Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
Shop
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

One Year Later: Still no justice for victims of MH17

July 17, 2015
Staff

WRITER

One year ago today, Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 was blown out of the sky by a missile that killed all 298 passengers aboard. The evidence increasingly shows that the Boeing 777 was annihilated by a Russian Buk missile launcher that has a total range of 82,000 feet. There has be no justice for that atrocity. There has not been a change in the policies of Russian aggression in eastern Ukraine. Buck Sexton spoke with World Chess Champion and political activist Garry Kasparov about the crash, Putin, the Ukraine, and more.

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it may contain errors:

BUCK: One year ago today, Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 was blown out of the sky by a surface two air missile that killed all 298 passengers aboard. This Boeing 777 was annihilated by a Russian Buk missile launcher that has a total range of 82,000 feet. The MH17 flight was hit at 33,000 feet. That was a year ago today.

There has be no justice for that atrocity. There, in fact, has not been a change in the policies that led to it. The policies of Russian aggression in eastern Ukraine.

I wanted to bring in somebody who can speak with us about this with tremendous knowledge. Garry Kasparov. He's an author, political activist. His latest coming out in just a little bit. Pardon me. Winter is Coming: Why Vladimir Putin and the Enemies of the Free World Must Be Stopped. It's out October 27th. It's available for preorder now. Garry, thank you very much for joining.

GARRY: Thanks for inviting me.

BUCK: Garry, it seems almost unfathomable that this kind of an atrocity could happen and that there would be no justice and, in fact, no real investigation at this point in time. And the latest from Putin is that he's rejecting calls for the establishment of the UN tribunal to prosecute any suspects. He's essentially saying, nothing is going to happen here. And I think he's right. Nothing is going to happen. How is it possible that he can get away with backing a policy and putting separatists in this region that shot a plane out of the sky and the international community essentially yawns?

GARRY: No, the very fact that Russia is the only state that categorically rejects the idea of international tribunal tells us that Putin knows who did it and he wants to cover it. Every other country, including Ukraine is inviting this idea because they have to find out who did it, and these people must be brought to justice.

But this tragic -- this tragic event, 298 lives are lost in the skies of Ukraine, brought down by a Russian-made missile and naturally fired by either pro-Russian forces or maybe the Russian regulars (phonetic). It's a result of Putin's unarmed aggression in Ukraine.

Everybody who talks about engagement and diplomacy and all sorts of attempts to bring dictators to the bargaining table, they ignore the fact that dictators never ask why. They always ask why not. And we would hate to hear about isolation (unintelligible). But, at the end of the day, if we don't stop them at an early stage, we pay more and more. The price goes up. And in this case, it's nearly 300 lives.

BUCK: It seems like Putin has taken the measure of the international community's response time and again and keeps finding the response to be wanting. Meaning that he doesn't think it's enough of a -- we don't pack enough a counterpunch with sanctions, with anything else to stop the policies. In fact, every time he seems to test our metal, whether it's in Georgia or the annexation of Crimea and now the continued aggression in eastern Ukraine, that as we know, it's one thing to say that this is a -- as I'm sure many do, and I know many do in Russia -- this is an internal dispute. Once you start shooting planes out of the sky with the international contingent of civilians, it should be the world's problem. There should be more of a focus on this. But, again, nothing happens here. What should be done? What could be done to make Putin actually stop?

GARRY: I've been saying for a long time that Putin was at one time Russia's problem. But it would be everyone's problem. Putin is a dictator. And he has enormous potential, Russian military and also Russian nuclear, to blackmail the rest of the world. And unless he's given an ultimatum, unless he sees a strong response from the West, start with the United States of America, nothing will happen.

And I have to say that, you know, NATO -- we could see American and NATO tanks in Estonia and Latvia. It's a small country bordering Russia. Again, the overall climate, political climate now, it's insane to stop Putin. And especially after what's happened now with Iran, where Putin has praised for helping Iran to get a phenomenal deal, I think Putin will become more arrogant because he sees nothing but weakness.

BUCK: Garry, you're actually taking me exactly where I wanted to go next. Which is, given this deal, as you said, Putin -- the Obama administration is high-fiving Putin for his help. Meanwhile, I think we know that the conventional and ballistic side of this agreement had to have some Russia collusion in here. Because where will they be buying this kind of missile technology and stuff? The most likely sellers of this will be Chinese and Russian. So it's good for the Russian arms market. And they're perfectly happy to sell them the S300. What does Putin do now that this is done? Now that he feels emboldened by this. This treaty is signed. What is Russia's policy under Putin going to be, vis-à-vis Iran?

GARRY: He sees this agreement as a step towards a big war in the Middle East. Iran now will get tons of money. It has international recognition. Iran's nuclear program, unlike was promised by the Obama administration to dismantle it, it's simply slowed down. And they can restore it at any moment. And of course, a big chunk of this $100 billion cash that Iran will receive under the terms of the agreement will go into Putin's pockets because as you said correctly, Russian weapons will be sold there.

And I believe that in this case, Putin and Obama, they're allies. Because both believe that America's power is something that should be reduced. Obama doesn't think that America should be involved in global affairs, and Putin agrees with him.

BUCK: Now, there's some places that people are already pointing to as possible flash points with Russia that have not yet flared up. People are saying the Balkans are getting quite a bit nervous. And there's been some NATO activity, where they're sort of prepositioning forces. They say it's for training forces. But to some of us, it looks like, well, it also is sort of a tripwire purpose. If not a quick reaction force purpose to have these NATO forces here.

Can you see within, let's say, a 12 to 18-month time frame from now, Russia backing another one of these -- this seems to be sort of the playbook. They find Russian speakers. Whether it's in the Baltics in the future or Transnistria or one of these places, and they'll try to push from some kind of a -- again, this separatist movement. They have swoop in. They'll be peace keepers for the Russians or something. Can you see that going, or will they just focus on Ukraine?

GARRY: We don't know what's exactly in Putin's mind and where he's going to hit next. But what I know is that when you deal with Putin, when you deal with Iran, when you deal with all sorts of dictators, you should understand that the nature of their regimes is quite different from the democratic institutions in this country or in Europe. They need enemies. And the moment they run out of enemies inside the country, they look for it outside. It's ridiculous to talk about Iran changing its behavior because the whole idea of Iranian revolution, you know, Saudis 1979 under Khomeini (phonetic) was to export revolution (unintelligible). Same for Putin. The moment he stops his aggression, foreign aggression, he will lose the rationale of staying in power in Russia. So dealing with these countries, you must understand that they will never change their behavior because it simply means they will have to relinquish their power.

BUCK: Now, Putin's popularity inside Russia at this point with this conflict that's been going in eastern Ukraine, it's increasingly clear that there's -- there's -- they say they're Russian volunteers. Then we find it's actually GRUs. And it's Russian Spetznaz. And some of these so-called separatists that are claiming they're Ukrainian or claiming that they're Russian volunteers. Or straight-on orders from the Kremlin. It doesn't seem like he's taking a hit when it comes to popularity at home. It seems like his aggressive ways and his sort of bellicose policy and the playing of the West and the United States has resulted in some pretty strong numbers for him. The polling numbers I see are astronomical compared to what a US president would expect after this many years in office. Is that still the case? Where is the sort of opposition movement?

GARRY: It's a big mistake to compare any polls taken in the United States or any democratic country compare them to opinion polls taken in the countries run by dictators. It's an element of fear. I mean, how many people are comfortable saying that they're not happy with Putin's rule? It's a country run by the KGB. And every day we see new laws being posted, Draconian laws being posed in Russia. And it would be the lost elements of civil rights and freedom disappearing, rapidly disappearing from the surface.

We don't know how popular is Putin. I mean, we don't know how popular is Kim Jong-un or how popular is Bashar al-Assad because running polls there means that you are calling people anonymously and you ask them to confess about a dictator. And they do understand this kind of information could be used against them because they were born and raised under the KGB rule.

BUCK: Garry, I know your book, Winter is Coming out in October. I assume in that book, based on what you're tackling, which is western appeasement since the end of the Cold War and the empowerment of Putin, I assume that you come out with some recommendations.

Before we close out here, Garry, what are your recommendations for how to deal with Putin and other dictators, including the Guardian Council of Iran and as you said Assad and elsewhere.

GARRY: Unfortunately, as much as we want to know to move with the globalization with peace, with trade, with development, with new ideas, we have to recognize that we are at war now. I named the book Winter Is Coming because we are entering the new Cold War. And it's up to us to stop it. There are many dictators from the world that could stay in power only being at war with the free world. And of course, America is the number one target. And the tragic events yesterday in Chattanooga, they proved that no one is safe. So we just have to understand that unless we take the challenge at an early stage, the price will go up. And whether we like it or not, we are in. And we have to defend the values of the free world again. And I believe that in this country, we must take a lead. And hopefully that in 2016, we'll see a new president who will change this suicidal course taken by the current administration.

BUCK: Winter is Coming is available for preorder now. It's out in October. The author Garry Kasparov. Garry, thank you very much for joining us. Good to have you on board here today.

Featured Image: A picture taken on October 15, 2014 shows the wreckage of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 near the village of Rassipnoe. The flight MH17 was shoot down on July 17, 2014 with 298 people on board. AFP PHOTO / DOMINIQUE FAGET

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.

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.