If athletes really want to protest, here are some stories they could focus on...

Well, hello, America, and welcome to The Glenn Beck Program and TheBlaze. I’m Stu Burguiere, filling in for Glenn.

Finally, some big-name athletes are taking a stand. Lebron James, Kyrie Irving, and a few other NBA players wore “I can’t breathe” shirts during warm-ups last night, and in recent weeks, several players have given a nod to the “hands up, don’t shoot” mantra from Mike Brown protesters. I don’t know about you, but I’m all a tingle to see professional athletes finally make a political and social statement like that.

Sports had been one of the few remaining places I could escape from the craziness of our day-to-day, the insanity of the news, and whatever other struggles we have going on in our lives and just sit back and enjoy the show. But thankfully that’s over now, and we can look forward to the game and a message too, a lecture or a political statement. I can’t wait. And who wouldn’t want to get their political messages from people who specialize in bouncing and throwing balls?

Before you get all negative and say sports is finally ruined forever, think of the positives. Okay, there’s really none, but who knows, maybe some good will come of this trend. Since they’re concerned about making black lives matter, maybe we’ll see this very soon. I mean, it’s really possible, right? I mean, I can see this happening.

In New York City, black babies are more likely to be aborted than born. Over 31,000 were murdered, while only 25,000 were actually born. In the past 10 years, 16 million black babies have been murdered. Michael Brown, Trayvon Martin, Eric Garner, that’s only three individuals, but if abortion were illegal, the black population by some estimates would be 36% larger. That’s more people than the population of every single U.S. state, except four: California, Texas, New York, and Florida.

Here are some other possibilities. What about this? You know, everyone loves the Constitution, right? Can’t you see Reggie Bush coming out with the Second Amendment shirt? Possible, right? Benghazi, I mean, people want to draw some attention. I haven’t seen a lot of the Benghazi shirts. I don’t think people want shirts with Hillary Clinton’s face on it. That might be the possible reason for that one.

How about this one, just a good old classic 'don’t tread on me'? That could happen too. Maybe the story of 22-year-old Chris Lane, who was murdered for simply being white will finally gain the notoriety it deserves. And I know I’m getting a little carried away with my expectations here, but perhaps this trend means we will finally see the day when someone has the courage to stand with the victims you never hear about, celebrity dudes who’ve been raped.

Shia LaBeouf, he held a days-long art exhibit where he sat in silence and let people come talk to him one on one. And during the “performance,” he was tragically raped. Since he wasn’t allowed to say anything, you know, for the art, he had to sit there and endure this rape. That’s a huge problem for celebrity men. The last thing a 20-something-year-old guy expects to deal with when they become famous are herds of gorgeous women who will do anything, literally anything, to hook up with them.

These men just want to focus on their careers and charitable endeavors and of course their art. Can you imagine having to fend off dozens of supermodels everywhere you went? It’s a horrible, horrible life, and it’s time someone takes a stand with Shia LaBeouf and all the male celebrity rape victims out there. I know I’m going to go to a field soon and see this, #Iammalecelebrityrape. We can only hope.

I am getting a little ahead of myself. Little baby steps, baby steps…we’ll take what we can get at this point. Maybe we can get someone to hold this sign up, you know? Oh yeah, “I’m not stoopid,” yeah, that’s kind of a reference to Jonathan Gruber, who was on Capitol Hill today for congressional hearings, and he was thoroughly grilled by Trey Gowdy and others and rightfully so.

He’s the ObamaCare architect who was caught on camera repeatedly bragging about the purposeful lack of transparency and relying on the stupidity of the American voter to get it passed. Remember this classic?

VIDEO

Gruber: …just like lack of transparency is a huge political advantage, and basically, you know, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical to get anything to pass.

Stu: It was. Most of the mainstream media didn’t pay much attention, but it’s a pretty damning statement. Naturally, Obama and Democrats distanced themselves from him.

VIDEO

President Obama: I just heard about this. I get well briefed before I come out here. The fact that some advisor who never worked on our staff expressed an opinion that I completely disagree with in terms of the voters is no reflection on the actual process that was run.

Stu: He’s just a random advisor, barely even knew he existed. Nancy Pelosi said she didn’t even know who he was. Of course, the problem here is, remember, this is 2006, okay? 2006 Obama, he disagrees. He said he stole ideas liberally from Jonathan Gruber at a conference where he spoke with Jonathan Gruber. And look at Nancy Pelosi’s Gruber-induced schizophrenia.

VIDEO

Pelosi: I don’t know who he is. He didn’t help write our bill, so with all due respect to your question, you have a person who wasn’t writing our bill commenting on what was going on when we were writing the bill. I don’t know if you have seen Jonathan Gruber of MIT’s analysis of what the comparison is to the status quo versus what will happen in our bill.

Stu: So when he was an unknown MIT professor, they loved him. He was the toast of the town. He gave the credibility of MIT. In fact, he even made a comic book starring himself that explained how wonderful ObamaCare really is. Do we have the comic book, please? Thank you. Oh, here it is. I could get you a copy of this really cheap, really, really cheap.

Look at this. You flip through, you get all the superhero…look at them. There’s monsters, and monsters are going to scare you. There’s our hero, Jonathan Gruber. See, he’s the smart one with the glasses, and he’s talking to all the idiot police officers and the stupid ambulance drivers about how they don’t know anything about healthcare and all the dumb voters and the morons, and he’s the smart one telling us all the truth about healthcare.

Of course, he now admits he was lying the whole time. On the back cover, you have endorsements from John Kerry and of course Center for American Progress as well. Now that he’s been exposed as just an arrogant progressive jackwagon, they play dumb. But forget all the politics of it all. Money talks. How much did they think this guy was worth? His salary should give some clues as to whether he was more architect or some advisor we don’t even really know. Here was his answer on Capitol Hill today.

VIDEO

Rep. Jordan: I don’t care what you were informed, Mr. Gruber. I care about what I’m asking you is how much money did the taxpayers, state or federal, pay you to have you then lie to them? That’s what I want to know.

Gruber: Over this fiscal year and the previous fiscal years—

Rep. Jordan: No, total. I mean, look, look, this has been a five-year ordeal with this law. We want to know how much you got from the taxpayer and then made fun of them after you got the money and lied to them.

Gruber: I don’t recall the total.

Stu: Who would know? I mean, if people pay you millions of dollars, you’re going to know? The arrogance really was infuriating. He absolutely knows how much money they paid him, and Americans are absolutely owed an answer, but instead he goes crawling to his attorneys. That’s our money. Just man up and tell us.

Of course the reason goober Gruber didn’t want to reveal how much taxpayer money he received is because he got filthy rich—$400,000 from DHHS, 2 million from NIH, 1.74 million from the DOJ. The DOJ? What the hell is the DOJ paying this guy millions of dollars for, seriously? A hundred thousand dollars from the State Department, and then various states also paid him hundreds of thousands of dollars. All told, we paid this guy $5.9 million to bring us ObamaCare, among other fabulous projects.

Sounds like a high amount for “just some advisor,” but then again, the government has never been accused of frugality. They pay millions of dollars for toilets. Maybe they thought Gruber was a porta potty. I’m not sure. Let’s not forget, by the way, that ObamaCare is a complete and total failure. There are some 40 million uninsured in America. Seven million “allegedly” are enrolled in ObamaCare, but 4 of those 7 million lost the plans they were already having, they are ready paid for, and they liked, and they were told that they could keep. So that means this giant, massive government program designed to cover, I don’t know, 40 million people is covering about three, and we’re the stupid ones. What a waste.

Maybe that’s something we can look forward to seeing future athletes protest. I hope so. Back in a second.

The great switch: Gates trades climate control for digital dominion

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The Big Tech billionaire once said humanity must change or perish. Now he claims we’ll survive — just as elites prepare total surveillance.

For decades, Americans have been told that climate change is an imminent apocalypse — the existential threat that justifies every intrusion into our lives, from banning gas stoves to rationing energy to tracking personal “carbon scores.”

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates helped lead that charge. He warned repeatedly that the “climate disaster” would be the greatest crisis humanity would ever face. He invested billions in green technology and demanded the world reach net-zero emissions by 2050 “to avoid catastrophe.”

The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch.

Now, suddenly, he wants everyone to relax: Climate change “will not lead to humanity’s demise” after all.

Gates was making less of a scientific statement and more of a strategic pivot. When elites retire a crisis, it’s never because the threat is gone — it’s because a better one has replaced it. And something else has indeed arrived — something the ruling class finds more useful than fear of the weather.The same day Gates downshifted the doomsday rhetoric, Amazon announced it would pay warehouse workers $30 an hour — while laying off 30,000 people because artificial intelligence will soon do their jobs.

Climate panic was the warm-up. AI control is the main event.

The new currency of power

The world once revolved around oil and gas. Today, it revolves around the electricity demanded by server farms, the chips that power machine learning, and the data that can be used to manipulate or silence entire populations. The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch. Whoever controls energy now controls information. And whoever controls information controls civilization.

Climate alarmism gave elites a pretext to centralize power over energy. Artificial intelligence gives them a mechanism to centralize power over people. The future battles will not be about carbon — they will be about control.

Two futures — both ending in tyranny

Americans are already being pushed into what look like two opposing movements, but both leave the individual powerless.

The first is the technocratic empire being constructed in the name of innovation. In its vision, human work will be replaced by machines, and digital permissions will subsume personal autonomy.

Government and corporations merge into a single authority. Your identity, finances, medical decisions, and speech rights become access points monitored by biometric scanners and enforced by automated gatekeepers. Every step, purchase, and opinion is tracked under the noble banner of “efficiency.”

The second is the green de-growth utopia being marketed as “compassion.” In this vision, prosperity itself becomes immoral. You will own less because “the planet” requires it. Elites will redesign cities so life cannot extend beyond a 15-minute walking radius, restrict movement to save the Earth, and ration resources to curb “excess.” It promises community and simplicity, but ultimately delivers enforced scarcity. Freedom withers when surviving becomes a collective permission rather than an individual right.

Both futures demand that citizens become manageable — either automated out of society or tightly regulated within it. The ruling class will embrace whichever version gives them the most leverage in any given moment.

Climate panic was losing its grip. AI dependency — and the obedience it creates — is far more potent.

The forgotten way

A third path exists, but it is the one today’s elites fear most: the path laid out in our Constitution. The founders built a system that assumes human beings are not subjects to be monitored or managed, but moral agents equipped by God with rights no government — and no algorithm — can override.

Hesham Elsherif / Stringer | Getty Images

That idea remains the most “disruptive technology” in history. It shattered the belief that people need kings or experts or global committees telling them how to live. No wonder elites want it erased.

Soon, you will be told you must choose: Live in a world run by machines or in a world stripped down for planetary salvation. Digital tyranny or rationed equality. Innovation without liberty or simplicity without dignity.

Both are traps.

The only way

The only future worth choosing is the one grounded in ordered liberty — where prosperity and progress exist alongside moral responsibility and personal freedom and human beings are treated as image-bearers of God — not climate liabilities, not data profiles, not replaceable hardware components.

Bill Gates can change his tune. The media can change the script. But the agenda remains the same.

They no longer want to save the planet. They want to run it, and they expect you to obey.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Why the White House restoration sent the left Into panic mode

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Presidents have altered the White House for decades, yet only Donald Trump is treated as a vandal for privately funding the East Wing’s restoration.

Every time a president so much as changes the color of the White House drapes, the press clutches its pearls. Unless the name on the stationery is Barack Obama’s, even routine restoration becomes a national outrage.

President Donald Trump’s decision to privately fund upgrades to the White House — including a new state ballroom — has been met with the usual chorus of gasps and sneers. You’d think he bulldozed Monticello.

If a Republican preserves beauty, it’s vandalism. If a Democrat does the same, it’s ‘visionary.’

The irony is that presidents have altered and expanded the White House for more than a century. President Franklin D. Roosevelt added the East and West Wings in the middle of the Great Depression. Newspapers accused him of building a palace while Americans stood in breadlines. History now calls it “vision.”

First lady Nancy Reagan faced the same hysteria. Headlines accused her of spending taxpayer money on new china “while Americans starved.” In truth, she raised private funds after learning that the White House didn’t have enough matching plates for state dinners. She took the ridicule and refused to pass blame.

“I’m a big girl,” she told her staff. “This comes with the job.” That was dignity — something the press no longer recognizes.

A restoration, not a renovation

Trump’s project is different in every way that should matter. It costs taxpayers nothing. Not a cent. The president and a few friends privately fund the work. There’s no private pool or tennis court, no personal perks. The additions won’t even be completed until after he leaves office.

What’s being built is not indulgence — it’s stewardship. A restoration of aging rooms, worn fixtures, and century-old bathrooms that no longer function properly in the people’s house. Trump has paid for cast brass doorknobs engraved with the presidential seal, restored the carpets and moldings, and ensured that the architecture remains faithful to history.

The media’s response was mockery and accusations of vanity. They call it “grotesque excess,” while celebrating billion-dollar “climate art” projects and funneling hundreds of millions into activist causes like the No Kings movement. They lecture America on restraint while living off the largesse of billionaires.

The selective guardians of history

Where was this sudden reverence for history when rioters torched St. John’s Church — the same church where every president since James Madison has worshipped? The press called it an “expression of grief.”

Where was that reverence when mobs toppled statues of Washington, Jefferson, and Grant? Or when first lady Melania Trump replaced the Rose Garden’s lawn with a patio but otherwise followed Jackie Kennedy’s original 1962 plans in the garden’s restoration? They called that “desecration.”

If a Republican preserves beauty, it’s vandalism. If a Democrat does the same, it’s “visionary.”

The real desecration

The people shrieking about “historic preservation” care nothing for history. They hate the idea that something lasting and beautiful might be built by hands they despise. They mock craftsmanship because it exposes their own cultural decay.

The White House ballroom is not a scandal — it’s a mirror. And what it reflects is the media’s own pettiness. The ruling class that ridicules restoration is the same class that cheered as America’s monuments fell. Its members sneer at permanence because permanence condemns them.

Julia Beverly / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump’s improvements are an act of faith — in the nation’s symbols, its endurance, and its worth. The outrage over a privately funded renovation says less about him than it does about the journalists who mistake destruction for progress.

The real desecration isn’t happening in the East Wing. It’s happening in the newsrooms that long ago tore up their own foundation — truth — and never bothered to rebuild it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Trump’s secret war in the Caribbean EXPOSED — It’s not about drugs

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The president’s moves in Venezuela, Guyana, and Colombia aren’t about drugs. They’re about re-establishing America’s sovereignty across the Western Hemisphere.

For decades, we’ve been told America’s wars are about drugs, democracy, or “defending freedom.” But look closer at what’s unfolding off the coast of Venezuela, and you’ll see something far more strategic taking shape. Donald Trump’s so-called drug war isn’t about fentanyl or cocaine. It’s about control — and a rebirth of American sovereignty.

The aim of Trump’s ‘drug war’ is to keep the hemisphere’s oil, minerals, and manufacturing within the Western family and out of Beijing’s hands.

The president understands something the foreign policy class forgot long ago: The world doesn’t respect apologies. It respects strength.

While the global elites in Davos tout the Great Reset, Trump is building something entirely different — a new architecture of power based on regional independence, not global dependence. His quiet campaign in the Western Hemisphere may one day be remembered as the second Monroe Doctrine.

Venezuela sits at the center of it all. It holds the world’s largest crude oil reserves — oil perfectly suited for America’s Gulf refineries. For years, China and Russia have treated Venezuela like a pawn on their chessboard, offering predatory loans in exchange for control of those resources. The result has been a corrupt, communist state sitting in our own back yard. For too long, Washington shrugged. Not any more.The naval exercises in the Caribbean, the sanctions, the patrols — they’re not about drug smugglers. They’re about evicting China from our hemisphere.

Trump is using the old “drug war” playbook to wage a new kind of war — an economic and strategic one — without firing a shot at our actual enemies. The goal is simple: Keep the hemisphere’s oil, minerals, and manufacturing within the Western family and out of Beijing’s hands.

Beyond Venezuela

Just east of Venezuela lies Guyana, a country most Americans couldn’t find on a map a year ago. Then ExxonMobil struck oil, and suddenly Guyana became the newest front in a quiet geopolitical contest. Washington is helping defend those offshore platforms, build radar systems, and secure undersea cables — not for charity, but for strategy. Control energy, data, and shipping lanes, and you control the future.

Moreover, Colombia — a country once defined by cartels — is now positioned as the hinge between two oceans and two continents. It guards the Panama Canal and sits atop rare-earth minerals every modern economy needs. Decades of American presence there weren’t just about cocaine interdiction; they were about maintaining leverage over the arteries of global trade. Trump sees that clearly.

PEDRO MATTEY / Contributor | Getty Images

All of these recent news items — from the military drills in the Caribbean to the trade negotiations — reflect a new vision of American power. Not global policing. Not endless nation-building. It’s about strategic sovereignty.

It’s the same philosophy driving Trump’s approach to NATO, the Middle East, and Asia. We’ll stand with you — but you’ll stand on your own two feet. The days of American taxpayers funding global security while our own borders collapse are over.

Trump’s Monroe Doctrine

Critics will call it “isolationism.” It isn’t. It’s realism. It’s recognizing that America’s strength comes not from fighting other people’s wars but from securing our own energy, our own supply lines, our own hemisphere. The first Monroe Doctrine warned foreign powers to stay out of the Americas. The second one — Trump’s — says we’ll defend them, but we’ll no longer be their bank or their babysitter.

Historians may one day mark this moment as the start of a new era — when America stopped apologizing for its own interests and started rebuilding its sovereignty, one barrel, one chip, and one border at a time.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Antifa isn’t “leaderless” — It’s an organized machine of violence

Jeff J Mitchell / Staff | Getty Images

The mob rises where men of courage fall silent. The lesson from Portland, Chicago, and other blue cities is simple: Appeasing radicals doesn’t buy peace — it only rents humiliation.

Parts of America, like Portland and Chicago, now resemble occupied territory. Progressive city governments have surrendered control to street militias, leaving citizens, journalists, and even federal officers to face violent anarchists without protection.

Take Portland, where Antifa has terrorized the city for more than 100 consecutive nights. Federal officers trying to keep order face nightly assaults while local officials do nothing. Independent journalists, such as Nick Sortor, have even been arrested for documenting the chaos. Sortor and Blaze News reporter Julio Rosas later testified at the White House about Antifa’s violence — testimony that corporate media outlets buried.

Antifa is organized, funded, and emboldened.

Chicago offers the same grim picture. Federal agents have been stalked, ambushed, and denied backup from local police while under siege from mobs. Calls for help went unanswered, putting lives in danger. This is more than disorder; it is open defiance of federal authority and a violation of the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause.

A history of violence

For years, the legacy media and left-wing think tanks have portrayed Antifa as “decentralized” and “leaderless.” The opposite is true. Antifa is organized, disciplined, and well-funded. Groups like Rose City Antifa in Oregon, the Elm Fork John Brown Gun Club in Texas, and Jane’s Revenge operate as coordinated street militias. Legal fronts such as the National Lawyers Guild provide protection, while crowdfunding networks and international supporters funnel money directly to the movement.

The claim that Antifa lacks structure is a convenient myth — one that’s cost Americans dearly.

History reminds us what happens when mobs go unchecked. The French Revolution, Weimar Germany, Mao’s Red Guards — every one began with chaos on the streets. But it wasn’t random. Today’s radicals follow the same playbook: Exploit disorder, intimidate opponents, and seize moral power while the state looks away.

Dismember the dragon

The Trump administration’s decision to designate Antifa a domestic terrorist organization was long overdue. The label finally acknowledged what citizens already knew: Antifa functions as a militant enterprise, recruiting and radicalizing youth for coordinated violence nationwide.

But naming the threat isn’t enough. The movement’s financiers, organizers, and enablers must also face justice. Every dollar that funds Antifa’s destruction should be traced, seized, and exposed.

AFP Contributor / Contributor | Getty Images

This fight transcends party lines. It’s not about left versus right; it’s about civilization versus anarchy. When politicians and judges excuse or ignore mob violence, they imperil the republic itself. Americans must reject silence and cowardice while street militias operate with impunity.

Antifa is organized, funded, and emboldened. The violence in Portland and Chicago is deliberate, not spontaneous. If America fails to confront it decisively, the price won’t just be broken cities — it will be the erosion of the republic itself.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.