Rep. Thomas Massie tells Glenn who he can and can't trust

October 22, 2015

Editor

Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massie came onto Glenn's radio program Thursday to share his disgust with Glenn on the recent endorsement of Paul Ryan for Speaker of the House.

"I'm disappointed that my colleagues in the Freedom Caucus expressed support for Paul Ryan instead of Daniel Webster," Massie said before pointing out he is not a member of the Freedom Caucus himself.

Glenn said, "Good, so you have nothing to lose. Give me the names of the members of the Freedom Caucus that you were surprised who just buckled."

Instead of naming names, Massie said, "I don't even want you to trust me. What I want you to do is look at who voted against John Boehner on January 6th. Compare that to the list of people today making noise."

He went on.

"There were only five of us actually who supported the motion to vacate the Speaker. And then, this is most important, Glenn, on October 29th, there will be a vote in front of C-SPAN and God and country, where every member of Congress has to stand up and say who they're voting for, for Speaker. Pay attention," Massie said. "That day they have to choose between you or the establishment."

Listen to the segment or read the transcript below.

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it might contain errors.

GLENN: I said on Facebook last night, I'm going to hold off as long as I can because I'm too angry and it's not going to get any better. So let me just see Freedom Caucus. You asked us to kick out the Speaker of the House, John Boehner. You then asked us to do our homework on Daniel Webster. That's the guy you need. Which we did. We did. You actually said to me -- members of the Freedom Caucus actually said to me, "Glenn, you've got to go on the air and ask for this tool. We need this tool." And I said, "I'll give you any tool that you need, me personally. But I don't know how I convince people -- he's -- he's not the guy."

"No, no, no, you don't know. It's the system that matters; otherwise, if we get in -- and this is a damn quote. "If we get in another John Boehner, the party will be lost, we will probably lose the presidency." You remember that, Pat?

PAT: Oh, yeah.

GLENN: This was in a private meeting. So I spent a week talking to members of the Freedom Caucus, the Liberty Caucus, the Tea Party Caucus, calling all these guys up and saying, "Really? Because I got one shot at this. You want me to put my name on Daniel Webster and me to tell the audience -- A, you better be damn sure that he's right. Because I got one shot at it. I betray my audience and put somebody up there and ask them to back him and he turns out to be the wrong guy, then my credibility is shot." And I've never done this before. I've never ever had the guys from the Freedom Caucus, Liberty Caucus, Tea Party Caucus -- they have never ever come to me and said, "Hey, we really want this." And then I've never ever said, "Yes, I'll help you do that." Never. But because this is so important and they made such a big deal out of it: "We'll lose not only the election, we could lose the country. We could lose everything. The whole thing rides on who the Speaker of the House is." That's what I was told by many members. And then they come and they say, "Oh, we're for Paul Ryan." I will give you at the top of the hour, my list of why Paul Ryan is not the guy.

But I personally feel betrayed by the Freedom Caucus. I personally feel betrayed by many members of Congress who asked for your help and asked me to carry water for them. And I got news for you, every single last one of you bums in Congress, I'm done with you. Never again will I help you. Never again.

Now, I want to hear -- I want to hear exactly what you were thinking. Of course, they won't come on. We have Thomas Massie who is waiting. Thomas Massie -- please dear God, Thomas, tell me that you didn't vote for this guy, right?

THOMAS: I did not vote for this guy. I'm not going to vote for this guy. Look, if Paul Ryan would promote the right ideas and a fair process, I could support him, but he doesn't have a history of doing that. Daniel Webster does. I'm supporting Daniel Webster. I'm disappointed that my colleagues in the Freedom Caucus expressed support for Paul Ryan instead of Daniel Webster. I am not a member of the Freedom Caucus.

GLENN: Good. So you have nothing to lose. Give me the names of the members of the Freedom Caucus that you were surprised who just buckled.

(laughter)

THOMAS: You know what, the people here in Washington, DC, are experts at telling you what you want to hear.

GLENN: I know. So tell me the things that you don't want to say. Give me the names of the people so the American people know exactly who these guys are.

THOMAS: You can't trust Sam -- I don't even want you to trust me. What I want you to do is look at who voted against John Boehner on January 6th. Compare that to the list of people today making noise. Look at the five men who were on the motion to vacate. They were only five of us actually who supported the motion to vacate the Speaker. And then, this is most important, Glenn, on October 29th, there will be a vote in front of C-SPAN and God and country, where every member of Congress has to stand up and say who they're voting for, for Speaker. Pay attention. Your listeners need to pay attention because there are people saying that they are something they are not. But that day they have to choose between you or the establishment.

GLENN: I will tell you, Thomas. I don't know how you do it. I don't know how you do it. Last night, I couldn't -- I couldn't -- I couldn't even sleep last night. I was so angry with these guys. I feel -- and, you know what, if you read my Facebook page, you read Pat's Facebook page --

THOMAS: I read it.

GLENN: You see, everybody is saying the same thing. I'm betrayed. I am absolutely betrayed.

PAT: They're pissed. I'm done. I won't make another phone call. All of that kind of stuff.

GLENN: All these guys -- and, you know what, Thomas, I'm sorry, but you're going to be swept up into it. You guys who didn't do it, you've got to stand up. I will make room for you guys, the good guys, on the show. Anyone who stands up. I need a list of the people who did it, and the list of the people who didn't do it. Because if you're not known, you're going to be swept up into it as well.

THOMAS: Here's what I recommend, Glenn, there are five men that put their names and careers on the line to sponsor the motion to vacate.

GLENN: Give me the five names.

THOMAS: Louie Gohmert. Myself, Thomas Massie. Ted Yoho. Mark Meadows, of course, was the primary sponsor. And Walter Jones. Now, we were the five who moved to vacate the chair before this was popular. We were the ones that put our careers on the line.

My wife actually asked me if I felt like I was in physical danger when I did that.

PAT: Wow.

THOMAS: Those are the five you can trust. Everybody else has got to speak for their vote on October 29th when they either vote to maintain the status quo or they vote for something different.

PAT: Thomas, it must be even worse in Washington than I believe it to be when you -- your vote places you in peril or at least your wife is concerned that that might be the case. That's pretty amazing.

THOMAS: These are big numbers, and these are powerful people up here. There's a lot of money at stake. There's a lot riding on this. And I don't want to go into conspiracy theories. I am not worried. I'm not physically worried. I think I'll be fine. If they wanted to ruin me, they would probably put something on my hard drive or set me up in some way and try to ruin me politically. I don't think there's any kind of physical danger here myself.

PAT: Yeah.

THOMAS: But keep this in mind, my colleagues that I work with, they are soft mammals with chemical reactions going on in their brains and they're walking around with voting cards, and you can't trust any of them.

(laughter)

PAT: That's for sure.

GLENN: Okay. So, Thomas, I'm going to ask people to call Congress today and tell them, "We're done." Will that make any difference at all?

THOMAS: It's like they're trying to put -- the establishment has found another cork to put on the bottle, and that's just going to build more pressure. We'll have more Donald Trumps empowered out there. I mean, he's a function -- he is the result of Congress' inaction, dysfunction, and unwillingness to listen.

GLENN: Yep. Yep.

THOMAS: People are so fed up, they're willing to back this guy. And it scares the heck out of me. I'm here in the middle of this, and I am trying to battle to do the right thing. I can't tell you how frustrated I am, Glenn. I am -- I am at least as frustrated as you are. I have to look these folks in the eye today and say --

GLENN: You know what, Thomas, you did what you said you would do.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: I know I said it to you. I said it to everybody I spoke to. Everybody who was saying, "No, we really need -- we really need -- those lying sons of bitches looked me in the eye and said to me, "Not really -- because do you remember me saying, "Look, I'll help you in any way I can. I can only do so much. I'll carry that water. Are you sure? Because I got one shot at this. I won't have any credibility left if you guys -- if this isn't the guy or if it -- do you remember me saying that to you?

THOMAS: I remember very precisely. And that's exactly what you said, Glenn.

GLENN: Right. So I feel really deeply betrayed by anyone who came to me and then -- and now they're like, "Well, you know, Paul Ryan, we can't really win." How dare you do that! How dare you do that! Thank you, Thomas, for at least being -- because I -- you know, I talked to you yesterday and you're like, "No, there's no way I'm going to vote for -- and I thought last night, I'm like, "Please, dear God, don't let Thomas be one of the guys who has done this." I'm so happy to hear that you stood your ground.

THOMAS: You can trust me. Look at the track record. This is what I encourage people. Don't -- people want to associate themselves with the caucus. I never did associate with the Freedom Caucus. Never been to a meeting. I'm not throwing them under the bus. What I am saying is, there are 40 individuals, and you need to look at each of those individuals. And what did they do on January 6th, when we stood firm and voted for a new Speaker? How many of them cosponsored the motion to vacate the chair? Not many. And look at what they do on October 29th. That's the most important thing you can do.

GLENN: Okay. So the biggest thing we can learn is the Freedom Caucus is nothing more than the Patriot Act. It's a stupid name that makes everybody think that, "Oh, they're the good guys." Is that what I'm hearing?

THOMAS: I do not want to disparage my colleagues. There are some really good --

GLENN: Okay. I'll do it for you. I'm sure there's five in there that aren't total and complete wastes of skin. The rest of them --

THOMAS: I can guarantee you there are five -- there are five very good individuals in there.

GLENN: Are there ten? Ten?

THOMAS: I've never been to a meeting, I don't know.

(laughter)

PAT: But he can't confirm there's ten.

GLENN: He cannot confirm that there are ten good people in the Freedom Caucus.

PAT: Oh, man.

GLENN: Look, here's the thing, Thomas, it's time to put the cards down on the table. If -- if what I have been told by senators, what I've been told by presidential candidates, what I've been told by House members, all on separate occasions, that if this goes wrong, the party is over because exactly what you said. And everything that I said and predicted five or six or seven years ago that the more you screw this up, the more extreme you will have in candidates, exactly what Thomas just said about Donald Trump is exactly what I said was crazy five or six years ago. That's going to happen. And so -- if what these guys have told me, that you lose the party, you lose the election -- I mean, there's nothing -- there's nothing left to lose here. We have to know and put pressure on these people, if that evens work. If it doesn't work, then I'm just done anyway. Will it work?

THOMAS: Please don't give up yet. I will be left alone up here if you give up. But, again, October 29th -- see, on October 28th, Glenn, there's a secret vote behind closed doors with no accountability whatsoever. And I -- and I expect Paul Ryan will probably beat Daniel Webster in that vote. But nobody has to attest for their vote until the next day, when the only constitutional vote that matters happens on the floor. And people have to --

GLENN: Any way that they can make that go away? Any way that they can take that in secret or it not be known?

THOMAS: No. No. It would be heresy. It would be against the Constitution to have a secret vote --

GLENN: When has that stopped anybody in Washington? When has the Constitution stopped a single damn thing?

THOMAS: Some people might try to vote present or be in the cloakroom or not vote that day. Do not let them tell you they didn't vote -- you know, that they stood up that day if they don't vote. Voting present does not work. Our Founding Fathers did not vote present.

GLENN: That's what they're going to do. These guys aren't Founding Fathers. These guys are criminals. They're not Founding Fathers. You know if they have an out, that's exactly what they will do so they can go back to us, oh, look at me, I didn't vote that way. I didn't do that.

THOMAS: Well, it's up to you not to let them have an out. So they need to cast a vote. They can't vote present or be gone that day. They need to cast a vote on October 29th. Don't trust them by what they say, trust them by what they do.

GLENN: Thomas Massie, representative from Kentucky and a guy who I think actually takes the position seriously and says, "I am a representative of the people of Kentucky," thank you for being on with us. I appreciate it.

THOMAS: Thank you.

URGENT: Supreme Court case could redefine religious liberty

Drew Angerer / Staff | Getty Images

The state is effectively silencing professionals who dare speak truths about gender and sexuality, redefining faith-guided speech as illegal.

This week, free speech is once again on the line before the U.S. Supreme Court. At stake is whether Americans still have the right to talk about faith, morality, and truth in their private practice without the government’s permission.

The case comes out of Colorado, where lawmakers in 2019 passed a ban on what they call “conversion therapy.” The law prohibits licensed counselors from trying to change a minor’s gender identity or sexual orientation, including their behaviors or gender expression. The law specifically targets Christian counselors who serve clients attempting to overcome gender dysphoria and not fall prey to the transgender ideology.

The root of this case isn’t about therapy. It’s about erasing a worldview.

The law does include one convenient exception. Counselors are free to “assist” a person who wants to transition genders but not someone who wants to affirm their biological sex. In other words, you can help a child move in one direction — one that is in line with the state’s progressive ideology — but not the other.

Think about that for a moment. The state is saying that a counselor can’t even discuss changing behavior with a client. Isn’t that the whole point of counseling?

One‑sided freedom

Kaley Chiles, a licensed professional counselor in Colorado Springs, has been one of the victims of this blatant attack on the First Amendment. Chiles has dedicated her practice to helping clients dealing with addiction, trauma, sexuality struggles, and gender dysphoria. She’s also a Christian who serves patients seeking guidance rooted in biblical teaching.

Before 2019, she could counsel minors according to her faith. She could talk about biblical morality, identity, and the path to wholeness. When the state outlawed that speech, she stopped. She followed the law — and then she sued.

Her case, Chiles v. Salazar, is now before the Supreme Court. Justices heard oral arguments on Tuesday. The question: Is counseling a form of speech or merely a government‑regulated service?

If the court rules the wrong way, it won’t just silence therapists. It could muzzle pastors, teachers, parents — anyone who believes in truth grounded in something higher than the state.

Censored belief

I believe marriage between a man and a woman is ordained by God. I believe that family — mother, father, child — is central to His design for humanity.

I believe that men and women are created in God’s image, with divine purpose and eternal worth. Gender isn’t an accessory; it’s part of who we are.

I believe the command to “be fruitful and multiply” still stands, that the power to create life is sacred, and that it belongs within marriage between a man and a woman.

And I believe that when we abandon these principles — when we treat sex as recreation, when we dissolve families, when we forget our vows — society fractures.

Are those statements controversial now? Maybe. But if this case goes against Chiles, those statements and others could soon be illegal to say aloud in public.

Faith on trial

In Colorado today, a counselor cannot sit down with a 15‑year‑old who’s struggling with gender identity and say, “You were made in God’s image, and He does not make mistakes.” That is now considered hate speech.

That’s the “freedom” the modern left is offering — freedom to affirm, but never to question. Freedom to comply, but never to dissent. The same movement that claims to champion tolerance now demands silence from anyone who disagrees. The root of this case isn’t about therapy. It’s about erasing a worldview.

The real test

No matter what happens at the Supreme Court, we cannot stop speaking the truth. These beliefs aren’t political slogans. For me, they are the product of years of wrestling, searching, and learning through pain and grace what actually leads to peace. For us, they are the fundamental principles that lead to a flourishing life. We cannot balk at standing for truth.

Maybe that’s why God allows these moments — moments when believers are pushed to the wall. They force us to ask hard questions: What is true? What is worth standing for? What is worth dying for — and living for?

If we answer those questions honestly, we’ll find not just truth, but freedom.

The state doesn’t grant real freedom — and it certainly isn’t defined by Colorado legislators. Real freedom comes from God. And the day we forget that, the First Amendment will mean nothing at all.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn Beck joins Megyn Kelly LIVE — One night ONLY in Fort Worth!

Get ready for sparks to fly. For the first time in years, Glenn will come face-to-face with Megyn Kelly — and this time, he’s the one in the hot seat. On October 25, 2025, at Dickies Arena in Fort Worth, Texas, Glenn joins Megyn on her “Megyn Kelly Live Tour” for a no-holds-barred conversation that promises laughs, surprises, and maybe even a few uncomfortable questions.

What will happen when two of America’s sharpest voices collide under the spotlight? Will Glenn finally reveal the major announcement he’s been teasing on the radio for weeks? You’ll have to be there to find out.

This promises to be more than just an interview — it’s a live showdown packed with wit, honesty, and the kind of energy you can only feel if you are in the room. Tickets are selling fast, so don’t miss your chance to see Glenn like you’ve never seen him before.

Get your tickets NOW at www.MegynKelly.com before they’re gone!

What our response to Israel reveals about us

JOSEPH PREZIOSO / Contributor | Getty Images

I have been honored to receive the Defender of Israel Award from Prime Minister Netanyahu.

The Jerusalem Post recently named me one of the strongest Christian voices in support of Israel.

And yet, my support is not blind loyalty. It’s not a rubber stamp for any government or policy. I support Israel because I believe it is my duty — first as a Christian, but even if I weren’t a believer, I would still support her as a man of reason, morality, and common sense.

Because faith isn’t required to understand this: Israel’s existence is not just about one nation’s survival — it is about the survival of Western civilization itself.

It is a lone beacon of shared values in the Middle East. It is a bulwark standing against radical Islam — the same evil that seeks to dismantle our own nation from within.

And my support is not rooted in politics. It is rooted in something simpler and older than politics: a people’s moral and historical right to their homeland, and their right to live in peace.

Israel has that right — and the right to defend herself against those who openly, repeatedly vow her destruction.

Let’s make it personal: if someone told me again and again that they wanted to kill me and my entire family — and then acted on that threat — would I not defend myself? Wouldn’t you? If Hamas were Canada, and we were Israel, and they did to us what Hamas has done to them, there wouldn’t be a single building left standing north of our border. That’s not a question of morality.

That’s just the truth. All people — every people — have a God-given right to protect themselves. And Israel is doing exactly that.

My support for Israel’s right to finish the fight against Hamas comes after eighty years of rejected peace offers and failed two-state solutions. Hamas has never hidden its mission — the eradication of Israel. That’s not a political disagreement.

That’s not a land dispute. That is an annihilationist ideology. And while I do not believe this is America’s war to fight, I do believe — with every fiber of my being — that it is Israel’s right, and moral duty, to defend her people.

Criticism of military tactics is fair. That’s not antisemitism. But denying Israel’s right to exist, or excusing — even celebrating — the barbarity of Hamas? That’s something far darker.

We saw it on October 7th — the face of evil itself. Women and children slaughtered. Babies burned alive. Innocent people raped and dragged through the streets. And now, to see our own fellow citizens march in defense of that evil… that is nothing short of a moral collapse.

If the chants in our streets were, “Hamas, return the hostages — Israel, stop the bombing,” we could have a conversation.

But that’s not what we hear.

What we hear is open sympathy for genocidal hatred. And that is a chasm — not just from decency, but from humanity itself. And here lies the danger: that same hatred is taking root here — in Dearborn, in London, in Paris — not as horror, but as heroism. If we are not vigilant, the enemy Israel faces today will be the enemy the free world faces tomorrow.

This isn’t about politics. It’s about truth. It’s about the courage to call evil by its name and to say “Never again” — and mean it.

And you don’t have to open a Bible to understand this. But if you do — if you are a believer — then this issue cuts even deeper. Because the question becomes: what did God promise, and does He keep His word?

He told Abraham, “I will bless those who bless you, and curse those who curse you.” He promised to make Abraham the father of many nations and to give him “the whole land of Canaan.” And though Abraham had other sons, God reaffirmed that promise through Isaac. And then again through Isaac’s son, Jacob — Israel — saying: “The land I gave to Abraham and Isaac I give to you and to your descendants after you.”

That’s an everlasting promise.

And from those descendants came a child — born in Bethlehem — who claimed to be the Savior of the world. Jesus never rejected His title as “son of David,” the great King of Israel.

He said plainly that He came “for the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” And when He returns, Scripture says He will return as “the Lion of the tribe of Judah.” And where do you think He will go? Back to His homeland — Israel.

Tamir Kalifa / Stringer | Getty Images

And what will He find when He gets there? His brothers — or his brothers’ enemies? Will the roads where He once walked be preserved? Or will they lie in rubble, as Gaza does today? If what He finds looks like the aftermath of October 7th, then tell me — what will be my defense as a Christian?

Some Christians argue that God’s promises to Israel have been transferred exclusively to the Church. I don’t believe that. But even if you do, then ask yourself this: if we’ve inherited the promises, do we not also inherit the land? Can we claim the birthright and then, like Esau, treat it as worthless when the world tries to steal it?

So, when terrorists come to slaughter Israelis simply for living in the land promised to Abraham, will we stand by? Or will we step forward — into the line of fire — and say,

“Take me instead”?

Because this is not just about Israel’s right to exist.

It’s about whether we still know the difference between good and evil.

It’s about whether we still have the courage to stand where God stands.

And if we cannot — if we will not — then maybe the question isn’t whether Israel will survive. Maybe the question is whether we will.

America’s moral erosion: How we were conditioned to accept the unthinkable

MATHIEU LEWIS-ROLLAND / Contributor | Getty Images

Every time we look away from lawlessness, we tell the next mob it can go a little further.

Chicago, Portland, and other American cities are showing us what happens when the rule of law breaks down. These cities have become openly lawless — and that’s not hyperbole.

When a governor declares she doesn’t believe federal agents about a credible threat to their lives, when Chicago orders its police not to assist federal officers, and when cartels print wanted posters offering bounties for the deaths of U.S. immigration agents, you’re looking at a country flirting with anarchy.

Two dangers face us now: the intimidation of federal officers and the normalization of soldiers as street police. Accept either, and we lose the republic.

This isn’t a matter of partisan politics. The struggle we’re watching now is not between Democrats and Republicans. It’s between good and evil, right and wrong, self‑government and chaos.

Moral erosion

For generations, Americans have inherited a republic based on law, liberty, and moral responsibility. That legacy is now under assault by extremists who openly seek to collapse the system and replace it with something darker.

Antifa, well‑financed by the left, isn’t an isolated fringe any more than Occupy Wall Street was. As with Occupy, big money and global interests are quietly aligned with “anti‑establishment” radicals. The goal is disruption, not reform.

And they’ve learned how to condition us. Twenty‑five years ago, few Americans would have supported drag shows in elementary schools, biological males in women’s sports, forced vaccinations, or government partnerships with mega‑corporations to decide which businesses live or die. Few would have tolerated cartels threatening federal agents or tolerated mobs doxxing political opponents. Yet today, many shrug — or cheer.

How did we get here? What evidence convinced so many people to reverse themselves on fundamental questions of morality, liberty, and law? Those long laboring to disrupt our republic have sought to condition people to believe that the ends justify the means.

Promoting “tolerance” justifies women losing to biological men in sports. “Compassion” justifies harboring illegal immigrants, even violent criminals. Whatever deluded ideals Antifa espouses is supposed to somehow justify targeting federal agents and overturning the rule of law. Our culture has been conditioned for this moment.

The buck stops with us

That’s why the debate over using troops to restore order in American cities matters so much. I’ve never supported soldiers executing civilian law, and I still don’t. But we need to speak honestly about what the Constitution allows and why. The Posse Comitatus Act sharply limits the use of the military for domestic policing. The Insurrection Act, however, exists for rare emergencies — when federal law truly can’t be enforced by ordinary means and when mobs, cartels, or coordinated violence block the courts.

Even then, the Constitution demands limits: a public proclamation ordering offenders to disperse, transparency about the mission, a narrow scope, temporary duration, and judicial oversight.

Soldiers fight wars. Cops enforce laws. We blur that line at our peril.

But we also cannot allow intimidation of federal officers or tolerate local officials who openly obstruct federal enforcement. Both extremes — lawlessness on one side and militarization on the other — endanger the republic.

The only way out is the Constitution itself. Protect civil liberty. Enforce the rule of law. Demand transparency. Reject the temptation to justify any tactic because “our side” is winning. We’ve already seen how fear after 9/11 led to the Patriot Act and years of surveillance.

KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

Two dangers face us now: the intimidation of federal officers and the normalization of soldiers as street police. Accept either, and we lose the republic. The left cannot be allowed to shut down enforcement, and the right cannot be allowed to abandon constitutional restraint.

The real threat to the republic isn’t just the mobs or the cartels. It’s us — citizens who stop caring about truth and constitutional limits. Anything can be justified when fear takes over. Everything collapses when enough people decide “the ends justify the means.”

We must choose differently. Uphold the rule of law. Guard civil liberties. And remember that the only way to preserve a government of, by, and for the people is to act like the people still want it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn's Show Prep

Rep. Thomas Massie tells Glenn who he can and can't trust

URGENT: Supreme Court case could redefine religious liberty

The state is effectively silencing professionals who dare speak truths about gender and sexuality, redefining faith-guided speech as illegal.

The root of this case isn’t about therapy. It’s about erasing a worldview.

One‑sided freedom

Censored belief

Faith on trial

The real test

Glenn Beck joins Megyn Kelly LIVE — One night ONLY in Fort Worth!

What our response to Israel reveals about us

I have been honored to receive the Defender of Israel Award from Prime Minister Netanyahu.

Because faith isn’t required to understand this: Israel’s existence is not just about one nation’s survival — it is about the survival of Western civilization itself.

Israel has that right — and the right to defend herself against those who openly, repeatedly vow her destruction.

But that’s not what we hear.

America’s moral erosion: How we were conditioned to accept the unthinkable

Every time we look away from lawlessness, we tell the next mob it can go a little further.

Two dangers face us now: the intimidation of federal officers and the normalization of soldiers as street police. Accept either, and we lose the republic.

Moral erosion

The buck stops with us