Is progressive NYC mayor getting ready to run for President?

NYC mayor Bill de Blasio just got back to New York City after taking his 13-point progressive agenda on the road. One of the main points is a $15 minimum wage, a policy that is already destroying cities like Seattle. Some are wondering if the tour was a prelude to a presidential race. Glenn tore apart de Blasio, his progressive agenda, and more on radio this morning.

Below is a rush transcript of this segment

GLENN: So here's the latest from Bill de Blasio because Bill de Blasio is thinking about running for president of the United States. I don't know if you know that. Fabulous.

But he's thinking about running for president. And he's come out with a new progressive agenda. A 13-point agenda. And Barack Obama has talked about it. He said, there was sort of this progressive statement of principles about what it means to be a progressive by some of these friends of mine. I noted that it was basically my agenda, except for the trade.

Uh-huh. Now, while he says that, one Democrat, one prominent Democrat unnamed in this article says none of that stuff is going to help us with elections and help us win back the House.

What is the agenda? The mayor wants to stop Democrats from running away from the discussion of progressive economic policy, and I do too. Please, please run on your progressive ideology.

Here's what he said. Raise the federal minimum wage so it reaches $15 an hour, while indexing it to inflation.

PAT: So raise it to 15. And then attach it to inflation.

GLENN: Federal. Federal. So imagine what a 15-dollar federal minimum wage would do to Cedar Rapids, Iowa.

PAT: And then if inflation goes up 2 percent a year, so does the minimum wage. Wow, that's going to be good.

GLENN: There is no way that minimum wage can be raised to $15 in small towns and survive. It would destroy Middle America. Just destroy us.

PAT: It's already creating shock waves in Seattle. And it's not even at 15.

GLENN: And in San Francisco, I believe.

PAT: Yes. Yes.

GLENN: In both of those, you've had all kinds of stores and restaurants closing. More to come. They're only up to $12 so far.

PAT: 11.50 or something in Seattle.

GLENN: Okay. They're not even at 15, and places are already starting to crumble and close. And this as reported by progressive media. So you know it's much worse than what the media is saying. Can you imagine what it would do even in New York City, where prices are already skyrocket? I mean, you get a glass of orange juice, is it ten bucks?

PAT: Probably in some places, yeah.

STU: Certainly at the hotels it is.

PAT: Oh, for sure.

GLENN: At the hotels it's more than ten bucks. So the first one is raise minimum wage. Which would cause massive unemployment.

Then reform the National Labor Relations Act. Enhance workers right to organize and rebuild the middle class. So the right to work goes away.

PAT: Yeah. Because you're going to have unions everywhere.

GLENN: Yeah. Everywhere there would be a union.

PAT: It's a good idea. Good idea.

GLENN: Pass comprehensive immigration reform to grow the economy and protect the exploitation of low wage workers. Are you crazy?

PAT: Grow the economy. How does that -- how does that grow the economy, by all of a sudden granting amnesty to 12 to 20 million people who are here. It just makes it okay for them to be here completely and solidifies the fact that, you know, American citizens aren't going to have those jobs. I don't care America citizens of what color, they're not going to have those jobs.

GLENN: Here's what's interesting to me. The president said he's released -- I want to get this exact quote. Maybe I'm reading too much into this. Stu, you give him the benefit of the doubt.

There was a sort of progressive statement of principles about what it means to be a progressive by some of these friends of mine, according to the president.

Quote, I noted that it was basically my agenda, except for trade.

Here's the trade section.

PAT: Wow.

GLENN: Oppose trade deals that hand more power to corporations, at the expense of American jobs, workers rights, and the environment.

So the president is saying, I agreed -- these were my agenda points, except for the trade agenda.

STU: And this is -- I assume is the fight between him and Elizabeth Warren.

PAT: On free trade.

STU: Where he seems to be --

GLENN: And why do you think the Republicans are for the free trade? It hands more power to the corporations at the expense of American jobs.

STU: Well --

PAT: I don't think they describe it that way, but, yeah.

GLENN: I bet it is.

PAT: Nobody knows.

GLENN: Nobody knows.

STU: Yeah. I'm much more free trade than Elizabeth Warren, certainly.

GLENN: Yes, yes.

STU: I think everybody on earth is more free trade than Elizabeth Warren. It's hard to know on this. You wind up thinking, am I choosing between Barack Obama and Elizabeth Warren as my two choices?

GLENN: Yes.

STU: Which is more of a fundamental foundational problem with the country.

GLENN: Yes. You're going from a full-fledged socialist to a Marxist. Which one do you vote for?

STU: How do you parse that?

GLENN: She's full-fledged socialist. She would have us looking like Denmark overnight. He's a full-fledged Marxist revolutionary.

STU: He's probably more right on this one than she is. Right?

PAT: It looks like it.

STU: I think so.

PAT: Which is why Republicans say they have the votes to pass this thing. Have you seen that?

GLENN: Yeah. So, again, on one side, you have Elizabeth Warren. On the other side, the president. And on another side, Mitch McConnell. I don't trust any of them.

STU: No.

PAT: Although, Obama and McConnell seem to be on the same side.

GLENN: So that leads me to believe Elizabeth Warren.

[laughter]

I mean, I really don't know who to believe on that one.

PAT: Not in that triangle.

GLENN: I talked to someone in Washington who went into the room and read it and said, Glenn, it has to have -- I think it's 60 days -- 45 or 60 days of sunlight. Has to. Otherwise, it cannot be passed. Congress cannot pass it without it having an open airing. He said, I honestly don't know -- he said, I read it. I don't know why it's been kept secret. He said, there's nothing in there that glares at me. He said, but it would take a team of attorneys to go through it. That's why the sunlight is necessary. He said, these bills are too big and too complex. And he said, I know that there are attorneys out there, that once it is online, they'll go through every single line. And they'll bring it up and say, wait. Wait. This is in there. He said, I didn't see anything. But that doesn't mean it's not there. Because this president has shown over and over again that he makes bad deals.

PAT: Right. And someone we respect a lot too. So you would tend to believe him. If he says he didn't see anything bad in it, it sounds like there's nothing bad in it.

GLENN: But he did say it needs a full airing.

PAT: We're not against that.

STU: It makes you nervous when the president all of a sudden seems pro free trade. I just don't believe that those are his principles. But judging on the surface, you know, I'm certainly going to be more free trade.

PAT: Is it possible that he could do one thing right in eight years? Is it possible?

STU: Well, he did kill bin Laden.

PAT: Okay. Two things right.

GLENN: He didn't. I want to point this out. He didn't. It took him a year to decide.

STU: Yeah. But then when he did decide, he took the flight over there with a knife and stabbed him in the heart.

PAT: Yeah. And he made the toughest decision in 500 years.

GLENN: So it was Barack Obama in the library with a candelabra.

PAT: No. It was a knife.

STU: Don't be ridiculous.

PAT: Come on, Glenn.

GLENN: So here's what we have so far with the de Blasio plan. Raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour, nationwide. Allow the unions to organize anywhere. Make sure that we get all of the immigrants that are already here. The illegals that are already here. Make them legal.

PAT: You have to help the economy.

GLENN: Oppose any trade deal that gives more power to corporations. Pass national sick-leave. Pass family -- paid family sick-leave.

PAT: So if I'm sick, my wife gets to stay home as well? Is that it?

GLENN: Yeah, paid family leave.

PAT: The whole family gets to stay --

PAT: What?

PAT: Yeah. The Family Medical Leave Act. It's not just for super, hey, I have a cold.

GLENN: No. It's like cancer.

STU: Major. Yeah, something like that. You can actually leave. But the company is not forced to pay you for that time.

PAT: So this one the company would be forced. Wow.

GLENN: Here's the problem with that. Sure, you might have companies that are so grinchy. But those companies, eventually no one wants to work for. You know what I mean? They're so bad. But there's a lot of companies that, like, if you guys left and said, hey, my wife has cancer, I would do my best to hold on. But if it went on for however long --

STU: At some point, yeah.

GLENN: At some point, you know, this is a bad example.

PAT: How long? Like a week and a half?

GLENN: Like 20 minutes. If she's not better by the time I get back from the next break, I can't do it.

PAT: That's understandable.

GLENN: You can see that. It's the CFO of the company. Can you imagine how bad you would be if you fired somebody because their wife had cancer and was in the hospital. Nobody would want to do that. The press would be awful. Awful. You would make as many accommodations as you possibly could. But at some point, you're like, I have to have a CFO.

STU: Yeah, someone actually has to do the job.

PAT: Yes.

GLENN: And I can't have some guy in the interim.

PAT: And you can't necessarily pay 2CFOs. One that's actually working and one at home with his --

STU: You can under this plan though.

GLENN: Yeah!

PAT: Is that funded by the government?

GLENN: No.

STU: By evil corporations and their profits, which they don't need?

PAT: Jeez. Can you imagine doing that to a small business. It would kill them.

GLENN: You can't make it. This is a kill all small businesses plan.

STU: It's a genocidal business plan.

GLENN: It really is. Small business genocide. Never again is now. Make Pre-K after-school programs and child care universal.

STU: Yeah. So this was his big change --

PAT: Oh, wow. Child care too.

GLENN: Yeah, babysitters are free now.

PAT: That's a good deal if you can get it.

STU: That's one of the first things he did in New York. It was universal Pre-K.

PAT: He didn't do child care.

GLENN: What kind of grinch is he?

STU: I don't know if he did child care.

GLENN: If I can get my kids from three years old --

PAT: To be raised by somebody else. And I don't have to pick them up until like 9:30 at night, and I just dump them in bed as soon as they get home, that would be ideal. That would be ideal.

GLENN: I don't know if I want to pick them up at all.

JEFFY: Thank you. Thank you.

PAT: Right. You don't need to pick them up at all. Why not child care overnight, every night.

GLENN: Here's what I want to do. I want to have sex with, let's call them surrogates.

STU: Okay.

GLENN: When they get pregnant, I'm not there.

PAT: Why would you be?

GLENN: You put them right in Pre-K. Mom's got child care.

PAT: Besides, she should have had an abortion, she wouldn't have to deal with any of this.

GLENN: Exactly right. That's what I was pushing for. The abortion. Okay. If I can't kill the kid, I don't want to see the kid. I want the kid going right to the government. It's a shared responsibility.

PAT: Should she decide to choose with her own body and have the kid, then it's her responsibility for the first three years. And then you dump them into child care.

GLENN: Right. So you know if she changes her mind anywhere in the first three years, she can still kill the child.

PAT: Like it's a late-term abortion. Really long-term. Like 25th trimester.

GLENN: That's Peter Singer: Before they reach the age of consciousness where they know tomorrow is coming.

STU: Yes, that's the way he phrases it. If they can't say, Daddy, please don't kill me, you're free to go.

GLENN: No. No. They can say, Daddy, please, don't kill me. They just can't say, Daddy, please don't kill me because I want to see tomorrow.

PAT: Or I want to watch Cartoon Network tomorrow.

GLENN: Tomorrow.

PAT: So you can't kill me today.

GLENN: As long as they say I want to watch the Cartoon Network today and today only, then you can abort them. As long as you can convince them there is no tomorrow, you can kill them. That's an actual Peter singer viewpoint.

STU: We may have mangled it a little bit, but not much.

GLENN: Not much.

STU: He initially said you should be able to commit an abortion. Infanticide. Beyond that, it was three to five years old.

GLENN: He said three. Then he came out and apologized.

STU: I'm glad. At least he apologized.

GLENN: Except he apologized and said, I shouldn't have put a time on it. It should be open to any time.

PAT: You don't want to limit yourself to three years. The kid could be 19 and not know tomorrow is coming.

GLENN: Exactly right.

STU: Yeah. What if he's turning out like Jeffy. You're not allowed to --

PAT: Exactly. Or orphan Annie. Well, I guess she knew the sun was coming out tomorrow, didn't she?

GLENN: Yeah, she was singing the song.

PAT: That was a bad example.

GLENN: That's all we have to do. Is, if we want to be evil bastards, once they start killing all the children because it's legal, we just sing: The sun will come out tomorrow, bet your bottom dollar that tomorrow! As long as we have that, our kids can live.

STU: Yay!

GLENN: Expand the income tax credit. Allow students to refinance student loan debt.

VOICE: Well, what if there is no tomorrow. There wasn't one today.

GLENN: Right.

PAT: Did you think about that?

GLENN: They can all die.

Close the carried interest loophole. End tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas. Implement the Buffett rule so millionaires pay their fair share.

PAT: Yes! Finally!

GLENN: Close the CEO tax loophole --

PAT: Another finally.

GLENN: -- that allows corporations to take advantage of performance pay write-offs.

PAT: Yeah. I hate that

STU: It's about time.

GLENN: Yeah. There's the 13-point progressive plan that Bill de Blasio is now hocking and thinking about running for president of the United States.

PAT: That guy would kill us. He would finish the job that Barack Obama has started.

GLENN: And when it wouldn't work, he would blame us. As they always do.

STU: Why is he doing this so fast? You just became mayor of New York. It's because if he hangs around long enough for his policies to really get into effect, no one is going to elect him.

GLENN: Well, the good news is, he's forcing Hillary Clinton to run to the left.

STU: Yes.

GLENN: So between him and Elizabeth Warren, she is running hard to the left. Notice nobody is talking about that.

PAT: There was an article on Drudge yesterday.

GLENN: Drudge.

PAT: Yeah, but at least it's out there. That she is, what, the most liberal elite candidate.

GLENN: Ever.

PAT: Yeah, or at least in decades.

GLENN: So she is going hard left, which is good. Because you'll see where she stands. We have her on record now, scoffing at the 20-week abortion rule. Passed Congress last week. She says, that's not right.

STU: It's amazing. You're talked about something that is supported by over 85 percent of Americans. It's the third trimester sort of stuff where, I mean, it's not even close.

GLENN: Money doesn't talk. It screams. And she needs money for her campaign now. She needs to be as far left as she possibly can be.

Rage isn’t conservatism — THIS is what true patriots stand for

Gary Hershorn / Contributor | Getty Images

Conservatism is not about rage or nostalgia. It’s about moral clarity, national renewal, and guarding the principles that built America’s freedom.

Our movement is at a crossroads, and the question before us is simple: What does it mean to be a conservative in America today?

For years, we have been told what we are against — against the left, against wokeism, against decline. But opposition alone does not define a movement, and it certainly does not define a moral vision.

We are not here to cling to the past or wallow in grievance. We are not the movement of rage. We are the movement of reason and hope.

The media, as usual, are eager to supply their own answer. The New York Times recently suggested that Nick Fuentes represents the “future” of conservatism. That’s nonsense — a distortion of both truth and tradition. Fuentes and those like him do not represent American conservatism. They represent its counterfeit.

Real conservatism is not rage. It is reverence. It does not treat the past as a museum, but as a teacher. America’s founders asked us to preserve their principles and improve upon their practice. That means understanding what we are conserving — a living covenant, not a relic.

Conservatism as stewardship

In 2025, conservatism means stewardship — of a nation, a culture, and a moral inheritance too precious to abandon. To conserve is not to freeze history. It is to stand guard over what is essential. We are custodians of an experiment in liberty that rests on the belief that rights come not from kings or Congress, but from the Creator.

That belief built this country. It will be what saves it. The Constitution is a covenant between generations. Conservatism is the duty to keep that covenant alive — to preserve what works, correct what fails, and pass on both wisdom and freedom to those who come next.

Economics, culture, and morality are inseparable. Debt is not only fiscal; it is moral. Spending what belongs to the unborn is theft. Dependence is not compassion; it is weakness parading as virtue. A society that trades responsibility for comfort teaches citizens how to live as slaves.

Freedom without virtue is not freedom; it is chaos. A culture that mocks faith cannot defend liberty, and a nation that rejects truth cannot sustain justice. Conservatism must again become the moral compass of a disoriented people, reminding America that liberty survives only when anchored to virtue.

Rebuilding what is broken

We cannot define ourselves by what we oppose. We must build families, communities, and institutions that endure. Government is broken because education is broken, and education is broken because we abandoned the formation of the mind and the soul. The work ahead is competence, not cynicism.

Conservatives should embrace innovation and technology while rejecting the chaos of Silicon Valley. Progress must not come at the expense of principle. Technology must strengthen people, not replace them. Artificial intelligence should remain a servant, never a master. The true strength of a nation is not measured by data or bureaucracy, but by the quiet webs of family, faith, and service that hold communities together. When Washington falters — and it will — those neighborhoods must stand.

Eric Lee / Stringer | Getty Images

This is the real work of conservatism: to conserve what is good and true and to reform what has decayed. It is not about slogans; it is about stewardship — the patient labor of building a civilization that remembers what it stands for.

A creed for the rising generation

We are not here to cling to the past or wallow in grievance. We are not the movement of rage. We are the movement of reason and hope.

For the rising generation, conservatism cannot be nostalgia. It must be more than a memory of 9/11 or admiration for a Reagan era they never lived through. Many young Americans did not experience those moments — and they should not have to in order to grasp the lessons they taught and the truths they embodied. The next chapter is not about preserving relics but renewing purpose. It must speak to conviction, not cynicism; to moral clarity, not despair.

Young people are searching for meaning in a culture that mocks truth and empties life of purpose. Conservatism should be the moral compass that reminds them freedom is responsibility and that faith, family, and moral courage remain the surest rebellions against hopelessness.

To be a conservative in 2025 is to defend the enduring principles of American liberty while stewarding the culture, the economy, and the spirit of a free people. It is to stand for truth when truth is unfashionable and to guard moral order when the world celebrates chaos.

We are not merely holding the torch. We are relighting it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn Beck: Here's what's WRONG with conservatism today

Getty Images / Handout | Getty Images

What does it mean to be a conservative in 2025? Glenn offers guidance on what conservatives need to do to ensure the conservative movement doesn't fade into oblivion. We have to get back to PRINCIPLES, not policies.

To be a conservative in 2025 means to STAND

  • for Stewardship, protecting the wisdom of our Founders;
  • for Truth, defending objective reality in an age of illusion;
  • for Accountability, living within our means as individuals and as a nation;
  • for Neighborhood, rebuilding family, faith, and local community;
  • and for Duty, carrying freedom forward to the next generation.

A conservative doesn’t cling to the past — he stands guard over the principles that make the future possible.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: You know, I'm so tired of being against everything. Saying what we're not.

It's time that we start saying what we are. And it's hard, because we're changing. It's different to be a conservative, today, than it was, you know, years ago.

And part of that is just coming from hard knocks. School of hard knocks. We've learned a lot of lessons on things we thought we were for. No, no, no.

But conservatives. To be a conservative, it shouldn't be about policies. It's really about principles. And that's why we've lost our way. Because we've lost our principles. And it's easy. Because the world got easy. And now the world is changing so rapidly. The boundaries between truth and illusion are blurred second by second. Machines now think. Currencies falter. Families fractured. And nations, all over the world, have forgotten who they are.

So what does it mean to be a conservative now, in 2025, '26. For a lot of people, it means opposing the left. That's -- that's a reaction. That's not renewal.

That's a reaction. It can't mean also worshiping the past, as if the past were perfect. The founders never asked for that.

They asked that we would preserve the principles and perfect their practice. They knew it was imperfect. To make a more perfect nation.

Is what we're supposed to be doing.

2025, '26 being a conservative has to mean stewardship.

The stewardship of a nation, of a civilization.

Of a moral inheritance. That is too precious to abandon.

What does it mean to conserve? To conserve something doesn't mean to stand still.

It means to stand guard. It means to defend what the Founders designed. The separation of powers. The rule of law.

The belief that our rights come not from kings or from Congress, but from the creator himself.
This is a system that was not built for ease. It was built for endurance, and it will endure if we only teach it again!

The problem is, we only teach it like it's a museum piece. You know, it's not a museum piece. It's not an old dusty document. It's a living covenant between the dead, the living and the unborn.

So this chapter of -- of conservatism. Must confront reality. Economic reality.

Global reality.

And moral reality.

It's not enough just to be against something. Or chant tax cuts or free markets.

We have to ask -- we have to start with simple questions like freedom, yes. But freedom for what?

Freedom for economic sovereignty. Your right to produce and to innovate. To build without asking Beijing's permission. That's a moral issue now.

Another moral issue: Debt! It's -- it's generational theft. We're spending money from generations we won't even meet.

And dependence. Another moral issue. It's a national weakness.

People cannot stand up for themselves. They can't make it themselves. And we're encouraging them to sit down, shut up, and don't think.

And the conservative who can't connect with fiscal prudence, and connect fiscal prudence to moral duty, you're not a conservative at all.

Being a conservative today, means you have to rebuild an economy that serves liberty, not one that serves -- survives by debt, and then there's the soul of the nation.

We are living through a time period. An age of dislocation. Where our families are fractured.

Our faith is almost gone.

Meaning is evaporating so fast. Nobody knows what meaning of life is. That's why everybody is killing themselves. They have no meaning in life. And why they don't have any meaning, is truth itself is mocked and blurred and replaced by nothing, but lies and noise.

If you want to be a conservative, then you have to be to become the moral compass that reminds a lost people, liberty cannot survive without virtue.

That freedom untethered from moral order is nothing, but chaos!

And that no app, no algorithm, no ideology is ever going to fill the void, where meaning used to live!

To be a conservative, moving forward, we cannot just be about policies.

We have to defend the sacred, the unseen, the moral architecture, that gives people an identity. So how do you do that? Well, we have to rebuild competence. We have to restore institutions that actually work. Just in the last hour, this monologue on what we're facing now, because we can't open the government.

Why can't we open the government?

Because government is broken. Why does nobody care? Because education is broken.

We have to reclaim education, not as propaganda, but as the formation of the mind and the soul. Conservatives have to champion innovation.

Not to imitate Silicon Valley's chaos, but to harness technology in defense of human dignity. Don't be afraid of AI.

Know what it is. Know it's a tool. It's a tool to strengthen people. As long as you always remember it's a tool. Otherwise, you will lose your humanity to it!

That's a conservative principle. To be a conservative, we have to restore local strength. Our families are the basic building blocks, our schools, our churches, and our charities. Not some big, distant NGO that was started by the Tides Foundation, but actual local charities, where you see people working. A web of voluntary institutions that held us together at one point. Because when Washington fails, and it will, it already has, the neighborhood has to stand.

Charlie Kirk was doing one thing that people on our side were not doing. Speaking to the young.

But not in nostalgia.

Not in -- you know, Reagan, Reagan, Reagan.

In purpose. They don't remember. They don't remember who Dick Cheney was.

I was listening to Fox news this morning, talking about Dick Cheney. And there was somebody there that I know was not even born when Dick Cheney. When the World Trade Center came down.

They weren't even born. They were telling me about Dick Cheney.

And I was like, come on. Come on. Come on.

If you don't remember who Dick Cheney was, how are you going to remember 9/11. How will you remember who Reagan was.

That just says, that's an old man's creed. No, it's not.

It's the ultimate timeless rebellion against tyranny in all of its forms. Yes, and even the tyranny of despair, which is eating people alive!

We need to redefine ourselves. Because we have changed, and that's a good thing. The creed for a generation, that will decide the fate of the republic, is what we need to find.

A conservative in 2025, '26.

Is somebody who protects the enduring principles of American liberty and self-government.

While actively stewarding the institutions. The culture. The economy of this nation!

For those who are alive and yet to be unborn.

We have to be a group of people that we're not anchored in the past. Or in rage! But in reason. And morality. Realism. And hope for the future.

We're the stewards! We're the ones that have to relight the torch, not just hold it. We didn't -- we didn't build this Torch. We didn't make this Torch. We're the keepers of the flame, but we are honor-bound to pass that forward, and conservatives are viewed as people who just live in the past. We're not here to merely conserve the past, but to renew it. To sort it. What worked, what didn't work. We're the ones to say to the world, there's still such a thing as truth. There's still such a thing as virtue. You can deny it all you want.

But the pain will only get worse. There's still such a thing as America!

And if now is not the time to renew America. When is that time?

If you're not the person. If we're not the generation to actively stand and redefine and defend, then who is that person?

We are -- we are supposed to preserve what works.

That -- you know, I was writing something this morning.

I was making notes on this. A constitutionalist is for restraint. A progressive, if you will, for lack of a better term, is for more power.

Progressives want the government to have more power.

Conservatives are for more restraint.

But the -- for the American eagle to fly, we must have both wings.

And one can't be stronger than the other.

We as a conservative, are supposed to look and say, no. Don't look at that. The past teaches us this, this, and this. So don't do that.

We can't do that. But there are these things that we were doing in the past, that we have to jettison. And maybe the other side has a good idea on what should replace that. But we're the ones who are supposed to say, no, but remember the framework.

They're -- they can dream all they want.
They can come up with all these utopias and everything else, and we can go, "That's a great idea."

But how do we make it work with this framework? Because that's our job. The point of this is, it takes both. It takes both.

We have to have the customs and the moral order. And the practices that have stood the test of time, in trial.

We -- we're in an amazing, amazing time. Amazing time.

We live at a time now, where anything -- literally anything is possible!

I don't want to be against stuff. I want to be for the future. I want to be for a rich, dynamic future. One where we are part of changing the world for the better!

Where more people are lifted out of poverty, more people are given the freedom to choose, whatever it is that they want to choose, as their own government and everything.

I don't want to force it down anybody's throat.

We -- I am so excited to be a shining city on the hill again.

We have that opportunity, right in front of us!

But not in we get bogged down in hatred, in division.

Not if we get bogged down into being against something.

We must be for something!

I know what I'm for.

Do you?

From Pharaoh to Hamas: The same spirit of evil, new disguise

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

The drone footage out of Gaza isn’t just war propaganda — it’s a glimpse of the same darkness that once convinced men they were righteous for killing innocents.

Evil introduces itself subtly. It doesn’t announce, “Hi, I’m here to destroy you.” It whispers. It flatters. It borrows the language of justice, empathy, and freedom, twisting them until hatred sounds righteous and violence sounds brave.

We are watching that same deception unfold again — in the streets, on college campuses, and in the rhetoric of people who should know better. It’s the oldest story in the world, retold with new slogans.

Evil wins when good people mirror its rage.

A drone video surfaced this week showing Hamas terrorists staging the “discovery” of a hostage’s body. They pushed a corpse out of a window, dragged it into a hole, buried it, and then called in aid workers to “find” what they themselves had planted. It was theater — evil, disguised as victimhood. And it was caught entirely on camera.

That’s how evil operates. It never comes in through the front door. It sneaks in, often through manipulative pity. The same spirit animates the moral rot spreading through our institutions — from the halls of universities to the chambers of government.

Take Zohran Mamdani, a New York assemblyman who has praised jihadists and defended pro-Hamas agitators. His father, a Columbia University professor, wrote that America and al-Qaeda are morally equivalent — that suicide bombings shouldn’t be viewed as barbaric. Imagine thinking that way after watching 3,000 Americans die on 9/11. That’s not intellectualism. That’s indoctrination.

Often, that indoctrination comes from hostile foreign actors, peddled by complicit pawns on our own soil. The pro-Hamas protests that erupted across campuses last year, for example, were funded by Iran — a regime that murders its own citizens for speaking freely.

Ancient evil, new clothes

But the deeper danger isn’t foreign money. It’s the spiritual blindness that lets good people believe resentment is justice and envy is discernment. Scripture talks about the spirit of Amalek — the eternal enemy of God’s people, who attacks the weak from behind while the strong look away. Amalek never dies; it just changes its vocabulary and form with the times.

Today, Amalek tweets. He speaks through professors who defend terrorism as “anti-colonial resistance.” He preaches from pulpits that call violence “solidarity.” And he recruits through algorithms, whispering that the Jews control everything, that America had it coming, that chaos is freedom. Those are ancient lies wearing new clothes.

When nations embrace those lies, it’s not the Jews who perish first. It’s the nations themselves. The soul dies long before the body. The ovens of Auschwitz didn’t start with smoke; they started with silence and slogans.

Andrew Harnik / Staff | Getty Images

A time for choosing

So what do we do? We speak truth — calmly, firmly, without venom. Because hatred can’t kill hatred; it only feeds it. Truth, compassion, and courage starve it to death.

Evil wins when good people mirror its rage. That’s how Amalek survives — by making you fight him with his own weapons. The only victory that lasts is moral clarity without malice, courage without cruelty.

The war we’re fighting isn’t new. It’s the same battle between remembrance and amnesia, covenant and chaos, humility and pride. The same spirit that whispered to Pharaoh, to Hitler, and to every mob that thought hatred could heal the world is whispering again now — on your screens, in your classrooms, in your churches.

Will you join it, or will you stand against it?

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Bill Gates ends climate fear campaign, declares AI the future ruler

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.