McMullin Confirms He's Straight (Not That It Matters). Can We Discuss Real Issues Now?

Presidential hopeful Evan McMullin joined The Glenn Beck Program on Wednesday to discuss, among other things, the recent robocalls made in Utah by a self-described white supremacist. According to the Deseret News, William Daniel Johnson urged Utahns to vote for Donald Trump and said that "Evan is over 40 years old and is not married and doesn’t even have a girlfriend. I believe Evan is a closet homosexual."

Adding to the embarrassingly tawdry 2016 presidential campaign, McMullin has since had to address the issue of his sexuality. For the record, he's straight, not that it matters.

RELATED: Captain America Is Straight and Libertarian—Deal With It

"You know, it's truly unfortunate. Donald Trump's campaign of bigotry have brought these people out of the cage. Just a month ago, they held a big press conference in downtown Washington, D.C., that never would have happened in the last couple of days, but now they feel empowered," McMullin said.

In a video of the meeting, available on YouTube, the white supremacists voiced their disagreement with the ideas of liberty, and that all men and women are created equal.

"Many white nationalists are also neo-Nazis. Nazis are national socialists. So, of course, they don't agree with freedom and choice," Glenn said.

McMullin also discussed the problem with Putin supporting white nationalists across Europe.

"He does that to attack the principles on which these these democracies are based, the idea of equality and liberty," McMullin said.

Read below or watch the clip for answers to these questions:

• Since when do we listen to white nationalists?

• Is McMullin part of the Mormon Mafia?

• What is McMullin's biggest ambition in life?

• What is the largest intelligence success in modern times?

• If Hillary Clinton wins, will World War III start?

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

GLENN: Presidential hopeful Evan McMullin who is neck-and-neck with Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton in Utah. Welcome to the program, Evan.

EVAN: Great to be with you, Glenn.

GLENN: Good. A white nationalist, which we'll get to in a second, came out and said something. But I first noticed this coming from a state senator and a former bishop saying, "Hey, look, all I can tell you is -- you know, this guy, he's been in the CIA, he's worked for Goldman Sachs, and he's a 40-year-old man who doesn't date. I'm just saying."

(chuckling)

GLENN: How did that make you feel -- I expect it from the white nationalist. How did that make you feel?

EVAN: Yeah. Well, I can't say, Glenn, that it's a surprise candidly. I mean, this is the kind of campaign that Donald Trump has run. And many of his supporters have joined in that approach. In the past -- in the past week -- in the past few days especially, I found that my faith has been attacked. My service to this country has been attacked. My mother has been attacked. They're spreading lies about who I am. And even now we're receiving death threats from the white supremacist movement.

But you know, I knew this would come. I knew this would happen.

PAT: Wow.

EVAN: I knew -- I knew there would be opposition. But we will not be intimidated.

GLENN: I will tell you, Evan -- Evan, I will tell you this -- first of all, I'm sorry for the attacks on your mom. I don't know what anyone would have you do.

PAT: Terrible.

GLENN: Apparently --

PAT: I guess you're supposed to disavow her?

GLENN: Disavow your mom or something. I don't know if you were to punch her in the stomach or what you were supposed to do.

EVAN: Yeah. Right, yeah, exactly.

GLENN: Yeah. Our heartfelt thoughts and prayers go out to your mother.

EVAN: Thank you, Glenn.

GLENN: I will tell you this, Evan, that when I just endorsed Ted Cruz, I knew politics was ugly. I knew what -- you know, what was possible. But there's a difference between knowing that and experiencing that. I will --

EVAN: That's right.

GLENN: I will never get near that cesspool ever again. Ever again. So you can't tell me that you knew this was going to happen. There is a difference.

EVAN: Well, I knew that I would be attacked. I knew that my service would be under attack.

PAT: Uh-huh.

EVAN: I knew that people would attack me on all fronts. I knew that would happen. I think you're not prepared for it until you -- you experience it and you about it through it. So I understand your point there. But, look, I saw that Donald Trump attacked Ted Cruz's wife and his father. This is the kind of campaign they run. Other surrogates and supporters of Donald Trump are -- are attacking my faith. Calling me -- saying that I'm part of a Mormon Mafia. We've had fun with that online.

GLENN: Which, by the way, has been a very popular -- at least in my neighborhood. The Mormon Mafia showed up at my house for trick-or-treat a couple of times.

STU: Did they?

GLENN: Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. I had to ask what they were. They were all dressed in black with, like, fedoras. And I said, "What are you?" And they're like, "The Mormon Mafia."

(laughter)

EVAN: Did you get a picture of that, Glenn?

GLENN: I don't think I did, but I can ask Tania. She might have.

EVAN: Yeah, let's try -- let's get one. That would be a lot of fun.

GLENN: Yeah.

EVAN: But, yeah, you know, we're all having fun with it. But in a more serious way -- I mean, this is an attack, and there have been other attacks on my faith and -- on my -- my personal faith, but then on the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which is the -- the church I belong to, as a part of what we're doing and a part of Donald's opposition to us.

But, look, I wear it all as a badge of honor, you know. That robo-call said that I was gay. I'm not. I'm straight. I've never had to defend that about myself before. You know, the man who did the robo-call was on a local radio station in Utah yesterday and gave me the advice that I should get married and have children.

And I said, "Well, at least that's something we can agree upon because that's -- that's my biggest ambition in life."

But, you know, going after my mother -- they point out that my mother --

GLENN: Wait. Wait. Hang on just a second. Before we get into your mom.

EVAN: Yeah. Yeah.

GLENN: Was this a credible radio station that had the white nationalist on?

EVAN: Yes, actually it was. It was.

GLENN: Okay. Can I ask a question? Because I saw this white nationalist on a network, a cable news network, and I don't want to say which one because I don't remember which one it was on.

EVAN: Yeah.

GLENN: Since when do we listen to white nationalists and their advice?

EVAN: Right.

GLENN: Since when?

EVAN: Yeah.

GLENN: Were they presented in a credible way?

EVAN: Halfway credible. When you have them on at all, I think it helps lend credibility to them and their cause.

JEFFY: Yes, it does.

EVAN: You know, it's truly unfortunate. Donald Trump's campaign of bigotry have brought these people out of the cage. And now they're -- just a month ago, they held a big press conference in downtown Washington, DC, that never would have happened in the last couple of days. But now they feel empowered.

And you know what they said, Glenn? You got to watch this tape. You can find it on YouTube. I can send it to you. They talk a lot about how they don't agree with the idea that all men and women are created equal. That much we know, but you know what they went on to say, Glenn? They went on to say that they also didn't support the idea of liberty, the cause of liberty. And that was a huge wake-up call for me.

I am I was already in this fight when it happened. I was already in the race. But when I realized -- of course, if you don't agree that all men and women are created equal, then it follows that you're probably not for liberty. But they said it. They made a case that -- yeah.

GLENN: Many white nationalists are also neo-Nazis. Nazis are national socialists. So, of course, they don't agree with freedom --

EVAN: Yes, that's right.

GLENN: -- and choice. They're national socialists.

EVAN: That's -- that's right. But they're saying this openly and in a way that I hadn't seen it before. We know they're fascist. We get all that. But they made a case to talk specifically about liberty. And we do not accept liberty. So, yes -- but these are people who are supporting Donald Trump. And he is -- his campaign is -- is fueled in part, not entirely -- let's be clear about that. And not everybody who supports Donald Trump agrees with these guys, but these guys form a large part of his support. And this is what we're up against, Glenn. And this is what we're fighting for.

And it's fitting and it's -- it's right that there would be this opposition. And I'm proud that this is the opposition we're facing, because it means that we're fighting for the right thing.

STU: I think we've learned a lot, by the way, of -- in this campaign from having the white nationalists finally be open and honest about their opinions.

GLENN: Yes, it is good.

STU: I'm fine hearing from them. In reality, if you don't hear from them, they hide and do these things in private.

GLENN: I don't mind exposing them. I do mind taking them seriously.

STU: Oh, yeah.

GLENN: I didn't hear the interview on whatever station. I did see it on one of the cable stations. And it may not have even been him. It may have been somebody else. But they were not talking about his white nationalism. They were talking about Evan. And I'm like --

EVAN: Right.

GLENN: -- how are we -- wait. Let's talk about the guy burying the message here. Doesn't that bother anybody?

EVAN: Right.

GLENN: Yesterday, we talked to somebody who -- you know, my vote is coming down to a couple of people. You're one of them. Darrell Castle is another one. And yesterday, I asked him a few questions about Russia. And I believe Russia is deeply involved with the --

EVAN: Oh, yeah.

GLENN: -- white nationalists and with this -- this Neo-Eurasian kind of philosophy.

EVAN: Yeah, right.

GLENN: Are you familiar with that at all, Evan?

EVAN: Yes. Glenn, this is what -- this is what Vladimir Putin does in Europe. He promotes these white nationalist groups, and then he -- and then he finds leaders of them and then promotes those leaders. And he does that -- and this is -- Glenn, you know, this is just so fundamentally important.

He does that to attack the principles on which these -- on which these democracies are based, the idea of equality and liberty. He wants to attack those because Vladimir Putin is smart enough to know this -- that the United States, the power of the United States and the power of some of our European -- many of our European allies ultimately comes from these ideals. You know, we have differences between the way we look at the role of government and all of that between our European allies here and all that. We know that. But Vladimir Putin wants to undermine the cause of liberty and equality in these countries because he knows that if he does that, he will weaken those countries, weaken the United States.

Our -- so much of our power, Glenn, comes from the fact -- from this cause of liberty. Countries around the world want to work with us, cooperate with us, be led by us, when necessary. And that is an enormous source of power. And it keeps authoritarians -- expansionists, authoritarians like Vladimir Putin in check.

Now, if he undermines our values, then he undermines that goodwill, then our power recedes, and then he has a freer hand to do more of what he does, what he's doing in Syria, what he's doing in Ukraine, what he's doing in western Europe, by undermining their democracies by promoting these white nationalist movements. He's doing that right here in the United States. And it's tragic that he's the Republican -- Donald Trump, his man, Vladimir Putin's man is the nominee of a major party. It's perhaps the largest intelligence success in modern times that Russia has had.

GLENN: I agree.

EVAN: I assure you in the Kremlin, they're just wildly excited about. The success they're having.

GLENN: Excited. Evan, I'm going to ask you -- in advance, I'm going to warn the audience, this is an extremely unfair question because I don't know anyone honestly that can answer this question yes. But if there's anybody that might, it might be you. And bonus points if you can.

EVAN: Okay.

GLENN: Can you explain Neo-Eurasianism? Do you know what that is?

EVAN: Well, I -- I actually -- I have not heard that term. You mentioned that. Is that -- is that something that you're coining, or is that something that you're --

GLENN: No, that's something that Dugin and Putin's people have coined. I wondered --

EVAN: Yeah.

GLENN: You sound like you're aware of it, you just may not be aware of the term.

EVAN: The term, yes.

GLENN: Because it's something that I don't think anybody is aware of. And it is the root of what's happening with -- with Putin. And you sound -- the only reason why I asked you is because you sound like you get it. And I don't know if you knew it by that name or if you just instinctively have been watching Russia and know what's going on.

PAT: You probably would have had to read Aleksandr Dugin's book, Evan. We don't think we'd expect you to have read that at any point --

EVAN: Yeah. I don't know if there's a lot of time reading Dugin's work.

PAT: No.

GLENN: That's fine. That's fine.

EVAN: But, yes, this is what he's doing. Yeah.

GLENN: Because we're seeing people that are dismissing Russia. And it is so clear they're interfering with our politics. And especially Donald Trump supporters, 48 percent say that he -- that Putin is a friend of the United States.

EVAN: Yeah. Yeah.

GLENN: And on the other side, we have Hillary Clinton who we're being told is going to start, you know, World War III with Putin.

EVAN: Right. Right.

GLENN: How do we deal with this? You're president of the United States, what do you do?

EVAN: Well, first of all, that is absolutely bogus, the idea that if we elect Hillary Clinton, it's going to start World War III. Now, if we elect Hillary Clinton, it's going to do enormous damage to our country, period. But the same is true with her fellow big government liberal, Donald Trump.

But this is -- Putin is trying to scare the American people. He's trying to influence the election in a number of ways. It's RT America. You know, the Russian cable network here in the United States.

GLENN: Yeah, yeah.

EVAN: You know, that is something they sow seeds of skepticism in our democratic institutions.

It's very -- its purpose is to undermine our faith in our system, in our democracy. And, look, our democracy is not perfect. We're blessed to have it. It is not perfect. We can all admit that and still be proud Americans. We can make improvements to it.

But we are so fortunate to have what we have. And, yes, let's improve it. Let's make it better as we go, in accordance with the Constitution.

But, you know, they're trying to sow seeds of skepticism in the system so that Americans let go of -- of -- of foundational American principles. And so that weakens our country in the way that I described earlier.

And it's the hacking. It's all this other -- all these other things. The promotion of the white supremacist movement. All of this.

GLENN: Okay. I only have one minute. Stu has a question.

STU: Yeah, I'm a numbers guy.

EVAN: Yeah.

STU: And we've seen a lot of numbers being thrown around here. So I want to -- give me your number answer on this. We have Hillary Clinton proposing a $275 billion infrastructure stimulus. We have Donald Trump proposing a $1 trillion infrastructure stimulus. What is the Evan McMullin stimulus number?

EVAN: Well, Stu, I may disappoint you on this one, but I think we're asking the wrong question. The reason why this question is so hard to answer is because we don't have the money. The reason we don't have the money is because we refuse to reform entitlements. That's what we need to be talking about. We need to reform entitlements so we can bring down our deficits and our debt. And then we have more money to spend on things that are important. Infrastructure is important. We do need to spend money on that. Right now, we don't have it. And that's why --

GLENN: We spend money on infrastructure or spend money on a stimulus.

EVAN: On -- well, on infrastructure.

GLENN: Okay.

EVAN: Yeah, on infrastructure.

GLENN: Okay.

EVAN: But this is the problem, where we keep talking about infrastructure, and we're avoiding -- the real problem is entitlements. That's what -- we need to fix that, then we have the finances to do other things we need to do. But right now, we are not reforming entitlements. They're 66 percent of the budget. In ten years, they'll be 78 percent of the budget, if you include interest payments on our debt. We've got to get those under control. And then things like infrastructure aren't such a big deal.

GLENN: Evan, our best to you. And good luck. If we don't speak again until the election or after the election, good luck to you. Thank you for being a decent human being, and our best to your mother and your family. God bless.

EVAN: Thanks, Glenn. Thank you so much, Glenn. Thanks, Stu. Thank you --

GLENN: All right. Here's our sponsor this half-hour. You notice he didn't thank Pat or Jeffy.

PAT: I noticed that.

STU: No one's going to thank Jeffy, but I think he was in the middle of thanking Pat at the end.

Featured Image: Former CIA agent Evan McMullin announces his presidential campaign as an Independent candidate on August 10, 2016 in Salt Lake City, Utah. (Photo by George Frey/Getty Images)

URGENT: FIVE steps to CONTROL AI before it's too late!

MANAURE QUINTERO / Contributor | Getty Images

By now, many of us are familiar with AI and its potential benefits and threats. However, unless you're a tech tycoon, it can feel like you have little influence over the future of artificial intelligence.

For years, Glenn has warned about the dangers of rapidly developing AI technologies that have taken the world by storm.

He acknowledges their significant benefits but emphasizes the need to establish proper boundaries and ethics now, while we still have control. But since most people aren’t Silicon Valley tech leaders making the decisions, how can they help keep AI in check?

Recently, Glenn interviewed Tristan Harris, a tech ethicist deeply concerned about the potential harm of unchecked AI, to discuss its societal implications. Harris highlighted a concerning new piece of legislation proposed by Texas Senator Ted Cruz. This legislation proposes a state-level moratorium on AI regulation, meaning only the federal government could regulate AI. Harris noted that there’s currently no Federal plan for regulating AI. Until the federal government establishes a plan, tech companies would have nearly free rein with their AI. And we all know how slowly the federal government moves.

This is where you come in. Tristan Harris shared with Glenn the top five actions you should urge your representatives to take regarding AI, including opposing the moratorium until a concrete plan is in place. Now is your chance to influence the future of AI. Contact your senator and congressman today and share these five crucial steps they must take to keep AI in check:

Ban engagement-optimized AI companions for kids

Create legislation that will prevent AI from being designed to maximize addiction, sexualization, flattery, and attachment disorders, and to protect young people’s mental health and ability to form real-life friendships.

Establish basic liability laws

Companies need to be held accountable when their products cause real-world harm.

Pass increased whistleblower protections

Protect concerned technologists working inside the AI labs from facing untenable pressures and threats that prevent them from warning the public when the AI rollout is unsafe or crosses dangerous red lines.

Prevent AI from having legal rights

Enact laws so AIs don’t have protected speech or have their own bank accounts, making sure our legal system works for human interests over AI interests.

Oppose the state moratorium on AI 

Call your congressman or Senator Cruz’s office, and demand they oppose the state moratorium on AI without a plan for how we will set guardrails for this technology.

Glenn: Only Trump dared to deliver on decades of empty promises

Tasos Katopodis / Stringer | Getty Images

The Islamic regime has been killing Americans since 1979. Now Trump’s response proves we’re no longer playing defense — we’re finally hitting back.

The United States has taken direct military action against Iran’s nuclear program. Whatever you think of the strike, it’s over. It’s happened. And now, we have to predict what happens next. I want to help you understand the gravity of this situation: what happened, what it means, and what might come next. To that end, we need to begin with a little history.

Since 1979, Iran has been at war with us — even if we refused to call it that.

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell.

It began with the hostage crisis, when 66 Americans were seized and 52 were held for over a year by the radical Islamic regime. Four years later, 17 more Americans were murdered in the U.S. Embassy bombing in Beirut, followed by 241 Marines in the Beirut barracks bombing.

Then came the Khobar Towers bombing in 1996, which killed 19 more U.S. airmen. Iran had its fingerprints all over it.

In Iraq and Afghanistan, Iranian-backed proxies killed hundreds of American soldiers. From 2001 to 2020 in Afghanistan and 2003 to 2011 in Iraq, Iran supplied IEDs and tactical support.

The Iranians have plotted assassinations and kidnappings on U.S. soil — in 2011, 2021, and again in 2024 — and yet we’ve never really responded.

The precedent for U.S. retaliation has always been present, but no president has chosen to pull the trigger until this past weekend. President Donald Trump struck decisively. And what our military pulled off this weekend was nothing short of extraordinary.

Operation Midnight Hammer

The strike was reportedly called Operation Midnight Hammer. It involved as many as 175 U.S. aircraft, including 12 B-2 stealth bombers — out of just 19 in our entire arsenal. Those bombers are among the most complex machines in the world, and they were kept mission-ready by some of the finest mechanics on the planet.

USAF / Handout | Getty Images

To throw off Iranian radar and intelligence, some bombers flew west toward Guam — classic misdirection. The rest flew east, toward the real targets.

As the B-2s approached Iranian airspace, U.S. submarines launched dozens of Tomahawk missiles at Iran’s fortified nuclear facilities. Minutes later, the bombers dropped 14 MOPs — massive ordnance penetrators — each designed to drill deep into the earth and destroy underground bunkers. These bombs are the size of an F-16 and cost millions of dollars apiece. They are so accurate, I’ve been told they can hit the top of a soda can from 15,000 feet.

They were built for this mission — and we’ve been rehearsing this run for 15 years.

If the satellite imagery is accurate — and if what my sources tell me is true — the targeted nuclear sites were utterly destroyed. We’ll likely rely on the Israelis to confirm that on the ground.

This was a master class in strategy, execution, and deterrence. And it proved that only the United States could carry out a strike like this. I am very proud of our military, what we are capable of doing, and what we can accomplish.

What comes next

We don’t yet know how Iran will respond, but many of the possibilities are troubling. The Iranians could target U.S. forces across the Middle East. On Monday, Tehran launched 20 missiles at U.S. bases in Qatar, Syria, and Kuwait, to no effect. God forbid, they could also unleash Hezbollah or other terrorist proxies to strike here at home — and they just might.

Iran has also threatened to shut down the Strait of Hormuz — the artery through which nearly a fifth of the world’s oil flows. On Sunday, Iran’s parliament voted to begin the process. If the Supreme Council and the ayatollah give the go-ahead, we could see oil prices spike to $150 or even $200 a barrel.

That would be catastrophic.

The 2008 financial collapse was pushed over the edge when oil hit $130. Western economies — including ours — simply cannot sustain oil above $120 for long. If this conflict escalates and the Strait is closed, the global economy could unravel.

The strike also raises questions about regime stability. Will it spark an uprising, or will the Islamic regime respond with a brutal crackdown on dissidents?

Early signs aren’t hopeful. Reports suggest hundreds of arrests over the weekend and at least one dissident executed on charges of spying for Israel. The regime’s infamous morality police, the Gasht-e Ershad, are back on the streets. Every phone, every vehicle — monitored. The U.S. embassy in Qatar issued a shelter-in-place warning for Americans.

Russia and China both condemned the strike. On Monday, a senior Iranian official flew to Moscow to meet with Vladimir Putin. That meeting should alarm anyone paying attention. Their alliance continues to deepen — and that’s a serious concern.

Now we pray

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell. But either way, President Trump didn’t start this. He inherited it — and he took decisive action.

The difference is, he did what they all said they would do. He didn’t send pallets of cash in the dead of night. He didn’t sign another failed treaty.

He acted. Now, we pray. For peace, for wisdom, and for the strength to meet whatever comes next.


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Globalize the Intifada? Why Mamdani’s plan spells DOOM for America

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

If New Yorkers hand City Hall to Zohran Mamdani, they’re not voting for change. They’re opening the door to an alliance of socialism, Islamism, and chaos.

It only took 25 years for New York City to go from the resilient, flag-waving pride following the 9/11 attacks to a political fever dream. To quote Michael Malice, “I'm old enough to remember when New Yorkers endured 9/11 instead of voting for it.”

Malice is talking about Zohran Mamdani, a Democratic Socialist assemblyman from Queens now eyeing the mayor’s office. Mamdani, a 33-year-old state representative emerging from relative political obscurity, is now receiving substantial funding for his mayoral campaign from the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

CAIR has a long and concerning history, including being born out of the Muslim Brotherhood and named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror funding case. Why would the group have dropped $100,000 into a PAC backing Mamdani’s campaign?

Mamdani blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone.

Perhaps CAIR has a vested interest in Mamdani’s call to “globalize the intifada.” That’s not a call for peaceful protest. Intifada refers to historic uprisings of Muslims against what they call the “Israeli occupation of Palestine.” Suicide bombings and street violence are part of the playbook. So when Mamdani says he wants to “globalize” that, who exactly is the enemy in this global scenario? Because it sure sounds like he's saying America is the new Israel, and anyone who supports Western democracy is the new Zionist.

Mamdani tried to clean up his language by citing the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, which once used “intifada” in an Arabic-language article to describe the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. So now he’s comparing Palestinians to Jewish victims of the Nazis? If that doesn’t twist your stomach into knots, you’re not paying attention.

If you’re “globalizing” an intifada, and positioning Israel — and now America — as the Nazis, that’s not a cry for human rights. That’s a call for chaos and violence.

Rising Islamism

But hey, this is New York. Faculty members at Columbia University — where Mamdani’s own father once worked — signed a letter defending students who supported Hamas after October 7. They also contributed to Mamdani’s mayoral campaign. And his father? He blamed Ronald Reagan and the religious right for inspiring Islamic terrorism, as if the roots of 9/11 grew in Washington, not the caves of Tora Bora.

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

This isn’t about Islam as a faith. We should distinguish between Islam and Islamism. Islam is a religion followed peacefully by millions. Islamism is something entirely different — an ideology that seeks to merge mosque and state, impose Sharia law, and destroy secular liberal democracies from within. Islamism isn’t about prayer and fasting. It’s about power.

Criticizing Islamism is not Islamophobia. It is not an attack on peaceful Muslims. In fact, Muslims are often its first victims.

Islamism is misogynistic, theocratic, violent, and supremacist. It’s hostile to free speech, religious pluralism, gay rights, secularism — even to moderate Muslims. Yet somehow, the progressive left — the same left that claims to fight for feminism, LGBTQ rights, and free expression — finds itself defending candidates like Mamdani. You can’t make this stuff up.

Blending the worst ideologies

And if that weren’t enough, Mamdani also identifies as a Democratic Socialist. He blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone. But don’t worry, New York. I’m sure this time socialism will totally work. Just like it always didn’t.

If you’re a business owner, a parent, a person who’s saved anything, or just someone who values sanity: Get out. I’m serious. If Mamdani becomes mayor, as seems likely, then New York City will become a case study in what happens when you marry ideological extremism with political power. And it won’t be pretty.

This is about more than one mayoral race. It’s about the future of Western liberalism. It’s about drawing a bright line between faith and fanaticism, between healthy pluralism and authoritarian dogma.

Call out radicalism

We must call out political Islam the same way we call out white nationalism or any other supremacist ideology. When someone chants “globalize the intifada,” that should send a chill down your spine — whether you’re Jewish, Christian, Muslim, atheist, or anything in between.

The left may try to shame you into silence with words like “Islamophobia,” but the record is worn out. The grooves are shallow. The American people see what’s happening. And we’re not buying it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

How private stewardship could REVIVE America’s wild

Jonathan Newton / Contributor | Getty Images

The left’s idea of stewardship involves bulldozing bison and barring access. Lee’s vision puts conservation back in the hands of the people.

The media wants you to believe that Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) is trying to bulldoze Yellowstone and turn national parks into strip malls — that he’s calling for a reckless fire sale of America’s natural beauty to line developers’ pockets. That narrative is dishonest. It’s fearmongering, and, by the way, it’s wrong.

Here’s what’s really happening.

Private stewardship works. It’s local. It’s accountable. It’s incentivized.

The federal government currently owns 640 million acres of land — nearly 28% of all land in the United States. To put that into perspective, that’s more territory than France, Germany, Poland, and the United Kingdom combined.

Most of this land is west of the Mississippi River. That’s not a coincidence. In the American West, federal ownership isn’t just a bureaucratic technicality — it’s a stranglehold. States are suffocated. Locals are treated as tenants. Opportunities are choked off.

Meanwhile, people living east of the Mississippi — in places like Kentucky, Georgia, or Pennsylvania — might not even realize how little land their own states truly control. But the same policies that are plaguing the West could come for them next.

Lee isn’t proposing to auction off Yellowstone or pave over Yosemite. He’s talking about 3 million acres — that’s less than half of 1% of the federal estate. And this land isn’t your family’s favorite hiking trail. It’s remote, hard to access, and often mismanaged.

Failed management

Why was it mismanaged in the first place? Because the federal government is a terrible landlord.

Consider Yellowstone again. It’s home to the last remaining herd of genetically pure American bison — animals that haven’t been crossbred with cattle. Ranchers, myself included, would love the chance to help restore these majestic creatures on private land. But the federal government won’t allow it.

So what do they do when the herd gets too big?

They kill them. Bulldoze them into mass graves. That’s not conservation. That’s bureaucratic malpractice.

And don’t even get me started on bald eagles — majestic symbols of American freedom and a federally protected endangered species, now regularly slaughtered by wind turbines. I have pictures of piles of dead bald eagles. Where’s the outrage?

Biden’s federal land-grab

Some argue that states can’t afford to manage this land themselves. But if the states can’t afford it, how can Washington? We’re $35 trillion in debt. Entitlements are strained, infrastructure is crumbling, and the Bureau of Land Management, Forest Service, and National Park Service are billions of dollars behind in basic maintenance. Roads, firebreaks, and trails are falling apart.

The Biden administration quietly embraced something called the “30 by 30” initiative, a plan to lock up 30% of all U.S. land and water under federal “conservation” by 2030. The real goal is 50% by 2050.

That entails half of the country being taken away from you, controlled not by the people who live there but by technocrats in D.C.

You think that won’t affect your ability to hunt, fish, graze cattle, or cut timber? Think again. It won’t be conservatives who stop you from building a cabin, raising cattle, or teaching your grandkids how to shoot a rifle. It’ll be the same radical environmentalists who treat land as sacred — unless it’s your truck, your deer stand, or your back yard.

Land as collateral

Moreover, the U.S. Treasury is considering putting federally owned land on the national balance sheet, listing your parks, forests, and hunting grounds as collateral.

What happens if America defaults on its debt?

David McNew / Stringer | Getty Images

Do you think our creditors won’t come calling? Imagine explaining to your kids that the lake you used to fish in is now under foreign ownership, that the forest you hunted in belongs to China.

This is not hypothetical. This is the logical conclusion of treating land like a piggy bank.

The American way

There’s a better way — and it’s the American way.

Let the people who live near the land steward it. Let ranchers, farmers, sportsmen, and local conservationists do what they’ve done for generations.

Did you know that 75% of America’s wetlands are on private land? Or that the most successful wildlife recoveries — whitetail deer, ducks, wild turkeys — didn’t come from Washington but from partnerships between private landowners and groups like Ducks Unlimited?

Private stewardship works. It’s local. It’s accountable. It’s incentivized. When you break it, you fix it. When you profit from the land, you protect it.

This is not about selling out. It’s about buying in — to freedom, to responsibility, to the principle of constitutional self-governance.

So when you hear the pundits cry foul over 3 million acres of federal land, remember: We don’t need Washington to protect our land. We need Washington to get out of the way.

Because this isn’t just about land. It’s about liberty. And once liberty is lost, it doesn’t come back easily.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.