One person can make a difference

One of the big stories this week was a video clip of an Obamacare architect who made some startling admissions about Obama’s controversial health care bill. The video was actually from over a year ago but only recently surfaced -- today on radio Glenn spoke with the person who uncovered the video and didn’t quit until the public saw it.

Below is a rush transcript of this segment:

GLENN: I want to tell you about the power of one. How one person can make a difference. One person who is motivated to get up and just say, wait a minute. Wait a minute. I want to figure this out. I want to tell you about a story? Philadelphia, who said I thought you said I could keep my health insurance. I thought you said if I liked my health insurance, I could keep my health insurance. Now, my health insurance has been canceled. I want to find out how this whole thing happened. So he started for looking for all the architects of Obamacare. He started to read everything he could about them. And finding all the speeches. Anything where any of these guys had ever -- had ever given a speech. And he started listening to them. And then he started to notice, wait a minute this guy didn't say much, but, boy, this guy did. This guy is calling the American people stupid. This guy has all kinds of stuff. He's not hiding at all. And he's one of the main architects. I want to introduce you to the guy who found Gruber, the reason why we know that this administration is lying is because of a guy just like you. Who said I've had enough. And he dedicated some time to go and find the truth. This is why net neutrality is really being pushed. They've got to controlled the internet because they can't control the press.

If the press is free and is you. You're not going to the White House correspondence dinner. Rich Weinstein is not going to the White House correspondence dinner. And once you lose control of the press, once you lose control of the narrative, you lose. Let bring Rich Weinstein in. He's from Philadelphia. Rich, what do you do for a living.

RICH: I'm an investment advisory.

GLENN: And tell me your story on how you found these Gruber videos.

RICH: You kind of described it. About this time last year, I lost my -- you know, as I've said before, the president kind of speaks with qualifiers a lot. When he said, if you like your plan, you can keep your plan, period. There's no qualifiers in that statement. So I thought, well, the ACA is not going to impact me because I like my plan, I'll keep it, period. Then exactly this time this year, we got the notice. Our plan is not ACA compliant.

GLENN: That's because you had a junk plan, this is the argument.

RICH: That's an awesome argument except for the fact -- I don't want to throw too much out there about myself. When I say it, don't think I'm trying to be cocky or anything.

I'm an investment advisor, I have an accounting degree, I have an MBA, I have an insurance license. My wife is an MBA. I'm qualified to figure out what kind of insurance I have. What else can you tell me that I had a junk plan? I laughed like you did. And I'm like, wait a minute. Do you know my situation better than I know my situation? I'm qualified.

So it's kind of funny actually.

GLENN: So then you went to see and you started looking, and you looked at all of the architects. And on some of the architects, you didn't find anything.

RICH: Right. There's Dr. Cutler, the first guy I looked at. Pretty interesting. Talked a lot about cost control. He really didn't say anything or do anything politically. There's kind of one thing politically he did, but it didn't really grab my eye that much.

Once I got through with him, I started looking at Dr. Gruber. And I went through all his stuff. And it took -- I just found an email -- by the way, yesterday I called in here. I was talking to Pat and Stu because I had sent you guys a video that I thought was important.

So it kind of sparked me. I look back at some of the emails I sent out. And I sent emails to a lot of people in the media saying, hey, look, I got stuff here. And that goes back to December of last year. Even I had forgotten it was that long. December -- early December of 2013.

GLENN: Wow.

RICH: I was sending emails, Facebook messages, whatever, to whoever in the media seemed interested in the law. And nobody --

GLENN: I will tell you, Rich, I just heard this morning from Stu and Pat that you had sent this, and I'm going to do an investigation. But I will tell you that I believe that our secret servant agent that Stu gave it to was on the phone at the time that you jumped our fence. So I'm not exactly sure what happened there.

RICH: If anybody out there can get somebody from the 5 to contact me, I will make them laugh hysterically. I guarantee it. They will laugh, guaranteed.

STU: At this point, we're ready to take any of your videos. You've obviously proven yourself as someone who can find some good stuff.

PAT: In fact, you mentioned you sent your stuff to keep Malinak. We have since had him killed. We lost him.

GLENN: He was, I don't remember -- I -- what?

PAT: We just shot him in the head.

GLENN: We killed him. And we told him, if he likes that bullet, he can keep that bullet.

RICH: Period.

PAT: So far he's kept it.

GLENN: So, Rich, now Nancy Pelosi is saying, she's never heard of this guy. She's never heard of Gruber. But we've got another video from you that shows that Gruber was -- said, I wrote this specific part of the bill, where she said he didn't write any of that. I didn't even know about him.

PAT: And she's been talking about him.

GLENN: Right. She's been quoting him.

RICH: The video I -- that I sent today actually was the same video that I sent -- the same video that's going to be included in the court case that goes back to July. You guys had that. So when I sent it back with Keith -- Keith is actually still alive because someone is emailing me under his name. I said, look, it's actually in plain sight. It's this same video from this noblest conference. You have it. It's all in plain sight. You just have to look. You have it already.

GLENN: Let me ask you this --

RICH: I didn't send you guys anything new. You guys already had it.

GLENN: We're loading the gun for a second bullet to Keith's head.

STU: We just replace Keith. We rotate them in. When we kill one, we just put another one in with the same name.

PAT: Saves time legally that way.

GLENN: Rich, how do you feel as a guy who doesn't do this for a living -- I mean, imagine, America, see, this is the thing. He sent this to us. He sent this to other people. He couldn't get us or anybody else to pick this story up. But he just kept doing it.

And through the power of persistence, the power of the individual, and the power of the internet, he could not only make this case, but eventually set the world on fire. This is why you have to control the internet. This is why you have to shut people down.

A, how do you feel about being just a regular guy, who has been working and been frustrate, but now all of a sudden America is talking about this?

RICH: Well, I've had this secret for like a year. And, you know, I tell my friends and my neighbors, and I had this habit of doing like the fire -- like I have it all inside me and you'll hear a year's worth of knowledge or information I've gathered in 45 seconds. And their eyes glaze over.

So it's coming -- like, there's still a lot of stuff that's coming out. And it's coming, and it's coming, and it's coming. And I'm not trying to -- I'm almost like a librarian at this point, where when they see a guy write an article, and I say, yes, they're getting there. And then I'll contact them and say, you need to see this. This will help you.

So I'm acting like a librarian because people need to see it. It's coming together. And, for me, it's really kind of relieving because it's a secret -- maybe not a secret, but it's stuff people should have been seeing for a long time. And I can finally it get out there. I just want people to think.

GLENN: Unfortunately, I feel the same way about the caliphate. Unfortunately, it's too late now on the caliphate.

By the way, did you them the other prediction that just came true yesterday?

I had said, when they started talking about ISIL, I said, the only thing hear that will happen is it will cause the fall of Assad and that's why we're in it. Yesterday, a story came out, I think it was from the pentagon that said, the real -- the real target here, the real fortunately that is happening is the fall of Assad.

So I understand how frustrating it is, Rich, when you can't get somebody to listen and then you start to see it happen. Unfortunately, a lot of things are just not going away. Now, they're talked about, maybe we should cut the funding on some of this and comprise here and here. You're never going to repeal this whole thing I don't think because of the progressives on both sides. Rich, what is coming next? What is the one thing that you would say, America, you need to know this, what is it?

RICH: I think the most important thing for now is -- again, I don't want to do the fire hose thing, but this Cadillac tax is really, really important. Because the way they describe the law was, 80 percent of the country gets their insurance from the government or from their company, and 20 percent get it from, you know, the individual market like I do. So we need to fix that individual market and leave the other 80 percent alone.

That's out there on video a bunch of times. Dr. Gruber made pie charts, and they're out there on the web.

You can't say that and talk about the Cadillac tax in the same breath. They're conflicting thoughts. Because the Cadillac tax, people think is just for the high-end insurance plans, but the way Dr. Gruber describes it on video, within a certain period of time, I don't know if he said 10 or 20 years, it's going to hit everybody, and it's targeted at the employer sponsored insurance.

So when he says, we're not going to touch the employer's sponsored insurance. That's a conflicting thought.

PAT: The ultimate goal is single-payer. They want to eliminate the insurance companies.

RICH: Maybe. I don't want to go there.

But in this thought, the goal was to get at the tax break people get for employer-sponsored insurance. That was the goal. That's what that whole carry thing was about. That's what that whole carry quote is about. They want to get rid of that tax break. $250 billion per year of lost revenue to the treasury, according to -- that's the stat. That's what they've been trying to get rid of.

Even John McCain, you know, because of the video you kind of wiggle your way through a little bit. John McCain, I think, had the same idea in his plan in 2008. He told people about that thing. But they're doing it in a more covert manner, and the way it's structured as per what the videos say, it's structured so you're giving insurance to your guy and the premiums go up, it's structured so that your guy is mad, not you, but at the, quote, unquote, evil insurance companies. It's out there. It's all out there.

PAT: Yeah, we played that from what you said earlier.

STU: Glenn, this goes back to what you've said so many times. Watching the other hand. They pass something. These rich people they're spending too much. They can't get a full tax break for all that. The plan down the line as Gruber outlines is 20 years down the road and we've now removed a tax break that would politically impossible to just --

GLENN: I love the quote from him in one of the videos where he said the president is very smart. He knew you can't get that passed the American people. So how do we break this up and put it in progressive pieces so we can get by? Then Gruber is, again, the American people are stupid.

Rich, thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for doing this. Thank you for being an involved American and a persistent American and not giving up.

RICH: Anybody can do this. If you have something on your mind, go figure it out. I'm nobody special. Anybody can figure this out if they have something in their mind. It's probably out there in plain sight.

GLENN: Thanks, Rich. Appreciate it. God bless. You know what he is. Remember when we said, this is when we first started really going online with Twitter and everything else. And I said watchdogs. Bark if you're a watchdog. I said, because we cannot -- we're not experts in everything. We don't know. And this is the swim lanes that I've been talking about for a long time.

This is -- experts get people who are passionate about things, and they will do it because as reporters or journalists or even news agencies, we can't do all of it, but there will be a few people who are really, really dead indicated for personal reasons, and they'll know this one, thin, narrow lane. And they'll go in and they'll root it all out. That's the way this is going to work.

That's the way this new media works. It is no longer about some journalist. It's about a whole collection of people that you may only have one strike in your entire life, but it's because you know that. You've been there. You've seen that. Or you're motivated because something happened in your life and you'll go out and find it. Again, this goes back to, why does there have to be net neutrality? Because you have to shut people like Rich down.

Is the U.N. plotting to control 30% of U.S. land by 2030?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

A reliable conservative senator faces cancellation for listening to voters. But the real threat to public lands comes from the last president’s backdoor globalist agenda.

Something ugly is unfolding on social media, and most people aren’t seeing it clearly. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) — one of the most constitutionally grounded conservatives in Washington — is under fire for a housing provision he first proposed in 2022.

You wouldn’t know that from scrolling through X. According to the latest online frenzy, Lee wants to sell off national parks, bulldoze public lands, gut hunting and fishing rights, and hand America’s wilderness to Amazon, BlackRock, and the Chinese Communist Party. None of that is true.

Lee’s bill would have protected against the massive land-grab that’s already under way — courtesy of the Biden administration.

I covered this last month. Since then, the backlash has grown into something like a political witch hunt — not just from the left but from the right. Even Donald Trump Jr., someone I typically agree with, has attacked Lee’s proposal. He’s not alone.

Time to look at the facts the media refuses to cover about Lee’s federal land plan.

What Lee actually proposed

Over the weekend, Lee announced that he would withdraw the federal land sale provision from his housing bill. He said the decision was in response to “a tremendous amount of misinformation — and in some cases, outright lies,” but also acknowledged that many Americans brought forward sincere, thoughtful concerns.

Because of the strict rules surrounding the budget reconciliation process, Lee couldn’t secure legally enforceable protections to ensure that the land would be made available “only to American families — not to China, not to BlackRock, and not to any foreign interests.” Without those safeguards, he chose to walk it back.

That’s not selling out. That’s leadership.

It's what the legislative process is supposed to look like: A senator proposes a bill, the people respond, and the lawmaker listens. That was once known as representative democracy. These days, it gets you labeled a globalist sellout.

The Biden land-grab

To many Americans, “public land” brings to mind open spaces for hunting, fishing, hiking, and recreation. But that’s not what Sen. Mike Lee’s bill targeted.

His proposal would have protected against the real land-grab already under way — the one pushed by the Biden administration.

In 2021, Biden launched a plan to “conserve” 30% of America’s lands and waters by 2030. This effort follows the United Nations-backed “30 by 30” initiative, which seeks to place one-third of all land and water under government control.

Ask yourself: Is the U.N. focused on preserving your right to hunt and fish? Or are radical environmentalists exploiting climate fears to restrict your access to American land?

  Smith Collection/Gado / Contributor | Getty Images

As it stands, the federal government already owns 640 million acres — nearly one-third of the entire country. At this rate, the government will hit that 30% benchmark with ease. But it doesn’t end there. The next phase is already in play: the “50 by 50” agenda.

That brings me to a piece of legislation most Americans haven’t even heard of: the Sustains Act.

Passed in 2023, the law allows the federal government to accept private funding from organizations, such as BlackRock or the Bill Gates Foundation, to support “conservation programs.” In practice, the law enables wealthy elites to buy influence over how American land is used and managed.

Moreover, the government doesn’t even need the landowner’s permission to declare that your property contributes to “pollination,” or “photosynthesis,” or “air quality” — and then regulate it accordingly. You could wake up one morning and find out that the land you own no longer belongs to you in any meaningful sense.

Where was the outrage then? Where were the online crusaders when private capital and federal bureaucrats teamed up to quietly erode private property rights across America?

American families pay the price

The real danger isn’t in Mike Lee’s attempt to offer more housing near population centers — land that would be limited, clarified, and safeguarded in the final bill. The real threat is the creeping partnership between unelected global elites and our own government, a partnership designed to consolidate land, control rural development, and keep Americans penned in so-called “15-minute cities.”

BlackRock buying entire neighborhoods and pricing out regular families isn’t by accident. It’s part of a larger strategy to centralize populations into manageable zones, where cars are unnecessary, rural living is unaffordable, and every facet of life is tracked, regulated, and optimized.

That’s the real agenda. And it’s already happening , and Mike Lee’s bill would have been an effort to ensure that you — not BlackRock, not China — get first dibs.

I live in a town of 451 people. Even here, in the middle of nowhere, housing is unaffordable. The American dream of owning a patch of land is slipping away, not because of one proposal from a constitutional conservative, but because global powers and their political allies are already devouring it.

Divide and conquer

This controversy isn’t really about Mike Lee. It’s about whether we, as a nation, are still capable of having honest debates about public policy — or whether the online mob now controls the narrative. It’s about whether conservatives will focus on facts or fall into the trap of friendly fire and circular firing squads.

More importantly, it’s about whether we’ll recognize the real land-grab happening in our country — and have the courage to fight back before it’s too late.


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

URGENT: FIVE steps to CONTROL AI before it's too late!

MANAURE QUINTERO / Contributor | Getty Images

By now, many of us are familiar with AI and its potential benefits and threats. However, unless you're a tech tycoon, it can feel like you have little influence over the future of artificial intelligence.

For years, Glenn has warned about the dangers of rapidly developing AI technologies that have taken the world by storm.

He acknowledges their significant benefits but emphasizes the need to establish proper boundaries and ethics now, while we still have control. But since most people aren’t Silicon Valley tech leaders making the decisions, how can they help keep AI in check?

Recently, Glenn interviewed Tristan Harris, a tech ethicist deeply concerned about the potential harm of unchecked AI, to discuss its societal implications. Harris highlighted a concerning new piece of legislation proposed by Texas Senator Ted Cruz. This legislation proposes a state-level moratorium on AI regulation, meaning only the federal government could regulate AI. Harris noted that there’s currently no Federal plan for regulating AI. Until the federal government establishes a plan, tech companies would have nearly free rein with their AI. And we all know how slowly the federal government moves.

  

This is where you come in. Tristan Harris shared with Glenn the top five actions you should urge your representatives to take regarding AI, including opposing the moratorium until a concrete plan is in place. Now is your chance to influence the future of AI. Contact your senator and congressman today and share these five crucial steps they must take to keep AI in check:

Ban engagement-optimized AI companions for kids

Create legislation that will prevent AI from being designed to maximize addiction, sexualization, flattery, and attachment disorders, and to protect young people’s mental health and ability to form real-life friendships.

Establish basic liability laws

Companies need to be held accountable when their products cause real-world harm.

Pass increased whistleblower protections

Protect concerned technologists working inside the AI labs from facing untenable pressures and threats that prevent them from warning the public when the AI rollout is unsafe or crosses dangerous red lines.

Prevent AI from having legal rights

Enact laws so AIs don’t have protected speech or have their own bank accounts, making sure our legal system works for human interests over AI interests.

Oppose the state moratorium on AI 

Call your congressman or Senator Cruz’s office, and demand they oppose the state moratorium on AI without a plan for how we will set guardrails for this technology.

Glenn: Only Trump dared to deliver on decades of empty promises

Tasos Katopodis / Stringer | Getty Images

The Islamic regime has been killing Americans since 1979. Now Trump’s response proves we’re no longer playing defense — we’re finally hitting back.

The United States has taken direct military action against Iran’s nuclear program. Whatever you think of the strike, it’s over. It’s happened. And now, we have to predict what happens next. I want to help you understand the gravity of this situation: what happened, what it means, and what might come next. To that end, we need to begin with a little history.

Since 1979, Iran has been at war with us — even if we refused to call it that.

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell.

It began with the hostage crisis, when 66 Americans were seized and 52 were held for over a year by the radical Islamic regime. Four years later, 17 more Americans were murdered in the U.S. Embassy bombing in Beirut, followed by 241 Marines in the Beirut barracks bombing.

Then came the Khobar Towers bombing in 1996, which killed 19 more U.S. airmen. Iran had its fingerprints all over it.

In Iraq and Afghanistan, Iranian-backed proxies killed hundreds of American soldiers. From 2001 to 2020 in Afghanistan and 2003 to 2011 in Iraq, Iran supplied IEDs and tactical support.

The Iranians have plotted assassinations and kidnappings on U.S. soil — in 2011, 2021, and again in 2024 — and yet we’ve never really responded.

The precedent for U.S. retaliation has always been present, but no president has chosen to pull the trigger until this past weekend. President Donald Trump struck decisively. And what our military pulled off this weekend was nothing short of extraordinary.

Operation Midnight Hammer

The strike was reportedly called Operation Midnight Hammer. It involved as many as 175 U.S. aircraft, including 12 B-2 stealth bombers — out of just 19 in our entire arsenal. Those bombers are among the most complex machines in the world, and they were kept mission-ready by some of the finest mechanics on the planet.

   USAF / Handout | Getty Images

To throw off Iranian radar and intelligence, some bombers flew west toward Guam — classic misdirection. The rest flew east, toward the real targets.

As the B-2s approached Iranian airspace, U.S. submarines launched dozens of Tomahawk missiles at Iran’s fortified nuclear facilities. Minutes later, the bombers dropped 14 MOPs — massive ordnance penetrators — each designed to drill deep into the earth and destroy underground bunkers. These bombs are the size of an F-16 and cost millions of dollars apiece. They are so accurate, I’ve been told they can hit the top of a soda can from 15,000 feet.

They were built for this mission — and we’ve been rehearsing this run for 15 years.

If the satellite imagery is accurate — and if what my sources tell me is true — the targeted nuclear sites were utterly destroyed. We’ll likely rely on the Israelis to confirm that on the ground.

This was a master class in strategy, execution, and deterrence. And it proved that only the United States could carry out a strike like this. I am very proud of our military, what we are capable of doing, and what we can accomplish.

What comes next

We don’t yet know how Iran will respond, but many of the possibilities are troubling. The Iranians could target U.S. forces across the Middle East. On Monday, Tehran launched 20 missiles at U.S. bases in Qatar, Syria, and Kuwait, to no effect. God forbid, they could also unleash Hezbollah or other terrorist proxies to strike here at home — and they just might.

Iran has also threatened to shut down the Strait of Hormuz — the artery through which nearly a fifth of the world’s oil flows. On Sunday, Iran’s parliament voted to begin the process. If the Supreme Council and the ayatollah give the go-ahead, we could see oil prices spike to $150 or even $200 a barrel.

That would be catastrophic.

The 2008 financial collapse was pushed over the edge when oil hit $130. Western economies — including ours — simply cannot sustain oil above $120 for long. If this conflict escalates and the Strait is closed, the global economy could unravel.

The strike also raises questions about regime stability. Will it spark an uprising, or will the Islamic regime respond with a brutal crackdown on dissidents?

Early signs aren’t hopeful. Reports suggest hundreds of arrests over the weekend and at least one dissident executed on charges of spying for Israel. The regime’s infamous morality police, the Gasht-e Ershad, are back on the streets. Every phone, every vehicle — monitored. The U.S. embassy in Qatar issued a shelter-in-place warning for Americans.

Russia and China both condemned the strike. On Monday, a senior Iranian official flew to Moscow to meet with Vladimir Putin. That meeting should alarm anyone paying attention. Their alliance continues to deepen — and that’s a serious concern.

Now we pray

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell. But either way, President Trump didn’t start this. He inherited it — and he took decisive action.

The difference is, he did what they all said they would do. He didn’t send pallets of cash in the dead of night. He didn’t sign another failed treaty.

He acted. Now, we pray. For peace, for wisdom, and for the strength to meet whatever comes next.


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Globalize the Intifada? Why Mamdani’s plan spells DOOM for America

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

If New Yorkers hand City Hall to Zohran Mamdani, they’re not voting for change. They’re opening the door to an alliance of socialism, Islamism, and chaos.

It only took 25 years for New York City to go from the resilient, flag-waving pride following the 9/11 attacks to a political fever dream. To quote Michael Malice, “I'm old enough to remember when New Yorkers endured 9/11 instead of voting for it.”

Malice is talking about Zohran Mamdani, a Democratic Socialist assemblyman from Queens now eyeing the mayor’s office. Mamdani, a 33-year-old state representative emerging from relative political obscurity, is now receiving substantial funding for his mayoral campaign from the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

CAIR has a long and concerning history, including being born out of the Muslim Brotherhood and named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror funding case. Why would the group have dropped $100,000 into a PAC backing Mamdani’s campaign?

Mamdani blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone.

Perhaps CAIR has a vested interest in Mamdani’s call to “globalize the intifada.” That’s not a call for peaceful protest. Intifada refers to historic uprisings of Muslims against what they call the “Israeli occupation of Palestine.” Suicide bombings and street violence are part of the playbook. So when Mamdani says he wants to “globalize” that, who exactly is the enemy in this global scenario? Because it sure sounds like he's saying America is the new Israel, and anyone who supports Western democracy is the new Zionist.

Mamdani tried to clean up his language by citing the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, which once used “intifada” in an Arabic-language article to describe the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. So now he’s comparing Palestinians to Jewish victims of the Nazis? If that doesn’t twist your stomach into knots, you’re not paying attention.

If you’re “globalizing” an intifada, and positioning Israel — and now America — as the Nazis, that’s not a cry for human rights. That’s a call for chaos and violence.

Rising Islamism

But hey, this is New York. Faculty members at Columbia University — where Mamdani’s own father once worked — signed a letter defending students who supported Hamas after October 7. They also contributed to Mamdani’s mayoral campaign. And his father? He blamed Ronald Reagan and the religious right for inspiring Islamic terrorism, as if the roots of 9/11 grew in Washington, not the caves of Tora Bora.

   Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

 

This isn’t about Islam as a faith. We should distinguish between Islam and Islamism. Islam is a religion followed peacefully by millions. Islamism is something entirely different — an ideology that seeks to merge mosque and state, impose Sharia law, and destroy secular liberal democracies from within. Islamism isn’t about prayer and fasting. It’s about power.

Criticizing Islamism is not Islamophobia. It is not an attack on peaceful Muslims. In fact, Muslims are often its first victims.

Islamism is misogynistic, theocratic, violent, and supremacist. It’s hostile to free speech, religious pluralism, gay rights, secularism — even to moderate Muslims. Yet somehow, the progressive left — the same left that claims to fight for feminism, LGBTQ rights, and free expression — finds itself defending candidates like Mamdani. You can’t make this stuff up.

Blending the worst ideologies

And if that weren’t enough, Mamdani also identifies as a Democratic Socialist. He blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone. But don’t worry, New York. I’m sure this time socialism will totally work. Just like it always didn’t.

If you’re a business owner, a parent, a person who’s saved anything, or just someone who values sanity: Get out. I’m serious. If Mamdani becomes mayor, as seems likely, then New York City will become a case study in what happens when you marry ideological extremism with political power. And it won’t be pretty.

This is about more than one mayoral race. It’s about the future of Western liberalism. It’s about drawing a bright line between faith and fanaticism, between healthy pluralism and authoritarian dogma.

Call out radicalism

We must call out political Islam the same way we call out white nationalism or any other supremacist ideology. When someone chants “globalize the intifada,” that should send a chill down your spine — whether you’re Jewish, Christian, Muslim, atheist, or anything in between.

The left may try to shame you into silence with words like “Islamophobia,” but the record is worn out. The grooves are shallow. The American people see what’s happening. And we’re not buying it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.