The Candidates on ISIS, National Security and Immigration

February 15, 2016

Writer

It’s President’s Day 2016. And this election year, we’re bringing you a special edition of The Glenn Beck Program. Iowa and New Hampshire have now voiced their opinions in the primaries, but most of the country has yet to vote. Over the past several months, we have extended an offer to all of the presidential candidates to sit down and talk one-on-one in a long-form setting. Many of the candidates took us up on that offer; some did not.

We weren’t looking for gotcha questions, and we didn’t want sound bite answers. Anyone can do an interview where the politicians can give a polished and rehearsed answer. But we wanted to go in depth with the people who want to lead our country through, which will be no doubt, a very intense period in our nation’s history.

For those who participated, we discussed important issues, ranging from what to do about ISIS to Common Core to favorite Founding Fathers. It’s insightful and important even from those candidates out of the presidential race who could potentially be a vice presidential candidate.

ISIS and National Security

Ted Cruz:

• We need a commander-in-chief that lays out a clear objective, and that objective should be to destroy ISIS. ISIS hates America. They've declared an Islamic caliphate. They've declared an intention to murder us. They are beheading journalists. They are lighting people on fire. They intend to wage jihad and murder millions. It is in our national security interest to prevent that. A commander-in-chief who lays out the objective, we will destroy them, I believe we can do so.

• I think connecting U.S. national security interests to foreign policy should be the touchstone for everything we do in foreign policy.

• I opposed Obama wanting to go into Syria and unilaterally attack Syria. Because when I asked the administration, "Well, gosh, if you succeed in toppling Assad and the chemical weapons fall into the hands of radical Islamic terrorists of al-Qaeda or al-Nusra HEP or ISIS --- how is that better for us? They had no answer for that. On the other hand, when you look at Iran, for example, the reason I led the Iran rally, the reason I led the opposition to this nuclear deal, is when the Ayatollah Khamenei says death to America, I believe him.

• The Kurds are our friends. They're fighting ISIS right now. And ISIS has U.S. military equipment they've seized from Iraq. The Kurds have outmoded HEP equipment, but Obama doesn't want to give the Kurds weaponry because he thinks it would upset the government in Baghdad and it would upset Iran. I mean, this is lunacy.

Rand Paul:

• I warned about ISIS in 2013. We had a vote in the Foreign Relations Committee about whether we should send arms to Islamic rebels fighting against Assad. I said, "Are any of these groups in support of recognizing Israel as a country?" Absolutely not. These are the people we're giving arms to. Do these people like Israel or like the United States? Absolutely not. And I said, "The great irony is, the people you're arming today, will be back within a year fighting against our own arms." I warned them. I didn't know the name ISIS. I didn't know IS. I didn't know any of that. But I knew they were radical jihadists and it was a mistake to give them weapons because ultimately they would turn those weapons on us.

• The first thing you have to do if you really think ISIS is a threat to mankind and to the world, quit funding them. Quit sending arms to them. And quit giving them money.

• I think Kurds are a real fighting force. They have a land base. They live there. They're from there. And they will fight to the death. And they're good fighters. We have 7 billion dollars worth of rotting equipment in Afghanistan. Airlift it all directly to the Kurds, or at least a portion of it.

Rick Santorum

• Islam is not just a religion. It's also a political doctrine. And they are, in fact, one and the same. They're melted together. Unlike Christianity, which is not. Jesus didn't come to establish an earthly kingdom. Muhammad did. Muhammad governed. Muhammad set rules. Here is how civilization is to behave. And there are people who --- certainly in America, Muslims who are --- faithful Muslims who don't buy into Sharia law, don't buy into this that, you know, we're here to govern. But I would say that that is, in the world, a minority. I think that most in the world believe that Sharia law and --- is integrated into Islam, and it's hard to separate the two.

• If you're not willing to stand up and articulate one of the most virulent threats to the security of our country --- I mean, Iran, ISIS, all these other radical --- Hezbollah, all these other organizations, they want to destroy the United States of America. You hear in their defense planning, the Iranians talking about EMPs. I'm principally concerned about that. There are other methodologies. Obviously they can attack the United States. But that's the most cataclyzmic one. And it is not beyond the realm of possibility that that can happen.

Ben Carson

• If the Muslim accepts the whole Islamic mantra, which includes Sharia that to me is not compatible with our Constitution.

• One of the reasons they're [ISIS] being so successful with their recruitment efforts is because they have, in fact, established a caliphate: half of Iraq, a third of Syria, beachheads in Somalia, Nigeria, Tunisia. And they are looking extraordinarily successful, and they're able to offer people who frequently live in pretty desperate situations, some semblance of prestige in their life and money that they can send to their families. What I would do is make them not look like winners. How would you do that? Well, the easiest place I think to go is Iraq. The government in Iraq is pretty much in shambles at this stage in the game. But I think it would be relatively easy to take the territory back from them. That would be a huge blow to their prestige.

• I think we would have to put our own people on the ground. We also have a lot of Special Forces. We have capabilities that are very substantial. We have the capabilities of doing things. But our people won't let them do it.

• There are several factions of the Kurds. The one that we hear about the most are the Peshmerga. The PKK is the faction of the Kurds that Turkey is at war with. And, you know, I definitely think we should be directly helping them. I think they're an enormous fighting force who has a tremendous history. And they have a lot of variations, including Christians, among them.

Bobby Jindal

• We're going to have to go and build our military. That means more resources. That means the right people in the right places that understand the whole point of our military is to be the greatest fighting force in the history of the world. We have to take the political handcuffs off the military and have the right people in place to say, all right, if we send the military in, it's to get a mission done, to be victorious, and then to come home.

• Under this president, you've gotten the extreme where America tries to retreat from the world. Our friends don't trust us. Our enemies don't fear and respect us.

• The other extreme in American foreign policy is we cannot remake the world in our image by force. People don't want to change, you can't force them to change. This is the greatest country in the history of the world. We're exceptional. We're unique. It's naive to think that everybody else is going to be the same. They're not. And we're blessed to be here.

• We can give them moral support. There are soft tools in diplomacy. That doesn't mean we should be sending boots on the ground every chance there is. What Reagan understood was, the best way to avoid war is to prepare for it. So you build up that military so they don't test you.

Immigration

Carly Fiorina

• I've been absolutely consistent in this. We have to secure the border. We've talked about it every election. We haven't done it for 25 years. Securing the border takes, what? Money, manpower, technology, mostly, apparently it takes political willpower and leadership.

• For sanctuary cities, I would enforce federal law. The legal immigration system has been broke for 25 years. We talk about it. Nothing happens.

• Pass a border security bill. How hard is this?

• We have to fix the legal immigration system. We hand out Mexican border crossing cards every day. We don't check to see if anybody goes home. If you come in on a legal visa, we never see if you've left. We have to fix the legal immigration system.

• The reason zero-based budgeting is so important is because it's only when we know where our money is being spent that we can prioritize our money. Have you ever noticed, most people have when they think about it, that the federal government spends more money every year and never has enough money to do the important things. Never. Securing the border is the federal government's job, yet they never have enough money.

Rick Santorum

• There's a website called NumbersUSA.com. And Numbers USA actually rates all the candidates, Republicans and Democrats, on the immigration issue, both legal and illegal and what they're going to do on everything from birthright citizenship to securing the border. And there's only one person who gets an A --- that would be Rick Santorum.

• Since 2000, there have been 5.7 new new jobs created between 2000 and 2014. Of those 5.7 million net new jobs created, what percentage are held by people who are not born in this country? The answer: All of them.

• Half the people who are here [illegally], are here are on visa overstays. We know their names. We know where they live. And you know what we don't do? We don't tell them to go home. In fact, we encourage them not to go home.

Ted Cruz

• We should protect this country. And in particular that his [Obama's] plan to bring in tens of thousands of Syrian refugees makes no sense. The administration cannot vet whether these individuals are affiliated with ISIS. Whether there are ISIS terrorists among us. And we shouldn't be bringing in people that are coming in to wage jihad.

• It's a very different situation with the persecuted Christians in the Middle East, who are facing persecution, who are facing genocide. And we should be working to provide a safe haven for them. I know that's been a passion of yours and mine for a long time. And in response to that, President Obama says you and I and millions of Americans who want to keep this country safe, that we are both offensive and un-American. And I will note there's something particularly rich about the president calling you un-American as he's standing in Turkey, on foreign soil, lambasting the desire to keep the United States safe.

Ben Carson

Featured Image: Republican presidential candidates (L-R) Ohio Governor John Kasich, Jeb Bush, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), Donald Trump, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Ben Carson stand on stage during a CBS News GOP Debate February 13, 2016 at the Peace Center in Greenville, South Carolina. Residents of South Carolina will vote for the Republican candidate at the primary on February 20. (Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

Why the White House restoration sent the left Into panic mode

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A restoration, not a renovation

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

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

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

The selective guardians of history

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

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

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

The real desecration

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

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

Julia Beverly / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

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

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Beyond Venezuela

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

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

PEDRO MATTEY / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

Trump’s Monroe Doctrine

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

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

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

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

Jeff J Mitchell / Staff | Getty Images

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

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

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

Antifa is organized, funded, and emboldened.

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

A history of violence

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

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

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

Dismember the dragon

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

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

AFP Contributor / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

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's Show Prep

The Candidates on ISIS, National Security and Immigration

Why the White House restoration sent the left Into panic mode

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.

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

A restoration, not a renovation

The selective guardians of history

The real desecration

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

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

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

Beyond Venezuela

Trump’s Monroe Doctrine

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

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

Antifa is organized, funded, and emboldened.

A history of violence

Dismember the dragon

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