Time to Pass the Baton to the Next Hero Generation: The Millennials

October 18, 2016

Writer

It's time to take the plastic off the furniture and turn off the TV set. Millennials are the next hero generation queued up to save the republic. They're depending on older generations to show them the way. They don't care about political parties, they don't care about Ronald Reagan. They care about making a difference. So let's show them how to do it --- the American way.

Read below or listen to the full segment for answers to these questions:

• Do millennials watch television?

• What unrealistic expectations did parents set for millennials?

• Do millennials think older generations are like old grumpy neighbors?

• Why don't more millennials know about Mao Tse-tung?

• Do millennials want your house?

• Does Glenn surf the Kondratiev wave?

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

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

GLENN: So if -- imagine that you are a -- imagine that you're a millennial, and you're 20-something years old, and you're seeing the world as it is today. And you're watching people on television -- on television, which is no longer a part of your world. You go over to your mom and dad's house, and they're sitting on their couch, watching television, which you don't do. You don't do it. You don't sit and watch an hour of commercials in a television program. And so it's already kind of cute and quaint. It's kind of like going over to your grandparents when they had the plastic on the furniture. You're like, "They're just old. Don't -- you know, just go along with it." Okay?

PAT: I don't know if it's quite that bad.

GLENN: It's pretty close. It's pretty close. Millennials do not watch television.

JEFFY: No. No, they do not.

PAT: I mean, they watch it less. But they do watch it.

GLENN: Not cable news. Not cable news.

PAT: Nobody watches cable news anymore.

JEFFY: No cable.

GLENN: Yes, they do.

So the ones who are connected to politics, they're watching cable news. So they come over from their world into yours, and you're watching cable news. And you're seeing usually two old white guys and a young person, a millennial, a girl, a hot girl, who isn't talking at all like any of your millennial friends. Is like old people speak.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: And you're rolling your eyes at her. Because you're like, "Total sellout." And the other one -- because you're like, "This is so obvious. They're saying the same basic thing. They're arguing over things that -- oh, my gosh, I don't know why my dad does this." Okay?

That's the world they're coming from. Then they go to their world where they're listening to Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton and everybody else saying that jobs are good. Hey, we're on the road to recovery. They're massively in debt. They have -- they are -- they've gone to college. All their friends have gone to college. Their friends aren't getting jobs.

JEFFY: If they are, they're underemployed.

GLENN: Yes, they're underemployed. They can't pay for their --

PAT: And let's not forget, they've been told that which drives me out of my mind. That their debt is not their fault, they believe. Which pisses me off.

GLENN: Well, hang on just a second, they have now -- they see this crushing debt that they have --

PAT: That they accrued.

GLENN: Hang on just a second.

PAT: All right.

GLENN: That the old world, as they see it --

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: -- has been encouraged since they were little, "You got to go to college. When are going to go to college? Where are you going to go to college? Got to go to college. Got to go to college. Everybody goes to college. Got to go to college. Got to get into a good college."

Everyone in their life who they're now seeing represented on dad's/grandpa's TV set yelling at each other about a solution that they know won't work, and they think to themselves, "I -- I mean, this doesn't work, and I'm screwed with this debt."

Meanwhile, while everybody has been saying, "Got to go to college, got to go to college, got to go to college," they went to college. And where everybody -- where mom and dad said, "This is the best college. This is a great college." Those people that mom and dad endorsed taught them that you didn't really incur this debt and this whole system doesn't work. And so maybe I do know a little bit more than mom and dad.

Even if they don't go that far, they know this system doesn't work, and they don't want to become like mom and dad, who are now in debt. Dad is still having to work. Maybe their retirement isn't coming through the way it was. They haven't really been happy. Mom or dad have just been kind of tolerating each other for a while, maybe till the kids -- they've drifted apart. Or maybe they're really happy, but they're -- they are under such pressure with debt because of the house and the lifestyle, that the millennial looks at and says, "Why not just buy a smaller house? Why -- we didn't need all this stuff, mom and dad. Why did you do that?"

STU: It would be great if that's the way they were -- that's the way they were thinking about these things. It doesn't seem like that's the way they're thinking about it.

JEFFY: No, it is not.

STU: Good example of your generational thing.

GLENN: Some. Some. I'm telling you --

STU: Of course, some --

GLENN: -- they're being indoctrinated to think the other way.

STU: Right. But let's think about --

PAT: Some believe they're entitled to the house that mom and dad are living in.

JEFFY: Exactly right.

GLENN: I agree with you.

PAT: Move out of that house.

GLENN: I agree with you.

STU: Why would you bring that up? That's a weird thing to bring up.

PAT: I don't have any examples, no.

(laughter)

STU: Okay.

PAT: I just know that exists.

GLENN: You have five examples. You have five examples.

(chuckling)

STU: The generational thing you've talked about many times -- and this is an interesting -- potentially an interesting example of it, the situation -- the old system is faulty. Right? We spend all of this money. We get in lots of debt to get college. And they agree that that's faulty. You know what, I agree also that that's faulty. My, let's call it, generation would look at that issue and say, "Let's execute a cost-benefit analysis. Is it wise for us to enter into this agreement that everyone is telling me I have to do and acquire all this debt? Should I consider being educated in a way that is less expensive? Should I chase a different way of approaching this problem?"

PAT: Should I have gotten a job in high school and earned money?

GLENN: Hang on. Hang on.

STU: Hold on. Let me just finish the point.

They seem to be looking at this as, it's not the idea that college should be required, that's the problem. The issue is, I just shouldn't have to pay for it. I completely accept without questioning --

JEFFY: Yes.

STU: -- the idea that I must go to college and must do all these things, despite the fact that I'm going to spend 80 percent of my time now doing schoolwork, as has been shown in study after study. That, I shouldn't question at all. I should only question the cost I acquire for it. And that's why we continually complain about them -- millennials looking at socialist solutions.

A real -- a real questioning the status quo, really, is to say, do I need this? Do I need to do it in a different way? Do I do it in a way that maybe doesn't --

PAT: Can I go to trade school? Can I go to a community college?

Can I go to a State University where it's going to be cheaper than Harvard?

JEFFY: Not without getting a job though.

PAT: You know. Right.

STU: I stopped talking already. Glenn is giving me that look of how dare you. How dare you.

GLENN: No, no. No, no, no.

I agree with your point -- I agree with your point of view. I absolutely agree with your point of view. Here's where we differ, I think.

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: Do you know how hard it is to cut your own way anyway? Everybody likes to think, I'm different. I'm special. I'm cutting my own way.

JEFFY: Right.

GLENN: Well, first of all, that wasn't true for most of us when it was cool to think that you were different, but this generation, it's not cool to necessarily think differently. It's to think collectively because of their generation. Okay? To make things better collectively.

So they're coming to it from a different place than we are. It's why -- it's why grandparents usually understand -- have such a great bond with the grandchild. I've always thought that it's because, "I don't have the responsibility. So it's kind of fun." No, it's because it's an 80-year cycle. Your experiences are closer than the experiences of your children. It skips a generation because it's an 80-year we/me cycle. Okay?

So the grandchildren are looking at things much differently. Our children are looking at things much differently than we are. We were more independent-minded.

Also, at the time -- at our time, there were more people like Ronald Reagan, who were living this and saying, "Be this. Do this." All of society was, "You -- you can do it." All of society now is, "No, you can't do it, nor should you want to do it. No man is an island. You all have to work together for the common good." Everything is teaching them the opposite. And on top of it, who the hell do we have on our side that they can -- that they even relate to?

Because everybody that is on our side looks like me, sounds like me, does talk radio, or a stupid talk show on television, that come at that only their dads are watching. And they think their dad doesn't understand them.

There's nobody positioning themselves on our side that's speaking their language or even doing anything, but, "These crazy kids. Get off my lawn." That's who we're turning into, to them.

(chuckling)

GLENN: Where their professors are all --

PAT: Well, I don't want them on my lawn.

GLENN: All the professors are really super cool and telling them all the super cool things they can do collectively.

JEFFY: That's right.

GLENN: We're not. We're not.

We are never going to make an impact trying to speak the language of Ronald Reagan to a group of people who don't -- nor do they care. And in most cases, have been taught he's a bad guy. Nobody is going to listen to, "We got to be more like Ronald Reagan. We need another Ronald Reagan." They don't even know who the hell that is.

STU: I mean, I think that's the point I was making. In that, that's the generational gap. Right? That's the difference.

PAT: Yeah.

STU: And it's not just even bringing up Ronald Reagan. They don't even know who freaking Ronald Reagan is.

JEFFY: Right.

STU: I mean, you know, we talked about them not knowing who killed more people, Mao or Bush. Forty-two percent of people were unfamiliar with Mao. Almost half of them have never even heard of the guy. So I'm not -- you're right on language, I think. What I was trying to define is more of like what their approach is. And I think you've tried to do this with guest after guest after guest, and Kondratiev wave after Kondratiev wave after pendulum -- all of those things are pointing to the same general conclusion, that these -- that younger voters think completely differently about this stuff. And, you know, I find it to be problematic. I think -- I think you're looking at it as, well, how do we win them over, which I think is appropriate and is necessary. But, I mean, I do think it's problematic.

GLENN: But there's no -- the question I keep asking -- Kondratiev wave after Kondratiev wave after Kondratiev wave -- and I go back and do my history and look -- you do not beat -- it's like standing in front of the ocean expecting to change the tide. You're not.

Now, how can you get into the water and work with that tide and that force and perhaps change the direction? Because that happens every time. It's why we have the French Revolution and the American Revolution. Very different things, all the same piece: We, the people. We, the people.

That's really important to understand, just that one thing. That was a generation that understood -- that looked at things as a collective.

Now, you can push back and say, "Yeah, well, we had the Bill of Rights. That was all about individual liberties."

Yes, because they know that the eternal truth was that no one is over you. But that's why they started it with, "We, the people." Not, I, the individual: We, the people. We'll establish this to protect these things, to protect the individual. We're going to get together as a collective.

Now, unless you have somebody who is teaching, "Hey, as a collective, we have to protect the individual." Because that's all they want to do. "We want to help the downtrodden. We want to help." Great. Well, there's ways to do that. And the two times before this wave was the Founders' wave.

And they said, "We, the people, need to protect the individual and what the individual -- because that is supreme." Where all of the other generational we thinkers at that time went Robespierre and said, "We are the collective, and we'll crush the individual that stands in our way." And that's already happening.

You disagree with global warming, they will crush you. You disagree with Donald Trump, and they will crush you.

We are in that scenario, that always leads to witch hunts and to blacklists, unless somebody on our side is appealing to the youth and knows who they can be. They've just not had anybody on our side actually reaching out to them and saying, "I know who you are. You're not who everybody says who you are. I know who you are. You are the hero generation. And people are going to try to misguide you. We, collectively -- you can change the world and chart the course, away from the death you never learned about."

When somebody teaches you something and you realize that somebody intentionally has kept a very important detail away from you, you don't run into their arms and say, "Hey, thank you for that." You look at them and say, "What the hell were you thinking? You didn't tell me about this part? You didn't tell me about Mao and 100 million people that he killed. You let me believe that George W. Bush was a bigger killer. I can't trust you at all." We have a massive win. But it's slipping through our fingers every time we betray our values by living something differently than what we say is important.

Featured Image: USA's Gil Roberts (L) grabs the baton from USA's Tony McQuay as they compete in the Men's 4x400m Relay Final during the athletics event at the Rio 2016 Olympic Games at the Olympic Stadium in Rio de Janeiro on August 20, 2016. / AFP / PEDRO UGARTE (Photo credit should read PEDRO UGARTE/AFP/Getty Images)

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.

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.

Glenn's Show Prep

Time to Pass the Baton to the Next Hero Generation: The Millennials

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

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 wins when good people mirror its rage.

Ancient evil, new clothes

A time for choosing

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

The Big Tech billionaire once said humanity must change or perish. Now he claims we’ll survive — just as elites prepare total surveillance.

The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch.

The new currency of power

Two futures — both ending in tyranny

The forgotten way

The only way

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