Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsShopContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

Donald Trump Deserves a Chance and Our Support

November 11, 2016
Lori Hanes

Writer

After a hard-fought presidential election, Donald Trump has emerged victorious. There now exists a renewed opportunity for him to unite America and lead in a constitutional way. Based on recent tweets from Trump, Glenn believes our new President-elect is evolving into a man worthy of the presidency.

"I want to read a tweet that shows he is becoming presidential, and he is trying to do the right thing," Glenn said Friday on his radio program.

RELATED: Glenn Wipes the Slate Clean: I’ll Call Donald Trump to Offer My Support

Six months ago, Trump would have stirred the pot in response to the protests taking place on America's streets. Instead, he tweeted a unifying message for the country.

With the slate already wiped clean, Glenn reasserted his support for Donald Trump.

“I’m for the office of the president of the United States, and I will stand with Donald Trump as long as I can. I’ll stand with him until he starts to say crazy, divisive things and suggest policies that are not conservative or constitutional. But until he does that, I stand with him,” Glenn said.

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

• How many retweets did Trump's tweet get?

• Why must we stop labeling people as groups?

• On what will Glenn not budge?

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

GLENN: Okay. So I want to show you the evolution of a man. What did Donald Trump -- what would have Donald Trump said, you know, six months ago, if protests were there. He would have -- he would have been the showman that he is. He would have been the P.T. Barnum, and he would have whipped it up.

Yesterday morning -- now, I'm going to assume that he is making these tweets. And if not, then somebody else around him is making these tweets, and that's good because he is relinquishing his power and saying, "You're more eloquent than I am, go ahead, tweet." Because you know Donald Trump has always said, "No one will corral me." So even if he didn't do it himself, no one is corralling him. We have to take him at his word, that he agrees with this. This is what he did 11 hours ago: Just had a very open and successful presidential election. Now professional protesters incited by the media are protesting. Very unfair.

This was 54,000 retweets.

Then this: Love the fact that the small groups of protesters last night have a passion for our great country. We will come together and be proud.

That is a presidential tweet. That is what we should be saying to one another. Look, it's a small group. They might look big, but it's a small group.

I saw a -- I saw an ad, if you will, for a broadcaster that said the Democrats hate us. That -- in bold red, "The Democrats hate us. Don't doubt me." And I thought to myself, "No, they don't. Some do." As Riaz said yesterday -- the gay Muslim immigrant -- what else? I mean, he's got -- Pakistani. He's got -- this guy, everybody is against.

I can't imagine this guy's life. But he came down, and he wanted to understand the right. So we spent the day together. And then he went and did something about it.

And last weekend, he went up to Alaska to sit and talk to Trump supporters. And he wrote the best defense of Trump supporters I've read.

And as he said in that, "Look, are there some people that are racist that voted for Trump?" Yes. But that's not all of the Trump supporters.

And? He followed it up. He's a Muslim Pakistani. Are some Muslims terrorists? Yes. But not all Muslims.

The same can be said -- are you a racist? You voted for Trump, are you a racist? No. Are you a Nazi? No.

Do you believe in white supremacy? No. Do you believe that there are those that believe that whites are extreme? Of course. Do you believe that there are some that voted for Trump that are Nazis? Of course. Do you believe that there are some that voted for Barack Obama that are Marxists that want to destroy the United States of America? Yes.

Do you believe there are some that voted for Barack Obama that want to see your rights taken away?

Yes. But do you also believe that the Democrats that you personally know are those people?

No. No. We have to separate and stop labeling people as groups. Or we are going to make this worse.

We are at a crossroads America. And I know this is going to become increasingly unpopular. But I will stand by any man until he loses his principles. The principles of Donald Trump right now, he is being presidential. He is saying I'm going to bring people together. And he is saying, I will do these things through Congress, through the vote.

If Donald Trump would have lost and he would have flamed the fans of these -- of riots, which he could have done, if he had lost, I would be standing against him. But he won fair and square. He is doing things the right way and constitutionally. I don't agree with everything that he wants to do, but that's America. This is who we are.

We don't -- boy, am I going to quote the song that he played at the end? You don't always get what you want. But you just might find that you get what you need. And we have to believe in that. And we have to put our sword and, quite frankly, our shield down against the average person.

When you are in -- let me tell you a story: Fordham University, I believe, turned my daughter against me. My daughter was so angry with me while she was going to Fordham University, she couldn't even speak to me at times. She -- she was convinced that I was a homophobic bigot. And I kept saying to her, "Honey, what in my life has ever given you that perspective?"

You're against gay marriage.

No. I'm against the government being involved in marriage.

I don't want to talk to you, Dad.

And she would cry and walk away. She believed that of her own father. What do you think the people going to NYU, these kids who have been raised, even by Democratic families, what do you think they believe after sitting in those universities with those professors who are tell them -- and you have to understand, New York City, especially, is an echo chamber of biblical proportions. Everything in New York points to the people who would vote for Donald Trump are nothing, but toothless hicks who hate women, who hate blacks, who just want to set the world on fire.

There's a lot of people that are afraid. And, quite honestly, if you're a Republican and you're like me, I understand that. You have -- you have to admit to yourself, even those who reluctantly voted for Donald Trump, there is a part of you that said, "I don't know what we're getting here." But you give your side the benefit of the doubt. I'm giving our side the benefit of the doubt. I'm giving the benefit of the doubt that the office will temper and make the man. Because, quite honestly, I don't have any other choice, other than to get into the streets and be an idiot.

He won fair and square. This is the system. Now, how do we come together?

I will tell you, we won't come together -- and I'm not talking about come together and compromise our principles.

I read another story today from the right: The last thing we can do is come together. I'm sick and tired of hearing people say we need to come together with these people.

No. What are you talking about? We get together with our family every Thanksgiving, don't we? I got together -- I got together with the in-laws that -- that Tim's family, my son-in-law's family, who are wonderful people, I love them. I really do love them. We disagreed on who should be president. They were staunch Trump supporters. I obviously am not. But I know who they are. And I know they're not haters. I know they're not idiots. They live in New Jersey, and he's a cop. He's tired of everybody saying that the cops, you know, should die and being okay with it.

Did I say when they came down to visit, "You're not coming into my house?" No. And we had a great time together. We just didn't talk about the things where we knew we disagreed, because we knew where each other stood. And we're not going to do anything, but get pissed at each other. But we're family.

I don't think ill of them. And I hope they don't think ill of me. And I'm certainly not saying, "They hate America." And I hope they're not saying that either -- they're not.

Glenn is just a bad person and he hates us. No, they're not saying that.

This, I've told you for so long: A, there are going to be people -- and you're going to feel justified -- that want to tear us apart. Now, we just went through a horrible, horrible election. We have the opportunity to start all over again. We have the opportunity to not repeat the past, no matter what your enemy does to you, no matter what the person who is calling you names does to you. That has no affect on you, unless you choose to let that have an affect on you.

We are -- we have a chance to start over. We have a chance to be better people. Now, we can go down this road, and we can repeat what happened to us in 2000, which is division and name-calling and eight years of hating the other side.

Or we can do what we did in 2008. Be divided. Don't talk to each other. Hate each other. Call each other names. And make things worse.

Or we can try something new. Because this is something we haven't tried, well, since I've been voting for president. We haven't tried, "Hey, let's assume the best of our neighbor. Let's assume that the voices that are calling today in the streets, around the country for awful things, for revolution, for literally bloody revolution -- let's just assume that they are the minority, and let's politely ask -- politely ask the media to stop excusing this.

Let's not us excuse the violent behavior, but also know that there is a reason that people are afraid. It's been a tough fight.

Those people who are setting things on fire, breaking windows, those are anarchists. Those are anarchists. And if we lump anarchists into the same bed with Hillary Clinton, we would be wrong.

This is going to be hard, guys. This is really going to be hard. But this is our chance. This is the time -- you are blessed to live in this time, because we can be better. We can be leaders. This is the time where giants will come to the forefront. And you have to choose.

Are you going to be one of the 20 percent? That's what it's going to take. And that's typically only -- that's all you get, is about 20 percent. Are you going to be the 20 percent of this society that stands up and says, "I'm not going there. I'm not going there. I will not go over the cliff with the rest of humanity." Will you take the lead from your president? Your president and your president-elect.

Now, this. When you're at work, you can see that your home is safe, right? But when you're on vacation, your home and your family deserve to be protected.

[break]

GLENN: We were just talking in the break. This is really going to be hard, guys. This is really going to be hard. And we all have a choice to make because there's -- there's very few people, I think, that want to feel like we should come together.

But -- and it doesn't mean that we -- I mean, I think we just proved this. If your principles are at stake, we do not budge. But right now, the principles of peace and getting together -- Hillary Clinton -- Hillary Clinton has said he's legitimately our president, we need to support him and give him the opportunity to be successful.

Barack Obama has said the same thing. They have made the gesture of let's come together because this is the way our democracy or our republic works. The vote happens, you accept the vote.

We may not agree with it, and that doesn't mean you stop fighting. Look, if right now -- I'm having a lot of people saying, "Oh, look at Glenn, now he's for Trump." No, no. I'm for the office of the President of the United States. And I will stand with Donald Trump, as long as I can. I'll stand with him until he starts to say crazy, divisive things that are -- and suggest policies that are not conservative or constitutional. But until he does that, I stand with him.

Featured Image: President-elect Donald Trump meets with US President Barack Obama during an update on transition planning in the Oval Office at the White House on November 10, 2016 in Washington,DC. (Photo Credit: JIM WATSON/AFP/Getty Images)

Is the U.N. plotting to control 30% of U.S. land by 2030?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

A reliable conservative senator faces cancellation for listening to voters. But the real threat to public lands comes from the last president’s backdoor globalist agenda.

Something ugly is unfolding on social media, and most people aren’t seeing it clearly. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) — one of the most constitutionally grounded conservatives in Washington — is under fire for a housing provision he first proposed in 2022.

You wouldn’t know that from scrolling through X. According to the latest online frenzy, Lee wants to sell off national parks, bulldoze public lands, gut hunting and fishing rights, and hand America’s wilderness to Amazon, BlackRock, and the Chinese Communist Party. None of that is true.

Lee’s bill would have protected against the massive land-grab that’s already under way — courtesy of the Biden administration.

I covered this last month. Since then, the backlash has grown into something like a political witch hunt — not just from the left but from the right. Even Donald Trump Jr., someone I typically agree with, has attacked Lee’s proposal. He’s not alone.

Time to look at the facts the media refuses to cover about Lee’s federal land plan.

What Lee actually proposed

Over the weekend, Lee announced that he would withdraw the federal land sale provision from his housing bill. He said the decision was in response to “a tremendous amount of misinformation — and in some cases, outright lies,” but also acknowledged that many Americans brought forward sincere, thoughtful concerns.

Because of the strict rules surrounding the budget reconciliation process, Lee couldn’t secure legally enforceable protections to ensure that the land would be made available “only to American families — not to China, not to BlackRock, and not to any foreign interests.” Without those safeguards, he chose to walk it back.

That’s not selling out. That’s leadership.

It's what the legislative process is supposed to look like: A senator proposes a bill, the people respond, and the lawmaker listens. That was once known as representative democracy. These days, it gets you labeled a globalist sellout.

The Biden land-grab

To many Americans, “public land” brings to mind open spaces for hunting, fishing, hiking, and recreation. But that’s not what Sen. Mike Lee’s bill targeted.

His proposal would have protected against the real land-grab already under way — the one pushed by the Biden administration.

In 2021, Biden launched a plan to “conserve” 30% of America’s lands and waters by 2030. This effort follows the United Nations-backed “30 by 30” initiative, which seeks to place one-third of all land and water under government control.

Ask yourself: Is the U.N. focused on preserving your right to hunt and fish? Or are radical environmentalists exploiting climate fears to restrict your access to American land?

Smith Collection/Gado / Contributor | Getty Images

As it stands, the federal government already owns 640 million acres — nearly one-third of the entire country. At this rate, the government will hit that 30% benchmark with ease. But it doesn’t end there. The next phase is already in play: the “50 by 50” agenda.

That brings me to a piece of legislation most Americans haven’t even heard of: the Sustains Act.

Passed in 2023, the law allows the federal government to accept private funding from organizations, such as BlackRock or the Bill Gates Foundation, to support “conservation programs.” In practice, the law enables wealthy elites to buy influence over how American land is used and managed.

Moreover, the government doesn’t even need the landowner’s permission to declare that your property contributes to “pollination,” or “photosynthesis,” or “air quality” — and then regulate it accordingly. You could wake up one morning and find out that the land you own no longer belongs to you in any meaningful sense.

Where was the outrage then? Where were the online crusaders when private capital and federal bureaucrats teamed up to quietly erode private property rights across America?

American families pay the price

The real danger isn’t in Mike Lee’s attempt to offer more housing near population centers — land that would be limited, clarified, and safeguarded in the final bill. The real threat is the creeping partnership between unelected global elites and our own government, a partnership designed to consolidate land, control rural development, and keep Americans penned in so-called “15-minute cities.”

BlackRock buying entire neighborhoods and pricing out regular families isn’t by accident. It’s part of a larger strategy to centralize populations into manageable zones, where cars are unnecessary, rural living is unaffordable, and every facet of life is tracked, regulated, and optimized.

That’s the real agenda. And it’s already happening , and Mike Lee’s bill would have been an effort to ensure that you — not BlackRock, not China — get first dibs.

I live in a town of 451 people. Even here, in the middle of nowhere, housing is unaffordable. The American dream of owning a patch of land is slipping away, not because of one proposal from a constitutional conservative, but because global powers and their political allies are already devouring it.

Divide and conquer

This controversy isn’t really about Mike Lee. It’s about whether we, as a nation, are still capable of having honest debates about public policy — or whether the online mob now controls the narrative. It’s about whether conservatives will focus on facts or fall into the trap of friendly fire and circular firing squads.

More importantly, it’s about whether we’ll recognize the real land-grab happening in our country — and have the courage to fight back before it’s too late.


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

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.