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

Why Is Sean Hannity Mad at Glenn?

August 30, 2016
Lori Hanes

Writer

On his radio program Tuesday, Sean Hannity expressed his frustration with conservatives who have not boarded the so-called Trump train, specifically accusing Glenn of "attacking" him "every day."

Business Insider reported Hannity saying the following:

RELATED: Behind-the-Scenes Photos of the ‘Contentious’ Meeting with Sean Hannity, Ben Sasse and Glenn Beck

"Well, let me just say to all of you. And that includes the commentator class. That includes the Jonah Goldberg class, that includes radio talk show hosts. Glenn Beck is like on a — it's a holy war for him at this point. I mean, he's off the rails attacking me every day. Blaming me for Trump. Well, no. I was fair to everybody, Glenn. Whether you want to admit it or not. I know I was fair. My conscience is clear. And I, frankly, I'm proud to pull the lever for Donald Trump with a clear conscience.

We checked the radio transcripts and compiled every reference Glenn made to Hannity during the month of August. What we found didn't sound like "attacking" and it certainly wasn't "every day," but we'll let you decide. Here's what Glenn had to say about Hannity all five times his name came up this month:

THURSDAY, AUGUST 11TH

GLENN: All right. I want to go over a little bit of what Sean Hannity said. And I'm actually going to agree with Sean Hannity on a lot of what he said. And he took people on from the G.O.P. that are standing against Donald Trump or at least not supporting Donald Trump. And there are some things that I don't agree, but a lot that I do agree. And I think I have a way where we can all come together, something where both the people who agree with Sean and the people who agree with me can actually come together and protect our country. And it's probably where we should begin to focus. And we'll get into that here in just a second. I don't want to do it an injustice by trying to cram it in here.

[COMMERCIAL BREAK]

GLENN: Let me go to Sean Hannity and what he said last night, because I actually agree with him on some things. Listen to this monologue.

SEAN: Is it time now for Republicans who refuse to endorse Donald Trump -- are they now sabotaging his campaign? Because if they continue to do what they're doing and Hillary Clinton wins, will they be responsible for supporting Hillary Clinton's radical left-wing agenda?

GLENN: Stop. Stop. Flawed thinking here.

PAT: And it's almost progressive thinking. That's exactly what Obama does: He sets up a straw man argument, and then he sets it on fire. Well, that's...

GLENN: Yeah. I'm not responsible for Hillary Clinton.

PAT: No.

GLENN: We warned --

PAT: We said it all along.

GLENN: We had to beat Hillary Clinton. And we warned -- if we weren't powerful enough to get Ted Cruz to be the nominee, we're certainly not powerful enough to have Donald Trump trailing by 13 points.

PAT: No.

GLENN: I mean, if we had the power of 13 points, Ted Cruz would be the nominee.

STU: You and your math.

GLENN: Yeah, I know. So it's not us. We agree, Sean, with you that Hillary Clinton is a disaster. And the idea that Donald Trump said was, I don't need those constitutionalists. I don't need them. And those are his words.

PAT: He should be talking to Donald. Not us. Not only does he not need them; he said he didn't want them.

GLENN: Right. And that's totally fine. His plan was, I'm going to reach across the aisle, and I'm going to get a lot of Democrats and I'm going to get Bernie Sanders supporters. Well, that's not happening. And one-fifth of the Republican Party doesn't want anything to do with Donald Trump. One-fifth. You cannot win with one-fifth of the Republican Party not saying that they won't vote for you. But his plan, as we said, won't work. His plan from the beginning is, I'm going to win New York. I'm going to win Pennsylvania. I'm going to win a lot of Democrats. Well, that's not happening. Okay. So go ahead.

SEAN: Time to name names. Bill Kristol. Former Governor Mitt Romney. Susan Collins. Jeb Bush. Ted Cruz. Ben Sasse. Lindsey Graham. Meg Whitman. And many, many others. Now, if they keep up their stubborn, their stupid game and continue to lick their wounds, well, this is what they will be responsible for.

GLENN: Okay. Stop. I'm not letting you two talk. (Laughter.) Not letting you two talk.

PAT: Well, again, it's just that, that's not the issue. The issue is not our wounds. The issue is not our feelings. And he knows that.

GLENN: Right. It's our principles.

PAT: And he knows that.

GLENN: And to Sean, I believe our principles are very much the same. He's just going towards those principles in a route that we disagree with. And we're going towards those principles in a route that he disagrees with. And there's nothing wrong with that. We have different ways of getting to our principles. And he -- you know, he knows Donald Trump. I don't. He knows him. He trusts him. I don't think that Sean Hannity is evil or anything else.

He knows him, and he's talked to me several times, and he's like, "Glenn, you're wrong about Donald Trump." And it's not any kind of game he's playing. He's not getting money or anything. He believes Donald Trump. He knows him. I don't. I don't trust him.

But that's just the difference between us. And it's not that we're licking our wounds. It's not. It has nothing to do with that.

SEAN: Give a few examples. Of course that would be the continuation of President Obama's disastrous economic policies. And did any of them happen to listen to Trump's speech?

GLENN: This is where we totally agree.

SEAN: We have the lowest labor participation rate since the '70s. Lowest home ownership rate in 41 years. The worst recovery since the 1940s.

GLENN: He's right.

SEAN: Clinton will simply continue that failed economic agenda of Obama. Enforces Obamacare.

GLENN: Absolutely right.

SEAN: Now, Donald Trump told me last night he will repeal or replace it and have competition. Clinton will keep it.

GLENN: Okay. Stop.

PAT: Donald Trump also told 60 Minutes, he wants -- and he doesn't care if it costs him votes.

STU: And he also said he knows it's not Republican.

PAT: Right.

STU: I want the government to pay for it.

GLENN: So the question is -- and this is, again, where Sean knows Donald and believes him that he's going to repeal and replace with free market. I tend to take a man at his word on 60 Minutes that he's going to repeal and replace with something that is 100 percent socialism.

PAT: He was adamant about it. In September.

GLENN: He was adamant about it. And that is his record of belief throughout his life.

PAT: Right.

GLENN: Sean may be right. But I don't know Donald Trump. And a lot of people don't know Donald Trump. And the Donald Trump we do know changes his viewpoint to wherever he happens to be standing. And so that's the difference between us. I don't believe him on this.

SEAN: Open borders. Trump promises a wall. Clinton wants open borders. So which is better for national security and the American worker? Now, the refusal to use the term "radical Islam." Donald Trump will mention it. Liberal Supreme Court justices versus the originalists that Donald Trump has said that he will support. He wants people like Scalia and Clarence Thomas on the bench. On this one issue alone, this will impact this one for generations to come.

GLENN: Absolutely true.

SEAN: Hillary, of course, wants a 550 percent increase in unvetted refugees. Trump promises to vet them all, or else not let them in. Top-down Common Core education. That's failing. Hillary would continue that. We have a dilapidated military. Trump will improve the military and rebuild it. And the list goes on.

PAT: When did our military -- when -- wow, that's --

GLENN: No, we are in trouble. No, we are in trouble with our military.

PAT: Are they dilapidated?

GLENN: No, we are in big trouble. We are in big trouble. He's right on that.

PAT: I would not call our military dilapidated.

GLENN: I will put you in touch with somebody who will tell you exactly what's happened over -- we are in big trouble with our military. So Hannity is absolutely right on those problems. He's absolutely right. I want you to understand clearly, for the record, we've been saying this for over a year -- actually we've been saying this for four years because we knew she was going to be it. But as this went on, this is why we fought so hard -- this is why I endorsed somebody for the very first time. I endorsed the Constitution, not Ted Cruz. I started almost every speech, "I'm not here to endorse Ted Cruz. I am here to endorse the Constitution of the United States." I am telling you now, Hillary Clinton is an absolute unmitigated disaster for the country. Disaster. I happen to believe that Donald Trump, A, cannot nor will he win. I also think he is a very dangerous man that could end up being a bigger disaster for the United States.

So how do we solve this problem? We can either sit here and go back and forth. Sean said that -- he went on in his monologue calling people crybabies, et cetera, et cetera. And I was very offended by that. But I immediately thought, "You know what, I've said things like that about the other side." I have said things and disparaged people on the other side. And I regret it. Shouldn't have done it. So how am I going to point the finger at Sean Hannity and say, "Hey -- no. I did it too. We should stop that. And start to understand that there is one thing that we can come together -- there is one thing I can stand with Sean Hannity on and will stand with Sean Hannity on. And it won't be who to vote for. Although, I have never said, "Do not vote for Donald Trump."

STU: Well, at least not since the end of primary. I mean, certainly --

GLENN: Yeah, during the primary. I have said since the end of the primary, I cannot, but I understand those who do. I really do. I understand why. Because Hillary Clinton is so bad. So I understand that. And I'll never say Sean is not a patriot for doing that. He's doing what he believes is right because we are facing two horrible, horrible options. However, here's where we can unite, the under ticket. If Hillary Clinton is president, the only thing that will have a chance of being a speed bump, not a stop, but a speed bump, will be a Republican Congress. And we know the Republican Congress will unite against Hillary Clinton. We know the press will throw in for her. You need a speed bump. It's not going to solve all of the problems of what she's going to bring, but it will at least slow her down and stop some of them.

So let's unite on the bottom of the ticket. You must go out and vote. Who you vote for at the top of the ticket is your business. Who I vote for is my business. Who Sean does --- his business.

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 17TH

GLENN: We have now lost Fox News. We -- Roger Ailes is out. By his own doing, but Roger Ailes is out. And Roger Ailes is now tying his wagon to Donald Trump. Sean Hannity, completely Donald Trump. Drudge Report, completely Donald Trump. Breitbart, completely Donald Trump. Much of talk radio, completely talk Donald Trump. In fact, one big radio network, which will not be named, is telling their hosts throughout the entire country, "You are not to say anything bad about Donald Trump, period." There is an edict. No more. Many of our talk radio programmers are telling their hosts and choking back up on the chain, and they're doing it, I think, because of ratings. But most of them are doing it because they're such strong believers of Donald Trump. There's no diversity. You do not talk ill about Donald Trump. And the Tea Party. Now, not all of the Tea Party. But some of the Tea Party. And if it's some of the Tea Party, all of the Tea Party now has been discredited.

FRIDAY, AUGUST 19TH

GLENN: So let me give you a prediction. If Trump wins, you're going to see Bannon as the chief of staff or the media arm and Breitbart and Breitbart web and radio, I think, will become his official media. He'll just -- you know how the White House now does all of their media and they're not letting the reporters in. They're just doing the media themselves, and you can get the pool feed? But they're producing all of these clips. And the press pushed back on Obama, but not too much because it was Obama. I think he's going to take it a step forward. Roger Ailes, I think, will be, you know, a consultant of some sort. And I think air talent like Sean Hannity, I think Sean will become press secretary. And I mean this sincerely. I think if he wins. Now --

STU: I mean, first of all, Sean would be great at that.

GLENN: No, he would be great.

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 24TH

GLENN: Sean Hannity. Let's play what we can of that one. Sean Hannity last night had Donald Trump on, and I want to take your phone calls. 877-727-BECK. And I want to hear from Donald Trump supporters, from people who are voting for Donald Trump, and tell me what you think about . . . he's softening his language on immigration and softening his policy and reversing some of his policy. Here's a little bit of what happened on Hannity last night.

SEAN: And this is where you seem to in the last week be revisiting the issue of sending everybody back that is here illegally. Tell us where you stand on that.

DONALD: We want to follow the laws. You know, we have very strong laws. We have very strong laws in this country. (Laughter.) And I don't know if you know, but Bush and even Obama sends people back. Now, we can be more aggressive in that, but we want to follow the laws. If you start going around trying to make new laws in this country, it's a process that's brutal. We want to follow the laws of the country. And if we follow the laws, we can do what we have to do. (Applause.)

GLENN: Stop. That's incredible.

THURSDAY, AUGUST 25TH

GLENN: Now, here's the interesting place -- I want to play these three phone calls for you this hour and show you where I'm really confused with the Trump support right now. And we have to play some audio from -- that was cut out by Fox from Sean Hannity that shows, I think, how volatile this situation is. And the -- you can hear the volatility in this caller, where we start talking to him about, is Donald Trump betraying you? And he says no.

Featured Image: Fox News Host Sean Hannity speaks during the annual Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) 2016 at National Harbor in Oxon Hill, Maryland, outside Washington, March 4, 2016. (Photo Credit: SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images)

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.