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

Glenn Reacts to Statement by U2's Bono: He's Amazing, One of the Bravest

May 25, 2017
Staff

WRITER

Editor's note: This article has been updated. An earlier version seemed to indicate Glenn's admiration for Bono was a recent development when in reality, Glenn has been a fan of U2's lead vocalist for quite some time.

Contrasting responses to the Manchester terrorist attack made by U2's Bono and Queen's Brian May, Glenn shared his reaction on radio Thursday.

"I think Bono is an amazing guy, truly an amazing guy," he said.

One thing's for sure, Bono is incredibly brave for his comments on Manchester:

They hate music. They hate women. They even hate little girls. They hate everything that we love. And, you know, the worst of humanity was on view in Manchester last night. So was the best. As people took perfect strangers into their hands, and cued up blood banks. Manchester has an undefeatable spirit, I can assure you.

In other interviews, Bono has boldly discussed his belief in God:

My mother died at my --- her own father's grave site, as he was being lowered into the ground --- I was 14. She left me, but she left me an artist. I began the journey, trying to fill the hole in my heart with music, with my mates, my band mates.

Finally, the only thing that could fill it is God's love. And it's a big hole. But luckily, it's a big love. I went finally to Jerusalem on a family pilgrimage and I went to Golgotha. And I went to the site where -- and I had some time on my own -- where death died. And I was like, wow, there it is. That's where death died.

"That's unbelievable. I've never heard it described as where death died. That is fantastic," Glenn said.

Religious themes have also made their way into U2's music.

"U2's 1983 album War has a song called 40," Co-host Stu Burguiere said.

Bono's bandmate The Edge had this to say about the song:

So we had this slightly unusual piece the music, and We said, okay. What are we going to do with it? Bono said, let's do a psalm. Opened up the Bible, and found Psalm 40. "This is it. Let's do it." The song title is 40. Within 40 minutes, we had worked out the last few elements from the tune. Bono had sung it. We had mixed it. And literally, after finishing the mix, we walked out the door, and the next band walked in.

"I mean, they did a song that was based on Psalm 40," Stu said.

"If they're playing anywhere when I get back from vacation, if they're anywhere close, let's all go as a show," Glenn said.

Listen to this segment beginning at the 18:18 mark from The Glenn Beck Program:

GLENN: Welcome to the program.

Okay. So we heard from Brian May. Now let's hear what Bono said about the Manchester bombing.

JIMMY: As you know, there was another senseless terrorist attack in Manchester yesterday.

PAT: Obviously on Jimmy Kimmel.

JIMMY: And that's something you guys have been thinking about, certainly.

BONO: They -- they hate music. They hate women. They even hate little girls. They hate everything that we love.

And, you know, the worst of humanity was on view in Manchester last night. So was the best. As people took perfect strangers into their hands, and cued up blood banks. Manchester has an undefeatable spirit, I can assure you.

GLENN: Now, listen to the difference.

PAT: Listen to the difference between him and Brian May.

GLENN: Listen to the difference.

PAT: That almost sounds like what George Bush used to say all the time.

GLENN: No, but that's true.

PAT: They hate our music. They don't like Ariana Grande.

(laughter)

PAT: They don't like our -- tunes.

(chuckling)

PAT: They hate freedom.

GLENN: Right.

PAT: They don't like bowling. They don't like professional bowlers. They don't like the bowling shoes. They think they're ugly.

(chuckling)

Even the size 12, they didn't like them at all. In fact, size 12 bowling shoes set them off more than anything else.

(laughter)

STU: That's great.

GLENN: There's more to Bono that you absolutely have to hear. One of the -- one of the bravest --

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: One of the bravest -- he's kind of the Jon Voight though of music. Jon Voight is like, I got my Oscars. They don't know what to do with me now anyway. I'm still going to act in all their movies because they love me.

That's who he is. Bono is Jon Voight of music.

(OUT AT 10:30AM)

GLENN: All right. So let's play the Manchester from Jimmy Kimmel and Bono. I think Bono is -- is an amazing guy. Truly an amazing guy.

And I don't know if he is -- if he's changed, if he was as lefty as we thought. Or if he was just so popular, the left just brought him in and said, "Oh, Bono, you're on great. And you agree with us on everything." And he got credit and blame for things that he really didn't believe. I don't know.

PAT: Possibly. Because I remember disliking him a lot, thinking he was a wacko progressive.

GLENN: Well, you were a big U2 fan.

STU: I'm still a big U2 fan. Actually seeing them on Friday in Dallas.

JEFFY: Heck yeah.

GLENN: Are you really? I've never seen them.

STU: Oh, they're fantastic. This one is the Joshua Tree Tour. So they're going back -- I guess it's the 30-year anniversary of the Joshua Tree. So they're doing the whole album. And I think just that.

PAT: What?

GLENN: If they're playing anywhere, when I get back from vacation, if they're anywhere close, let's all go as a show. I've never seen them. I hear they're great.

STU: They are. I've been a big fan for a really long time. But I've always felt like the right gave him an unfair shake when it comes to who he is. Because he's seen as sort of this crazy liberal activist. And he was big on supporting AIDS charities and debt relief and sort the these global causes that you'd associate with every left-wing annoying celebrity --

PAT: AIDS for Africa.

GLENN: And there's nothing -- there's nothing wrong with any of that.

STU: Of course not.

GLENN: I always just assumed that he was with the United Nations. And I think he was.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: And then it didn't work.

STU: You know, I think -- he's no hard-core conservative by any means.

GLENN: No, no.

STU: But he's always been a big capitalist. And I think he's always -- he's always been religious and had a really impassioned --

PAT: And he's not afraid to talk about it.

GLENN: He was always religious?

STU: Yeah, going back to the beginning of the band.

JEFFY: Pretty much.

STU: I think he's had times where he's had his ups and life. I mean, he's lived a life. He's lived a rock star life too.

GLENN: I mean, I've heard him mention Jesus a lot lately.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: I mean, it must be one of his up periods because nobody talks -- nobody uses the J word.

STU: He's been more outspoken, I think, recently.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: But he's always had that influence. And, like, one of the things he got beat on was this RED project he did. Now, the RED project was -- you might remember it. It had like -- it was all shirts. And a lot the people, and celebrities were wearing them for a while. It said like, "Inspired." And RED was in parentheses. And it raised money for global charities, and it was a big deal.

And, you know, the media and also a lot on the right, kind of jumped on him. Was like, well, here you go. I think they raised $100 million or something. And they -- but, you know, like, I can't remember exactly what it was. It was something like at the end of -- at one period, they had only sent something like $20 million to -- to these charities. And it's like, well, think about what he did there, from a conservative perspective from a moment.

He worked with dozens of actual stores. He didn't just ask for free money. He worked with actual capitalist institutions, designed clothing that people wanted to wear, and then took a chunk of that money and gave it to charity.

GLENN: 20 percent.

STU: It was something like 20 percent that he gave to charity. Now, he didn't give every dime of it to charity. You know, there were licensing fees that they paid. He got criticism for that. And the fact that they were working for these big companies that only want profit and get people in the stores, and they buy other things.

GLENN: You had to have license, or people would rip it off. And then you would have nothing.

STU: Exactly. And here's a guy who actually worked through capitalism, to improve the world.

GLENN: That's why.

JEFFY: Yeah.

STU: And isn't that -- that's why he got beat up by places like the New York Times. But the right jumped on it because, oh, it's a celebrity.

GLENN: It's so weird that you say that. Because I almost said, when he started his RED campaign, I almost said -- that's when I started to like him. Then I thought -- maybe it wasn't. I don't know when -- but it was around that period that I started to think, "I think this guy gets it."

STU: Yeah. And you would talk to I'm sure Bono about a million topics. And you would disagree with him on half of them probably. He's no Libertarian.

GLENN: Sure. But you're a huge fan of his.

STU: I'm a huge fan.

GLENN: Right. You remember the time when I met him and spent like a half hour with him, we just chatted?

PAT: In New York, when he was doing the --

STU: I do remember that.

GLENN: Yeah. You weren't there. But I just chatted with him. We're buds.

PAT: It seems like you didn't even know who he was at that time.

GLENN: I mean, I knew he was part of U2. But I had never seen any of his contests or anything like that, but you --

JEFFY: He was asking you advice.

GLENN: Yeah, he was. He was asking me advice.

STU: Curing deadly diseases, and this is what you're going to focus on.

GLENN: Only because it drives you out of your mind.

STU: It does. It does.

GLENN: Okay. So listen to this from Bono. This came out earlier this week.

BONO: My mother died at my -- her own father's grave site, as he was being lowered into the ground -- I was fourteen.

She left me. But she left me an artist. I began the journey, trying to fill the hole in my heart with music, with my mates, my band mates. Finally, the only thing that could fill it is God's love. And it's a big hole. But luckily, it's a big love. I went finally to Jerusalem on a family pilgrimage.

PAT: Wow. Wow.

BONO: And I went to Golgotha. And I went to the site where -- and I had some time on my own -- where death died.

GLENN: Hmm.

BONO: And I was like, wow, there it is. That's where death died.

And so --

STU: Wow.

BONO: -- I don't really believe in it.

PAT: Wow. From a rock star.

GLENN: That's unbelievable. I've never heard it described as where death died. That is fantastic.

JEFFY: Me either.

STU: He speaks in lyrics in normal conversation.

GLENN: Yeah, I noticed that when I was -- oh, you weren't there.

STU: No. I wasn't.

JEFFY: Oh, man.

PAT: Really, he's almost poetic.

JEFFY: Yeah.

PAT: A lot like Donald Trump, who is also so eloquent, that sometimes it just shoots right over your head.

JEFFY: Right.

PAT: Right.

GLENN: If I may quote what's her name, the country artist -- the girl -- the young girl remember I saw the 100 most important people in the world or influential people in the world thing. She got up in front of Elton John and said, "I have this theory that songs -- love songs are just poetry set to music."

PAT: That was so profound. Wasn't it?

GLENN: So profound. Who was it? I actually like her. She's the big country artist that really respect her for, you know, the way she treats her fans and everything. What's her name?

STU: Taylor Swift.

GLENN: Yeah. Elton John was sitting right in front of her, and he had never heard that before.

JEFFY: He probably never heard that before.

GLENN: I think he put his head in his hands at that point. He's like, oh, dear God.

(laughter)

She didn't say it to a crowd of influential or important people at all.

STU: That's good. U2's 1983 album War has a song called 40. Here's the quote. This is by the Edge, not Bono. The other guy in the band -- one of the other guys in the band, talking about what it came from.

So we had this slightly unusual piece the music, and We said, okay. What are we going to do with it? Bono said, let's do a psalm.

Opened up the Bible, and found Psalm 40. "This is it. Let's do it."

The song title is 40. Within 40 minutes, we had worked out the last few elements from the tune. Bono had sung it. We had mixed it. And literally, after finishing the mix, we walked out the door, and the next band walked in.

But, I mean, they did a song that was based on Psalm 40.

PAT: Wow.

STU: One of their CDs. And this is 1983. This is not a new thing obviously.

GLENN: Is he Catholic?

STU: I think he is, yeah.

JEFFY: Yeah.

GLENN: Is it Scotland that is -- one of the -- is it -- is it -- is the struggle only in Ireland, between the Catholics and the Protestants?

PAT: Yeah, I don't think it's in Scotland.

GLENN: Why not? Aren't they right next door to each other? Aren't they a stone's throw away? Once you throw a mazel tov cocktail from Ireland to Scotland.

PAT: I don't think they do copycat protests. No, I don't think so.

GLENN: You don't think so?

Huh. Because I think they're basically the same country.

STU: Let's leave it to the expert on this debate. Jeffy, how would you describe that?

JEFFY: Describe what?

STU: Yeah. Okay. That's my new thing. Whenever there's a complicated topic, I just throw it to Jeffy as the expert because then he looks dumb instead of me.

GLENN: Right. Okay.

PAT: And then you get something really deep like, ugh.

EXCLUSIVE: Tech Ethicist reveals 5 ways to control AI NOW

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.