Concessions of a Transgendered Wrestler

Texas high school wrestler Mack Beggs recently won the state championship --- the female state championship --- amid controversy that caused some competitors to forfeit rather than wrestle the junior from Trinity High School in Euless, Texas. Beggs, who is transitioning from a girl to a boy, has been taking regular doses of testosterone.

"Take the emotion and the politics out of the transgendered issue for a second, and we'll just talk about how ridiculous it is that a girl who is taking heavy amounts of testosterone --- for a girl, right? --- would be able to compete at all," Co-host Stu Burguiere said Monday on The Glenn Beck Program.

Many argue that the high levels of testosterone, which build strength and muscles, give Beggs an unfair advantage. Begging the question, if it's Beggs' choice to transition, shouldn't she make concessions during the interim to maintain a level playing field? Concessions like not wrestling until the transition is complete?

Enjoy the complimentary clip above or read the transcript below for details.

PAT: We've had this situation where there is a girl who is transitioning to a boy. And she's 17 years old. She's a wrestler. And so she wanted -- apparently, she wanted to wrestle in the boy's division this year, right?

JEFFY: Correct. Correct.

PAT: Because she's making that switch. So she's going from boy to girl.

STU: And the Texas rule is, you compete in the gender that you were born.

PAT: That's on your birth certificate.

STU: Yes.

PAT: Especially I guess as long as you have that genitalia, which she does. She's a girl.

STU: Yeah, I don't know -- if you've gone through the full transition, I don't know -- again, if you're talking about kids, this is a pretty new development. I don't know if they have a rule for that.

PAT: Yeah, I don't either.

STU: I think the rule is the gender you had when you were born.


PAT: So that's the rule in Texas because it's hateful. How can you possibly ask somebody to compete in the gender category they were born into, how can you ask that?

STU: You can't, Pat. You can't.

PAT: You can't. Because what if you feel differently? Anyway, she does.


PAT: But she was made to -- she was put in the girl's category for wrestling. So she just won the tournament last week.

JEFFY: Yeah, she won the championship.

PAT: She won the championship.

JEFFY: The -- one of the issues is, is that she is actually going through the transition and taking the prescribed medicine to make the change. And so it's working.

PAT: The testosterone.

STU: Right. And, by the way, this ends any argument of all time as to whether men or women are better athletes. Just -- because this whole thing of -- the old Billie Jean King thing back in the day. Let's be honest about it. You take testosterone, you become better and stronger at sports.

PAT: Right.

STU: Sorry.

PAT: Now, that is science. That is science.

JEFFY: That is science.

STU: So sorry. I guess we have to apologize for that.

PAT: Everybody knows it. Everybody knows it. You can -- I guess you can try to deny it and say that women are just as strong in every instance as men. It's just not the case.

STU: No, they're better at certain --

PAT: Yes. They're just not built the same way as we are. And that's a good thing. It was supposed to be that way. We're supposed to be different. And we are. And we are.

STU: Stunning. A stunning development that everyone knew at a level of 100 percent until very recently.

JEFFY: Right.

PAT: This is insane. And, by the way, if a man were to take testosterone in the -- in Major League Baseball or the NFL --

STU: I like how you're saying this as a crazy hypothetical.

PAT: I know.

STU: If in some circumstance somehow --

PAT: And they do.

STU: -- some at least decided to take performance enhancing drugs --

PAT: I don't remember who it was. But your testosterone as a man in the normal range is 400 to 800, maybe up to 1,000. And that's fairly normal. I can't remember who the baseball player was. It might have been A-Rod. He had a testosterone level -- and I shouldn't mention him because I don't remember who it was. But I remember their level was 4,000. So clearly they had been --

JEFFY: That's a man.

PAT: No man takes -- or has that much natural testosterone. So clearly, they had been taking testosterone, so they were better at what they were doing than they otherwise would have been. So it works on men as well as girls transitioning to men. So obviously, this girl is going to become stronger, she's going to be faster. She's going to be better able to wrestle than she was as a girl with no testosterone.

JEFFY: Right. And the argument also from the other parents that are suing the school board is that, hey, she is taking this medicine. That's making her into a boy. We don't want her wrestling.

PAT: And in Texas, you can take -- you can compete if you've been prescribed the testosterone by a doctor, and she was.

JEFFY: Correct. And there are several -- there are three or four other things on that list that the Wrestling Association says it's okay as long as it's prescribed and that would not be okay if it was not prescribed, for sure.

PAT: Wow.

STU: And the reason for that, by the way, quickly, steroids are like standard treatment for a lot of illnesses.


PAT: Yes. Right.

STU: If you break out in a rash or if you have -- if you're sick in any number of ways.

PAT: Uh-huh.

STU: One of the first responses is to give you a shot of steroids because, you know, it works. It's pretty effective.

PAT: It reduces swelling, aids in healing. It just -- it calms down infection. I mean, it does a lot of different things. I've taken steroids quite a bit. Because I've been sick lately. And it helps. They help.

STU: A lot.

PAT: So it kind of makes sense that there are certain circumstances under which -- you know, because if you're taking anabolic steroids, that's one thing. But if you're taking steroids that a normal doctor would prescribe for an illness that's a different deal.

JEFFY: Which is pretty much what they were covering when they made the rules, before this.

PAT: Right. So, anyway, Stu heard this interview on the way in by Chris Cuomo. And is it the lawyer representing the other girls in the tournament?

STU: No, this is Ben Ferguson, who is a talk show host. He's a CNN contributor, so he's there to take the evil right-wing side of this argument. Chris Cuomo who purpose or it is I guess to be a journalist. I don't know that for a fact. But it seems like he wants to come off as evenhanded on the show is a straight-out activist on this show.

PAT: Yes.

STU: And the reason is because he's in the middle of his own personal issue with the transgendered argument, which is last week someone tweeted to him -- when talking about the transgendered issue, what do you tell a 12-year-old girl who doesn't want to see a man's unit in the locker room?

So a 12-year-old girl is in the locker room, someone changing next to them, takes down their pants and has a guy junk. Right? He's got guy junk.

What do you tell that 12-year-old girl? His response was, I wonder if she is the problem.

PAT: Good gosh.

STU: Or her overprotective and intolerant dad. Teach tolerance. That was his response.

PAT: That's unbelievable.

STU: Now, look, that's unbelievable, to put that on the 12-year-old girl.

PAT: Unbelievable response.

STU: A 12-year-old girl is not equipped to -- even if this were the most logical thing in the world, is not equipped to make that determination. She's going to be interested in what she's interested in at that age. That's going to be -- it's a moment -- it's an era of discovery, right. And so that is not something that you would necessarily want -- that's why they have separation.

Because honestly, with this standard, why bother with two different bathrooms? Why bother with two different locker rooms for any reason? Why bother? Why not just be tolerant of male genitalia all the time for 12-year-old girls? Why is it only when someone else outside of their decision-making process makes a decision they identify a different way. Right? Someone else has done that, that doesn't affect the 12-year-old girl in this scenario. She hasn't made any judgment, well, I identify that person as a female, therefore the junk that I'm looking at is not male. That's not her determination. It's someone else's determination. So that is -- it's an absurd argument on its face.

But he got so much heat for that tweet, blaming the 12-year-old girl and her intolerant dad of not being accepting of penises in the locker room, which is essentially what he said: You should be tolerant of the penis.

That was the word they used. He got so much heat for that. He's now in, I've locked myself in the corner, and I'm going to be defensive on this point no matter what. Which, it brings out the best in Chris Cuomo. Because he's now so desperate to prove that this wasn't a mistake, he'll say anything.

PAT: Yeah. Listen to this.

VOICE: What's your take on the tournament, my friend?

VOICE: Well, first off, I think this -- take the transgendered issue out of it for a second. If you are taking testosterone, which is a performance-enhancing drug in sports, you shouldn't be able to wrestle.

PAT: Correct. There you go.

VOICE: And this gave a completely unfair advantage to this participant. You can talk about that whether you are in your age-group or in your sex group that are associated with. If you're taking something that is performance enhancing, you're not a real champion. You cheated and you won.

Now, the state I think has some blame for this, by having it where they're even allowing these testosterones to be used if they're prescribed by a doctor. That's where I think the big fix probably needs to come.

STU: Stop for a second. Because this is -- so, first of all, this is his first response. Take the emotion and the politics out of the transgendered issue for a second. And we'll just talk about you how ridiculous it is that a girl who is taking heavy amounts of testosterone for a girl, right? Would be able to compete at all. So taking out the transgendered issue, it's still wrong. So he's already won the argument at this point, right?

JEFFY: Right. Right.

STU: But not with Chris Cuomo who can't possibly accept this.

CHRIS: If there was acceptance, we wouldn't have had this issue because this kid would be wrestling against boys.

PAT: Oh, good gosh.

STU: So here's his argument: So Chris, he falls back to --

PAT: If there were acceptance.

STU: I don't know what level we're going to fall back to on this. It's going to be hard to keep track of. But he falls back to, if there was -- if we taught acceptance, this wouldn't be an issue because she would be able to wrestle the boys like she wants to.

PAT: And in that eventuality, we wouldn't be talking about the story at all because she would have lost in the first round, and it would be over.

STU: Right. That's true.

PAT: It would be over.

STU: That's true. However -- however, we still would be talking about the issue. Why?

Because in a liberal state, let's say California, there would be a -- it would go the opposite way. You would have a boy who was transforming to be a girl and wanted to identify as a girl and then went into the girl's division and then destroyed all the girls. So the issue would still exist, it would just be in a liberal state and the opposite way. So he's completely wrong there to say the issue goes away if -- if we, quote, unquote, teach acceptance. The issue still exists, it's just on the opposite side.

VOICE: We know. And for those as you're learning about -- just so people know.

VOICE: Here's the thing.

VOICE: But hold on, Ben. Let's just clarify one thing: The science, you have to be careful about.

STU: This is argument two.

PAT: The science now.

VOICE: The amount of hormone that this kid is given is the minimum standard they can give to replicate the output of a boy.

STU: Okay. Stop. There's so much there.

JEFFY: Oh, my gosh.

PAT: Does he know the amount she's being given?

STU: First of all -- yes. So that was one of his big arguments in this. I assume he knows it because he quotes -- he kept saying, you have to look it up. You have to look it up. So, again, that's a bad assumption on my part.

PAT: Look it up, Jeffy. See how much testosterone --

STU: However, it's not the minimum amount that a girl would have, right? It's actually way more than a girl would have, which is what makes the transition happen.

PAT: Yes. Way more. It's the minimum amount for a boy.

STU: For a boy. Now, let's just say that that's true. So even if his argument is true, it's still cheating --

PAT: So even if his argument is true, it's still cheating.

STU: It still would be cheating as the girl. So his point is, well, then they should allow him -- her -- him to wrestle with the boys, right? Because he wants -- she identifies as a man. So we should think that she's a man. We should allow her to wrestle with the boys. Because she's not getting -- his point there is, he's not getting so much -- she's not getting so much more testosterone than the boy would normally have. So she's not a superhuman boy, she's just a boy, right? First of all, his wording is interesting there. The amount to replicate a boy.

If she's a boy, you do not need to replicate the boy.

If you're replicating something, you're replicating it because it's not actually happening. Therefore, your whole scientific argument is flawed. The thing that you're saying you want to happen isn't happening.

PAT: Yeah.

STU: She is not a boy. So if she was a boy, you would not need to replicate it.

PAT: Yeah, if you need to talk about science, what is she scientifically? She's a girl.

STU: She's a girl.

PAT: She's had no surgery. There's nothing been changed on her body. She's a girl. So if you want to talk science, she's a girl. And then -- so it's unfair for the girl to be getting testosterone, when the other girls aren't getting it.

STU: Right. Exactly. Now, his point seems to be, what he wants to happen is that she wrestles against the boys and then loses because she is getting only the appropriate level for a boy of testosterone.

Again, it's a ridiculous argument in and of itself. But if you're going -- even if you're going to entertain it, the point is, getting performance-enhancing drugs -- it's not to say that you let everyone come to the same level of testosterone. The point is, you don't get additional testosterone as to what you have naturally. That's the point of the rule. It's enhancing. Whether you think it's enhancing it only to equal, it's not the point. The point is, you don't enhance it to what you have naturally.

PAT: Uh-huh.

STU: She has very little naturally. And they're enhancing it to get a higher level, regardless of what level.

PAT: And all we're talking about here is -- the level of the other competitors is what we should be talking about, not the level of the boys.

STU: Yes. Right.

PAT: Because is it unfair for her to have beaten all these girls whose level of testosterone is ridiculous?

VOICE: Kids are going to be superhuman -- it's the opposite.

PAT: No, it's not the opposite.

VOICE: Scientifically, that is the outcome. If you look and do the research as I have, you'll see that.

STU: Oh, God.

PAT: What a condescending ass.

STU: Yes. Remember, this is a guy who is in full standing in the Douche Hall of Fame. And this is him showing off why he's there.

PAT: Exactly.

STU: And, by the way, on Pat and Stu today, a vote on Chris Cuomo as the Grand Nozzle after this interview. Because he deserves it from Harry Reid.

VOICE: If this state allowed this kid to wrestle against boys, which is what he wants, we wouldn't be talking about this case right now.

STU: Right. This case. You would be talking about a different case in a different state that went the opposite way. The issue would not go away at all based on that. You would just be arguing the opposite side of it.

PAT: True.

VOICE: But you also have to look at, there has to be a standard. And I think it's not insane or crazy for a state to say that you compete with the sex that's on your birth certificate. That's what I would refer to as logical. It is illogical to somehow imply that this kid is a victim because he decided to do something or change something and therefore you change the entire sport around it. That is the part that I think many people are sitting here and saying, "Hey, if you want to compete in a sport, period, then you cannot be taking performance-enhancing drugs and do it." But to say that we should change the entire way that sports is done because of one person and their decision to do something, that is unrealistic.

VOICE: Right.

But the premise is flawed. Because the logic requires --

STU: We got to come back. We're not going to have time to get it --

VOICE: I disagree. That's why we're having a discussion. That transgender doesn't count. But it does count, and that's why we're having this bigger debate about what you allow trans kids to have access to and what you don't.

PAT: He goes on to say that she identifies as a girl.

STU: Yeah, but we have to come back and play -- because that part is unbelievable as well.

PAT: Unbelievable.

STU: His scientific argument is that she identifies. Well, that's not science.

PAT: That's not science. Now you're talking feelings. You're not talking science.

STU: As you said, they're replicating it. She's identifying. You're laying it out -- subconsciously, you're saying the truth. You can't help yourself. You can't help yourself. You keep saying the truth.

PAT: I can identify as a gerbil, if I want to, but I'm not. I'm not one. And I won't fit into the little thing with the wheel that goes -- spins around and around. So...

STU: Right. And any other circumstance, this argument would be completely bizarre.


The Truth Behind the 5G Airline Hysteria | Brendan Carr | Ep 130

The rollout of 5G has begun across the country … except at airports. Rumors are everywhere that the new 5G networks could cause massive — and deadly — disruptions to air traffic. But is this a factual fear, or does it belong in the same bucket as the billion other conspiracy theories surrounding 5G? Population control, invisible propaganda, hundreds of birds that die all at once, wavelengths that microwave your brain ... And what about the less far-fetched concerns about what 5G could usher in: Increased Big Tech monitoring, ESG scores, the metaverse? Since President Biden isn’t doing anything to calm America’s fears, Glenn sits down with FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr to cut through the noise and separate fact from fiction. Yes, Carr explains, there is a lot to be concerned about. But he also details why he’s so optimistic about the potential a 5G-powered world could have.


WATCH: The Great Reset: Joe Biden and the Rise of 21st-Century Fascism

The Great Reset is not just an elitist idea — it’s not even a socialist utopian concept. It’s a real-world fascist threat to every American from Wall Street to Main Street. It’s happening now in policies and cultural shifts big and small, obvious and subtle, from environmental promises to corporations going woke. But the mainstream media, global elites, and politicians brushed off the Great Reset as “nothing to see here.” Another myth they push: “The World Economic Forum is just a conference for elites who have no REAL power.”

Glenn Beck first exposed the Great Reset almost two years ago, and the globalist cries of "conspiracy theorist" soon followed. They said he believed the WEF was a “master cabal calling the shots from some evil underground lair.” But Glenn Beck never said that. Instead, he uncovered the true intentions of global leaders in finance and politics by simply highlighting their own words.

This week, the same global elites are doubling down on their agenda at the World Economic Forum’s Davos Agenda virtual event. But still, the global elites — like Twitter’s Jack Dorsey — are trying to downplay the WEF’s influence to stop people like us from interfering with their plans. The oligarchy will prosper in the new world order they’ve designed. You will not.

So Glenn unveils a master chalkboard based on his best-selling new book to outline the threats from globalists and why we must stop their agenda if we hope to keep the precious freedoms we still have.

Watch the full episode of "GlennTV' Below:

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.


Explaining Washington’s rumored FORCED QUARANTINE law

Despite what the mainstream media may say, on January 12 Glenn DID fact-check a claim he made on Tucker Carlson about a rumored Washington law that could force citizens to quarantine or isolate. In this clip, Glenn clarifies his original statement, explaining that the law in question has been on Washington books since 2003 and therefore is NOT a result of the COVID pandemic. But Glenn also explains the more concerning context he — and those in the mainstream media — missed too: the fact that this law didn’t seem too farfetched for Washington citizens should be VERY concerning to us all.


Follow THESE 8 STEPS so we can REVIVE our republic

It’s a new year, and every new year comes with New Year's resolutions. This is when we resolve to lose weight, join a gym, or finally read those books on our shelves. For many of us, the New Year's resolution has become a kind of joke, because deep down, we know the new diet won’t stick and that reading a book a day isn’t really sustainable. The real issue is that we usually create resolutions that are too idealistic and broad, like, “Be healthy.” When it comes time to deliver on those resolutions, we don’t know what to do, so we quit.

But the idea of resolutions is still a good one. It is good to set new and better goals for ourselves. The secret is keeping them attainable.

You will hear many people, like me, tell you that 2022 is the year to save the American republic. Well, that is a great idea, but what do we actually DO to make that happen?

I know this audience is already resolved to save America, so I want to offer you some specific, actionable ways to do that.

Here are some “Practical Steps to Revive the Republic.” It is by no means a fully comprehensive list. We will find a broad array of ways to save our nation. This list is a jumping-off point for the New Year for folks like us who love this country.

Practical Steps to Revive the Republic

1. Get married and have a family.

Mother Teresa said, “What can you do to promote world peace? Go home and love your family.”

Family is the first system of government we enter. It is where we are taught the virtues necessary for self-government. Children denied love and guidance when they are young struggle to successfully enter society, let alone the reality of their own lives. We call them “mal-adjusted.”

Ronald Reagan addressed the nation in 1986, saying:

“Consider, for example, that the philosopher-historians Will and Ariel Durant called the family ‘the nucleus of civilization.’ They understood that all those aspects of civilized life that we most deeply cherish — freedom, the rule of law, economic prosperity and opportunity — that all these depend upon the strength and integrity of the family. If you think about it, you'll see that it's in the family that we must all learn the fundamental lesson of life — right and wrong, respect for others, self-discipline, the importance of knowledge, and, yes, a sense of our own self-worth. All of our lives, it's the love of our families that sustains us when times are hard. And it is perhaps above all to provide for our children that we work and save.

“Some have suggested that in today's world, the family has somehow become less important. Well, I can't help thinking just the opposite: that when so much around us is whispering the little lie that we should live only for the moment and for ourselves, it's more important than ever for our families to affirm an older and more lasting set of values.”

If you are concerned about the fall of the American republic, remember that liberty is always just a generation away from success or demise, and the children we raise make all of the difference.

2. Tell the truth.

“When you have something to say, silence is a lie.” –Jordan B. Peterson

Lying is really easy. It seems to take the mess of the present and push it into the future. But lying makes the world like a mine field of constructed reality – one wrong step and it will all blow up. To maintain a lie costs the liar in consciousness, attention, and productivity. Enough lies make you useless. Useless people have very little capacity for self-government.

In 2021, we rightly pointed out, “The media lies!” “The politicians lie!” “The doctors lie!” “The celebrities lie!”

But if we lie too, can we expect better from them? If we are silent in the face of lies, when we KNOW they are lies, then how can we expect things to improve?

If we each agreed to stop lying and to tell the truth today, can you imagine how much better tomorrow could be? Theodore Dalrymple, the pen name of the English writer and psychiatrist, said it perfectly: “When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is in some small way to become evil oneself. One's standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control.” We have to embrace and promote a way of life worthy of liberty – and that starts with me, you, and all of us.

3. Study history and read old books.

There is nothing new under the sun. It’s likely that the struggles of today were deliberated years ago by our ancestors. Perhaps they have some good ideas worth considering. We won’t know unless we study them. The American system of government was revolutionary not because the founders were somehow superhuman (although God was clearly with them) but because they embraced the lessons of the past. If you think practically, looking at the future is impossible, but moving into the future, regardless of where you look, is inevitable. The only concrete information we have is in the past. If you are being presented with a “new idea,” check with the past first to see how that idea will play out. If you love the American republic, study it. If you want to navigate the future, read old books.

4. Own. Don’t rent.

Many of us likely watched “It’s a Wonderful Life” over the holidays. This movie makes an explicit case for the correlation between home ownership and human dignity. The greedy villain. Mr. Potter, wants to keep the people of the town in his rental apartments and is threatened by the movie's protagonist, George Bailey, whose Bailey Building and Loan business is helping people own their own homes.

Home ownership matters. Not only does it set you on the path toward true self-reliance and out of the grips of the “Mr. Potters” of the world, but it also creates local buy-in, which makes our communities stronger. A 2001 Harvard study found:

“Strong and consistent evidence indicates that homeowners are more likely to:

a) be satisfied with their homes and neighborhoods;

b) participate in voluntary and political activities; and

c) stay in their homes longer, contributing to neighborhood stability.

To be metaphorical: It turns out that when we put down roots, we care more about the local soil. But right now, we are seeing the death of home ownership in exchange for perpetual renting. Even people with the financial capacity to buy a home are forgoing it for the ease of renting. But if we want to save our republic, we have to tend to our local communities. We have to take ownership over where we live.

Before our Declaration spoke about “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” John Locke was talking about the natural rights of life, liberty, and property. When he said “property,” he was talking about the holistic ownership a man can have over his destiny. The right to own property is about self-determination. In essence, it is about the right to own yourself – to own your destiny.

If you can buy a home, do it. If not, take on the mentality of a homeowner in your community, not a passerby.

Whenever possible, own, don’t rent.

5. Dump the tea into the sea.

Over the past two years, the government has grabbed at power like a drunken man in a strip club, losing all decorum, restraint, and sense of place in the greater society. But what is more disturbing is that we complied. After “15 days to slow the spread,” we stayed unnecessarily locked down physically, emotionally, and financially for almost two years.

Remember the last time kings tried to hold us down? I’m not saying to turn to violence. I am saying we should just start saying “no” to the government overreach – PEACEFULLY, respectfully, and deliberately.

Thomas Jefferson said, “The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that I wish it to be always kept alive.”

Maybe the lovers of the American republic need to start getting into, as the left loves to say, “good trouble.”

6. Know your rights AND your responsibilities.

We all love talking about our rights. In fact, the word “rights” is being conflated with a narcissistic tendency to think we deserve the whole world to conform to our way of life. Yet our inalienable rights are eroded every day. If you haven’t read our founding documents, now is the time. We can’t protect rights that we can’t define or are ignorant of. But along with rights come responsibilities. We are accustomed to turning to the government to solve everything – to heal all of our “boo-boos.” It’s reflexive at this point.

“There are so many poor people ... I’ll call my senator!”

Yes, the government has a role in general welfare, but the government is bad at solving most problems. I would love to hear a politician, when asked about an issue, say, “Yes, I agree that is a problem, but the government should not be the one to solve it.”

Can you imagine?

There are plenty of issues in our communities – plenty of people who need help. We have to start helping them. Knowing the government will “help the poor” and lock them in cycles of poverty, we need to develop other solutions in our own communities. There are many important issues to address. We have forgotten whose job it is to address them. When we fail to love our neighbors, the government steps in as a poor and destructive substitute.

7. Say “republic” more than “democracy.”

You can’t turn on the news without someone telling you about the fragility of our “democracy.” In President Biden's Inauguration Day speech, he broke the record for the number of times the word “democracy” was used in an inaugural address. When politicians call for abolishing the Electoral College, they call it “undemocratic.” A Pew Research study found that 58% of U.S. adults think the Constitution should be amended so that the presidential candidate who receives the most votes nationwide wins. This would no doubt make America more democratic. But America is not a democracy. We don’t live in a democracy for good reason. The founders understood that “majority” does not mean “right.” That isn’t to say our founders didn't infuse our system with the best of the democratic values, but they ultimately decided in favor of a new system – a very delicate order of checks and balances and delegated power and representation. This was to provide protection against the whims of faction or, as we call it today, “the mob.” It’s the leaders of our modern mob who love to exchange the word republic, which is what we really are, for democracy. Words have meanings. Many young Americans believe they live in a democracy. When discussing America, make sure to use the word republic.

Federalist No. 10

From this view of the subject it may be concluded that a pure democracy, by which I mean a society consisting of a small number of citizens, who assemble and administer the government in person, can admit of no cure for the mischiefs of faction. A common passion or interest will, in almost every case, be felt by a majority of the whole; a communication and concert result from the form of government itself; and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party or an obnoxious individual. Hence it is that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths. Theoretic politicians, who have patronized this species of government, have erroneously supposed that by reducing mankind to a perfect equality in their political rights, they would, at the same time, be perfectly equalized and assimilated in their possessions, their opinions, and their passions. A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme of representation takes place, opens a different prospect, and promises the cure for which we are seeking.

8. Learn from people you disagree with.

Perhaps this needs no explanation. We have so much we can learn from each other in the honest pursuit of truth. Our forefathers didn’t ensure our freedoms of conscience and association for nothing.

Here's how the conversation went on radio Thursday:

Follow THESE 8 STEPS so we can REVIVE our republic