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

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

Creator of Trump vs. CNN Meme Offers Apology We All Need to Hear

July 05, 2017
Staff

WRITER

Welcome to the new normal, another day, another Presidential tweet story. A Redditor who created the video clip of Trump going WWF on a guy with CNN logo superimposed on his face was tracked down by CNN and he's now offering an apology. The mea culpa doesn't fit with the typical media narrative but there is a message he shares that is important for everyone to hear.

Trolling is addictive and what you say actually means something even when you mean nothing.

"Now listen to what the guy said who made the original and was accused of this and did some really bad things. Look what he said: 'Your self-worth does not come from this. It's addictive. Think of the other people on the receiving end, before you say really horrible things that you know you don't mean. Because it's real,'" Glenn said on radio Wednesday.

For good or evil, there is a powerful message for our society.

"Your voice is more powerful than you ever could imagine. And man's individual voice is more powerful than it's ever been since the creation of the earth and Adam first woke up," Glenn said.

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

GLENN: All right. So CNN finds the guy who made that video of Trump in the WWF fight from years ago. And -- and -- and they ask him, okay. So what's up, dude?

Because he posted, wow, can't believe the president retweeted this.

Well, you go to his Reddit file, and you see that he has done horrible, horrible things. Really anti-Semitic. Really bad.

And this is the part of the story that doesn't make sense to me. Because the usual way for the mainstream media to handle this is you see a guy who is posting anti-Semitic stuff. You do nothing. You just assume he's a conservative. And you go for him. And it doesn't matter what the truth is. And, I mean, I don't know how you can post anti-Semitic stuff and the truth be good, but you just never give him a break in the mainstream media ever.

They -- they do everything they can to connect decent, innocent people to those kinds of thoughts, when they don't exist.

Here's a guy where it does exist. He apologizes. And they're like, okay. Well, we accept his apology.

I don't understand that. Because the way I look at the media, they are only in for the president's blood, at every step of the way. And so it doesn't -- something is not right on this story. Or something has changed that I find hard to believe. But maybe.

So what do we get out of this? Well, I want you to read what he posted yesterday. I think this is something that we should all read to our kids at dinner tonight. I'll share it, when we come back.

(OUT AT 9:31AM)

GLENN: I just can't get over the feeling that something is not right with this -- with this story, this HanAholeSolo story from Reddit.

STU: The internet makes every story interesting because you have to read their stupid screen names.

GLENN: I know. I know.

This -- this guy was up on Reddit and filed all kinds of anti-Semitic stuff. And then he's the guy who apparently did a version of the -- the tweet the president sent out. And it's the one where the president is -- it's old footage of Donald Trump at a wrestling match, and he throws a guy down on the ground and just beats the snot out of him. It's a wrestling thing.

And -- and this guy superimposed the CNN logo over the face of the guy the president is beating.

Well, he gets up -- he sees the president has tweeted it. And he thinks it's his. And he's like, oh, my gosh, that's great. And he's happy.

But then when the media gets a hold of it and says, look at the violence, the guy isn't happy. He's like, you know what, that's not mine. That was somebody else's. Somebody else took my original tweet and then added sound effects and music behind it or audio.

STU: Initially, he was happy.

GLENN: Yeah, initially he was happy.

STU: Then he turned around.

GLENN: Then he turned around. Yes.

STU: It's important.

GLENN: Now, this is the part that I think we can actually use to help our own children. But some of this is really interesting.

First of all -- this is his apology now: First of all, I'd like to apologize to the members of the Reddit community for getting this site and this sub embroiled in a controversy that should never have happened. I would also like to apologize for the posts made that were racist, bigoted, and anti-Semitic. I am in no way that person. I love and accept people of all walks of life, and I've done so for my entire life.

Huh. Okay.

I am not the person that the media portrays me to be in real life. I was trolling and posting things to get a reaction from the subs on Reddit and never meant any of the hateful things I said in these posts. I would never support any kind of violence or actions against others, simply for what they believe in, their religion, or their lifestyle they choose to have, nor would I carry out any violence against anyone based upon that or support anybody who did.

Do you believe that?

STU: You know, it's -- it's weird coming from someone who would post that kind of trash on the internet. But, I mean, it reads I think in an authentic way, does it not?

JEFFY: Yeah.

STU: You know, someone who --

GLENN: I think there's a lot of people -- I think there's a lot of people -- I know I have responded kindly to people who are just trolls. And not so much anymore. But there were times when they would be like, "Oh, man, I was just kidding."

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: And it was really -- people do try just to get a reaction.

STU: Totally, and I think it's a way for people to feel alive. And it says a hell of a lot about our society.

GLENN: It says a lot.

The meme was created purely as satire, he continues to write. It was not meant to be a call to violence against CNN or any other news affiliation. I had no idea anyone would take it and put sound to it and then put it up on the president's Twitter feed.

That's the question. Who did that?

It was a prank, nothing more. What the president's feed showed was not the original post posted here, but loaded up somewhere else and sounded added to it and then sent out to Twitter.

I think this is why they're accepting the apology. They're giving him credit to bring this to closer to the president.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: Because who did that? Did the president have somebody do that?

I think this is why this is being accepted. Because it makes no sense to me. Something's wrong. Something's wrong.

And only because -- and I want to take people at face value. But you need more than one time of letting somebody go of something like this.

JEFFY: Well, there has to be a first time.

GLENN: There does. There does. There does.

It was a prank, nothing more. I thought it was the original post that was made, and that's why I took credit for it. I have the highest respect for the journalistic community. And they put their lives on the line every day with jobs that they do, reporting the news.

Okay.

PAT: They do?

STU: In war zones.

PAT: I mean, war correspondence maybe. But that's a pretty small percentage.

STU: Yes. An exaggeration of the --

PAT: Yes. Yes. They're not the military.

GLENN: To people that troll -- now, this is the part -- this is the part that I think is important to read to your family, to sit down and talk about, was this right -- play the video. Was this right? Was this right of the president to post it? Was it right for somebody who made it? Was the media's reaction right?

PAT: No.

GLENN: And just -- just talk to -- just talk to your kids about the difference between right and wrong. Because our kids look at the internet as a game.

To people who troll on the internet for fun, he writes, consider your words and the actions conveyed in your message and who it might upset or anger. Put yourself in their shoes before you post it.

I mean, I remember saying things, doing things, and then, you know, a friend of the family or somebody else would say, "Hey -- that I didn't know what was standing there -- what would your mother say about that?" And you would immediately freeze and go, "Yes, sir." That's as bad as it got for us, was just saying it to four or five of our stupid friends and getting caught.

It's totally different now. What this guy said got somehow or another to the president of the United States.

Put yourself in their shoes before you post it. If you have a problem with trolling it -- if you have a problem with trolling, it is an addiction just like any other addiction someone can have to something. And don't be embarrassed to ask for help.

That's powerful to say to your kids. And that goes to all of the studies that we're reading about now, that talk about the hits that you get in your head every time somebody likes what you've said.

STU: Studies and South Park episodes. Both -- both scientific genres are speaking about --

GLENN: Yes. I believe the South Park episode actually more.

Trolling is nothing more than bullying a wide audience. Don't feed your own self-worth based upon inflicting suffering upon others online, just because you're behind a keyboard.

I think that's a tremendous story.

STU: Yeah.

PAT: It's a good apology. I -- I just -- I can't help, but think that this has been blown way out of proportion. I mean, you know, it's Trump doing a wrestling move on somebody with CNN on their face. It wasn't really CNN.

STU: What? No, it said it right on his face.

PAT: He didn't really do this. Nothing happened in real life. It's just a dumb little, what? Five-second video?

STU: Yes.

PAT: It's just -- it's so out of proportion. We've just lost all connection with proportion now.

GLENN: No, because we've lost all connection with decorum. We've -- I mean, guys if Barack Obama would have done that with a teabag over a guy's head, we would have gone crazy, and the media would have said nothing. We would have gone crazy. We would have. We would have.

PAT: Hmm.

GLENN: Yes, we would have.

STU: Yeah. Probably.

GLENN: If Barack Obama would have tweeted out something like that, and he had like a 9/12 Project and a Tea Party --

STU: I can -- I can imagine.

GLENN: Can you imagine? We would have gone crazy. We went crazy when he said, you know, and the car is in the ditch. And a bunch of Teabaggers, we're not going to let them drive. You'll put us in the ditch.

STU: Yeah.

PAT: A more exact example would be Fox News. Would we have gone crazy if it was Fox?

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

PAT: Maybe.

GLENN: Yes. Yes, we would have.

PAT: He trashed Fox all the time.

STU: And we went crazy. And we went crazy.

PAT: And it was him. Literally him, not just the president retweeting him. It was him saying Fox was --

GLENN: I know. I know.

PAT: So...

GLENN: But we had a problem with it.

PAT: Yeah.

STU: Yeah. That's --

GLENN: We had a real problem with it. And so it's not that this is a big deal. It's -- honestly, yesterday -- I should share this. I wrote something on Facebook, and it started with this premise, that the older I get, the less I hate things. You know, when you're a kid, you hate stuff. And your mom is always like, oh, no. You don't hate. You hate the actions that -- no, I hate the person, Mom. I hate them.

No, you hate their actions and the things that they do.

The older I get, the less I hate. The more I realize that things really, really matter, or they don't matter at all.

And the reason why this was going through my head yesterday was this tweet doesn't matter at all. It doesn't matter at all.

PAT: Right.

GLENN: We're reading into it what we want to read into it. And we are reading into -- or, we are looking at a presidency that this -- this happens -- Bush was the last real president that tried to represent both sides. He tried to represent both sides.

He never was, well, tell them to go to hell. He did say that about -- you're either with us or against us, it came to conquering al-Qaeda and evil. But I'm okay with that one, but some people weren't. But he never went out -- I mean, he met with Cindy Sheehan and everything else. The president did not reach out to the right.

PAT: He didn't meet with her eight times. So...

GLENN: Right. So he never -- President Obama never reached out to the Tea Party heads, tried to really talk to the people.

PAT: Nope. No.

GLENN: Instead, you know, the IRS and Teabaggers and all this stuff. And this president has just upped that game. So we're just seeing -- we're just seeing an evolution of the presidency that I don't like. I didn't like it in the last one. I don't like it in this one. Some people don't mind it in this one because of what happened in the last one. Some people are minding it in this one because they didn't see it happening in the last one.

We saw it in both. I don't like it in either. I think that's a good place to be.

But it doesn't matter. What matters are the little things.

You know, when I -- when I wrote that yesterday, I don't hate, there are just things that matter and don't. And it's funny because a lot of the stuff that the media focuses on, really, it doesn't matter to me. The things that matter are the things I used to hate when I was a kid. Sitting down at the dinner table and having dinner every night. I was always like, I got to go. I got to go. I got another thing. I got practice. I have this. I have that. I've got to go.

I hated sitting down at dinner. I I had a --

PAT: What kind of practice did you have? Like violin? What sort of practice did you have to get to?

JEFFY: I had the same question.

STU: Pinochle. Pinochle. Was it -- what kind of --

GLENN: Theater and choir. Yes.

PAT: Theater. All right.

GLENN: There are other kinds of practices, you know.

JEFFY: Well, that's why we were asking.

STU: He was just trying to clarify.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: So, anyway, had to go do stuff. Now, that's one of the most important things ever. It's just -- and I don't hate practice. I don't hate other things that you have to do. I just really love this. I just really love this. And I found meaning in the small things.

Which brings me to how I read this about Donald Trump and about CNN, you know, holding this guy hostage or whatever the hell is going on.

I don't care. That story, they can have it. They -- go further that story all you want. Here's what really needs to -- you need to know: The last paragraph of this three-paragraph apology, is one we should all be sitting down with our kids tonight and saying, here's news. I don't know what that means.

I mean, does any of this make you feel like it's right?

Now listen to what the guy said who made the original and was accused of this and did some really bad things. Look what he said.

Your self-worth does not come from this. It's addictive. Think of the other people on the receiving end, before you say really horrible things that you know you don't mean. Because it's real. Your voice -- just think of this lesson.

His voice, unbeknownst to him, made it to the president's desk. Don't tell me that you can't be heard in today's society.

Your voice is more powerful than you ever could imagine. And man's individual voice is more powerful than it's ever been since the creation of the earth and Adam first woke up.

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

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

The drone footage out of Gaza isn’t just war propaganda — it’s a glimpse of the same darkness that once convinced men they were righteous for killing innocents.

Evil introduces itself subtly. It doesn’t announce, “Hi, I’m here to destroy you.” It whispers. It flatters. It borrows the language of justice, empathy, and freedom, twisting them until hatred sounds righteous and violence sounds brave.

We are watching that same deception unfold again — in the streets, on college campuses, and in the rhetoric of people who should know better. It’s the oldest story in the world, retold with new slogans.

Evil wins when good people mirror its rage.

A drone video surfaced this week showing Hamas terrorists staging the “discovery” of a hostage’s body. They pushed a corpse out of a window, dragged it into a hole, buried it, and then called in aid workers to “find” what they themselves had planted. It was theater — evil, disguised as victimhood. And it was caught entirely on camera.

That’s how evil operates. It never comes in through the front door. It sneaks in, often through manipulative pity. The same spirit animates the moral rot spreading through our institutions — from the halls of universities to the chambers of government.

Take Zohran Mamdani, a New York assemblyman who has praised jihadists and defended pro-Hamas agitators. His father, a Columbia University professor, wrote that America and al-Qaeda are morally equivalent — that suicide bombings shouldn’t be viewed as barbaric. Imagine thinking that way after watching 3,000 Americans die on 9/11. That’s not intellectualism. That’s indoctrination.

Often, that indoctrination comes from hostile foreign actors, peddled by complicit pawns on our own soil. The pro-Hamas protests that erupted across campuses last year, for example, were funded by Iran — a regime that murders its own citizens for speaking freely.

Ancient evil, new clothes

But the deeper danger isn’t foreign money. It’s the spiritual blindness that lets good people believe resentment is justice and envy is discernment. Scripture talks about the spirit of Amalek — the eternal enemy of God’s people, who attacks the weak from behind while the strong look away. Amalek never dies; it just changes its vocabulary and form with the times.

Today, Amalek tweets. He speaks through professors who defend terrorism as “anti-colonial resistance.” He preaches from pulpits that call violence “solidarity.” And he recruits through algorithms, whispering that the Jews control everything, that America had it coming, that chaos is freedom. Those are ancient lies wearing new clothes.

When nations embrace those lies, it’s not the Jews who perish first. It’s the nations themselves. The soul dies long before the body. The ovens of Auschwitz didn’t start with smoke; they started with silence and slogans.

Andrew Harnik / Staff | Getty Images

A time for choosing

So what do we do? We speak truth — calmly, firmly, without venom. Because hatred can’t kill hatred; it only feeds it. Truth, compassion, and courage starve it to death.

Evil wins when good people mirror its rage. That’s how Amalek survives — by making you fight him with his own weapons. The only victory that lasts is moral clarity without malice, courage without cruelty.

The war we’re fighting isn’t new. It’s the same battle between remembrance and amnesia, covenant and chaos, humility and pride. The same spirit that whispered to Pharaoh, to Hitler, and to every mob that thought hatred could heal the world is whispering again now — on your screens, in your classrooms, in your churches.

Will you join it, or will you stand against it?

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

The great switch: Gates trades climate control for digital dominion

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

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

For decades, Americans have been told that climate change is an imminent apocalypse — the existential threat that justifies every intrusion into our lives, from banning gas stoves to rationing energy to tracking personal “carbon scores.”

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates helped lead that charge. He warned repeatedly that the “climate disaster” would be the greatest crisis humanity would ever face. He invested billions in green technology and demanded the world reach net-zero emissions by 2050 “to avoid catastrophe.”

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

Now, suddenly, he wants everyone to relax: Climate change “will not lead to humanity’s demise” after all.

Gates was making less of a scientific statement and more of a strategic pivot. When elites retire a crisis, it’s never because the threat is gone — it’s because a better one has replaced it. And something else has indeed arrived — something the ruling class finds more useful than fear of the weather.The same day Gates downshifted the doomsday rhetoric, Amazon announced it would pay warehouse workers $30 an hour — while laying off 30,000 people because artificial intelligence will soon do their jobs.

Climate panic was the warm-up. AI control is the main event.

The new currency of power

The world once revolved around oil and gas. Today, it revolves around the electricity demanded by server farms, the chips that power machine learning, and the data that can be used to manipulate or silence entire populations. The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch. Whoever controls energy now controls information. And whoever controls information controls civilization.

Climate alarmism gave elites a pretext to centralize power over energy. Artificial intelligence gives them a mechanism to centralize power over people. The future battles will not be about carbon — they will be about control.

Two futures — both ending in tyranny

Americans are already being pushed into what look like two opposing movements, but both leave the individual powerless.

The first is the technocratic empire being constructed in the name of innovation. In its vision, human work will be replaced by machines, and digital permissions will subsume personal autonomy.

Government and corporations merge into a single authority. Your identity, finances, medical decisions, and speech rights become access points monitored by biometric scanners and enforced by automated gatekeepers. Every step, purchase, and opinion is tracked under the noble banner of “efficiency.”

The second is the green de-growth utopia being marketed as “compassion.” In this vision, prosperity itself becomes immoral. You will own less because “the planet” requires it. Elites will redesign cities so life cannot extend beyond a 15-minute walking radius, restrict movement to save the Earth, and ration resources to curb “excess.” It promises community and simplicity, but ultimately delivers enforced scarcity. Freedom withers when surviving becomes a collective permission rather than an individual right.

Both futures demand that citizens become manageable — either automated out of society or tightly regulated within it. The ruling class will embrace whichever version gives them the most leverage in any given moment.

Climate panic was losing its grip. AI dependency — and the obedience it creates — is far more potent.

The forgotten way

A third path exists, but it is the one today’s elites fear most: the path laid out in our Constitution. The founders built a system that assumes human beings are not subjects to be monitored or managed, but moral agents equipped by God with rights no government — and no algorithm — can override.

Hesham Elsherif / Stringer | Getty Images

That idea remains the most “disruptive technology” in history. It shattered the belief that people need kings or experts or global committees telling them how to live. No wonder elites want it erased.

Soon, you will be told you must choose: Live in a world run by machines or in a world stripped down for planetary salvation. Digital tyranny or rationed equality. Innovation without liberty or simplicity without dignity.

Both are traps.

The only way

The only future worth choosing is the one grounded in ordered liberty — where prosperity and progress exist alongside moral responsibility and personal freedom and human beings are treated as image-bearers of God — not climate liabilities, not data profiles, not replaceable hardware components.

Bill Gates can change his tune. The media can change the script. But the agenda remains the same.

They no longer want to save the planet. They want to run it, and they expect you to obey.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Why the White House restoration sent the left Into panic mode

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Presidents have altered the White House for decades, yet only Donald Trump is treated as a vandal for privately funding the East Wing’s restoration.

Every time a president so much as changes the color of the White House drapes, the press clutches its pearls. Unless the name on the stationery is Barack Obama’s, even routine restoration becomes a national outrage.

President Donald Trump’s decision to privately fund upgrades to the White House — including a new state ballroom — has been met with the usual chorus of gasps and sneers. You’d think he bulldozed Monticello.

If a Republican preserves beauty, it’s vandalism. If a Democrat does the same, it’s ‘visionary.’

The irony is that presidents have altered and expanded the White House for more than a century. President Franklin D. Roosevelt added the East and West Wings in the middle of the Great Depression. Newspapers accused him of building a palace while Americans stood in breadlines. History now calls it “vision.”

First lady Nancy Reagan faced the same hysteria. Headlines accused her of spending taxpayer money on new china “while Americans starved.” In truth, she raised private funds after learning that the White House didn’t have enough matching plates for state dinners. She took the ridicule and refused to pass blame.

“I’m a big girl,” she told her staff. “This comes with the job.” That was dignity — something the press no longer recognizes.

A restoration, not a renovation

Trump’s project is different in every way that should matter. It costs taxpayers nothing. Not a cent. The president and a few friends privately fund the work. There’s no private pool or tennis court, no personal perks. The additions won’t even be completed until after he leaves office.

What’s being built is not indulgence — it’s stewardship. A restoration of aging rooms, worn fixtures, and century-old bathrooms that no longer function properly in the people’s house. Trump has paid for cast brass doorknobs engraved with the presidential seal, restored the carpets and moldings, and ensured that the architecture remains faithful to history.

The media’s response was mockery and accusations of vanity. They call it “grotesque excess,” while celebrating billion-dollar “climate art” projects and funneling hundreds of millions into activist causes like the No Kings movement. They lecture America on restraint while living off the largesse of billionaires.

The selective guardians of history

Where was this sudden reverence for history when rioters torched St. John’s Church — the same church where every president since James Madison has worshipped? The press called it an “expression of grief.”

Where was that reverence when mobs toppled statues of Washington, Jefferson, and Grant? Or when first lady Melania Trump replaced the Rose Garden’s lawn with a patio but otherwise followed Jackie Kennedy’s original 1962 plans in the garden’s restoration? They called that “desecration.”

If a Republican preserves beauty, it’s vandalism. If a Democrat does the same, it’s “visionary.”

The real desecration

The people shrieking about “historic preservation” care nothing for history. They hate the idea that something lasting and beautiful might be built by hands they despise. They mock craftsmanship because it exposes their own cultural decay.

The White House ballroom is not a scandal — it’s a mirror. And what it reflects is the media’s own pettiness. The ruling class that ridicules restoration is the same class that cheered as America’s monuments fell. Its members sneer at permanence because permanence condemns them.

Julia Beverly / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump’s improvements are an act of faith — in the nation’s symbols, its endurance, and its worth. The outrage over a privately funded renovation says less about him than it does about the journalists who mistake destruction for progress.

The real desecration isn’t happening in the East Wing. It’s happening in the newsrooms that long ago tore up their own foundation — truth — and never bothered to rebuild it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Trump’s secret war in the Caribbean EXPOSED — It’s not about drugs

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The president’s moves in Venezuela, Guyana, and Colombia aren’t about drugs. They’re about re-establishing America’s sovereignty across the Western Hemisphere.

For decades, we’ve been told America’s wars are about drugs, democracy, or “defending freedom.” But look closer at what’s unfolding off the coast of Venezuela, and you’ll see something far more strategic taking shape. Donald Trump’s so-called drug war isn’t about fentanyl or cocaine. It’s about control — and a rebirth of American sovereignty.

The aim of Trump’s ‘drug war’ is to keep the hemisphere’s oil, minerals, and manufacturing within the Western family and out of Beijing’s hands.

The president understands something the foreign policy class forgot long ago: The world doesn’t respect apologies. It respects strength.

While the global elites in Davos tout the Great Reset, Trump is building something entirely different — a new architecture of power based on regional independence, not global dependence. His quiet campaign in the Western Hemisphere may one day be remembered as the second Monroe Doctrine.

Venezuela sits at the center of it all. It holds the world’s largest crude oil reserves — oil perfectly suited for America’s Gulf refineries. For years, China and Russia have treated Venezuela like a pawn on their chessboard, offering predatory loans in exchange for control of those resources. The result has been a corrupt, communist state sitting in our own back yard. For too long, Washington shrugged. Not any more.The naval exercises in the Caribbean, the sanctions, the patrols — they’re not about drug smugglers. They’re about evicting China from our hemisphere.

Trump is using the old “drug war” playbook to wage a new kind of war — an economic and strategic one — without firing a shot at our actual enemies. The goal is simple: Keep the hemisphere’s oil, minerals, and manufacturing within the Western family and out of Beijing’s hands.

Beyond Venezuela

Just east of Venezuela lies Guyana, a country most Americans couldn’t find on a map a year ago. Then ExxonMobil struck oil, and suddenly Guyana became the newest front in a quiet geopolitical contest. Washington is helping defend those offshore platforms, build radar systems, and secure undersea cables — not for charity, but for strategy. Control energy, data, and shipping lanes, and you control the future.

Moreover, Colombia — a country once defined by cartels — is now positioned as the hinge between two oceans and two continents. It guards the Panama Canal and sits atop rare-earth minerals every modern economy needs. Decades of American presence there weren’t just about cocaine interdiction; they were about maintaining leverage over the arteries of global trade. Trump sees that clearly.

PEDRO MATTEY / Contributor | Getty Images

All of these recent news items — from the military drills in the Caribbean to the trade negotiations — reflect a new vision of American power. Not global policing. Not endless nation-building. It’s about strategic sovereignty.

It’s the same philosophy driving Trump’s approach to NATO, the Middle East, and Asia. We’ll stand with you — but you’ll stand on your own two feet. The days of American taxpayers funding global security while our own borders collapse are over.

Trump’s Monroe Doctrine

Critics will call it “isolationism.” It isn’t. It’s realism. It’s recognizing that America’s strength comes not from fighting other people’s wars but from securing our own energy, our own supply lines, our own hemisphere. The first Monroe Doctrine warned foreign powers to stay out of the Americas. The second one — Trump’s — says we’ll defend them, but we’ll no longer be their bank or their babysitter.

Historians may one day mark this moment as the start of a new era — when America stopped apologizing for its own interests and started rebuilding its sovereignty, one barrel, one chip, and one border at a time.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.