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

Couple Whose Baby Has Same Genetic Condition As Charlie Gard Speak Out and Raise Glenn's Spirits

August 08, 2017
Staff

WRITER

A couple whose son has the same debilitating condition as Charlie Gard shared their story on radio Tuesday.

Russell Cruzan II and Michelle Budnik-Nap in Kalamazoo, Michigan, had no idea that their baby Russell would be born with mitochondrial DNA depletion syndrome. In a one-in-a-million coincidence, both parents carry the same gene, and their baby had a very small chance of inheriting the gene from both of them.

“[Russell and Charlie] both have mitochondrial DNA depletion syndrome; it’s just different gene mutations causing it,” Budnik-Nap explained.

Unlike Charlie, who was not allowed to leave the U.K. hospital that said he needed to die, baby Russell has options.

“We have the capability to get treatment wherever we want to right now,” Budnik-Nap said.

Cruzan and Budnik-Nap are working to get him to doctors doing experimental work with children who have this rare condition; one option is Boston Children’s Hospital.

“We were told there was no treatment and to take our son home to enjoy the time we have with him, as the disease typically takes children in early childhood,” the couple said on their crowdfunding page. “We have since learned that there IS experimental treatment out there that has shown GREAT success in others with similar conditions.”

DONATE HERE

GLENN: Charlie Gard is this incredible story. In case you missed it, let me just quickly recap. He just died. It was a week before his first birthday. Chris Gard and Connie Yates had a son born. Everybody thought he was fine. He was normal. And then symptoms started to have an onset. And because they lived with socialized medicine, the hospital said, "There's nothing we can do," even though there is experimental and somewhat successful experimental procedures done here in America.

The hospital wouldn't let Charlie go. They fought in court. By the time the court case was coming to an end. It was too late. Doctors said here in America, it's too late for him. There's no more time left.

The parents sued the hospital said, "Please, let us just take him home so he can die at home." The hospital took them to court on that one and fought against it and somehow or another won, and he died in a hospice center.

But he did die with the parents. And both of them said, "We took Charlie out for a walk in a pushchair in the hospice park." We dressed him in babygrow with stars on it. He looked so beautiful and innocent. This is according to mom, Connie.

The hospital staff popped in. Those last five hours just flashed by. A woman said the moment we dreaded would happen in the next five minutes. Chris and I were both crying. We laid on the bed with Charlie between us, each of us holding a hand. We were both telling him that we were there and that we loved him and how proud we were of him.

Charlie opened his eyes at that moment and looked at us one last time and then closed them and passed away.

This story, the beginning of it, as far as the diagnosis is playing itself out again in Kalamazoo, Michigan. Russell and Michelle are two parents of a four-month-old. Russell Cruzan III. They refer to him as Bubby. He was born just like Charlie. Great, cute, healthy, and then he wasn't gaining weight. He wasn't eating. And doctors couldn't figure it out. And then finally diagnosed with the same disease that Charlie Gard had.

We have Russell Cruzan and Michelle Budnik-Nab on the phone. Parents of Bubby. How are you guys?

RUSSELL: Good how are you?

MICHELLE: Good. Good.

GLENN: Very good.

Can you tell us, first of all, how is Bubby doing today?

MICHELLE: He's doing pretty good. He's taking a nap right now. He -- yep.

GLENN: Okay. When you first found out -- had you -- did you know who Charlie Gard was?

MICHELLE: Not originally, no. Very shortly afterwards, yes. As soon as we -- you know, we were trying to do research into his condition, which, you know, they -- they both have mitochondrial DNA depletion syndrome. It's just different gene mutations causing it. They're both encefalomyopic (phonetic). But as soon as we Googled, you know, his condition, of course, Charlie popped up. And we started looking into his story.

GLENN: Have you talked to the -- Charlie's parents?

MICHELLE: We did. We did originally when we first found out, me and Connie talked a lot back and forth. But obviously things have been very overwhelming for them. And, yeah, they're quite busy.

GLENN: So hopefully you were going to tell me that things are quite different here in America than they are overseas. Can you tell me about --

MICHELLE: So far, yeah, we have definitely found that things are quite different. We have the capability to get treatment wherever we want to right now. We've been inpatient at our local hospital a few times, and we love them.

And, you know, if we think that he needs to go somewhere else, or he thinks -- or, yeah, he needs to go somewhere else, and they're very willing to work with us to make that happen. Also, we're just -- we're free to make an appointment wherever we want, for him to see any specialist that we want.

GLENN: Have you reached out to the specialist that the Gard parents were trying to have take care of Charlie?

RUSSELL: Yes, yes, yes, we have. And he doesn't believe treatment of that sort at this time would do any good at all.

GLENN: So does that mean that it might later, or it just doesn't apply to yourself?

MICHELLE: As far as we know, it doesn't apply to -- to Russell. We're still hoping to look at it as an option. Right now, we are pursuing BCA treatment with Boston's Children's Hospital. We're hoping that he can be considered for a -- for a trial of the medication there.

GLENN: So what is the prognosis, Russell?

MICHELLE: The prognosis, I mean, with no treatment, the prognosis is pretty grim. With the prospect of treatment, we -- we really don't know because it's all experimental. But we're hoping that it could help preserve the healthy mitochondria that he has and help keep some of the toxic levels in his body down, the lactic acid and ammonia down, because those are kind of our number one dangers right now.

GLENN: So what is this? How did it first manifest? And what is the body doing?

RUSSELL: Basically, how it all starts is me and his mother are both carriers of a gene, a chromosome that's bad. Being one bad, one good.

GLENN: Did you know that in advance?

RUSSELL: No. The only way you can figure that out is through genetic testing, which nobody gets genetic testing unless there's an issue.

GLENN: Okay. Yes.

RUSSELL: But -- so we're both carriers for a bad chromosome, and we have a good chromosome. And then we both have the same bad chromosome, just a different mutation of it. So that's how he got it. There's like a one in a million chance that two people meet each other that they're like that. And then it's still like, oh, a 25 percent chance that one of your kids can get it.

GLENN: So when it started to manifest -- because I've seen pictures of Baby Russell. And, you know, he looks healthy. Like he's supposed to. A little porky. A little fat. You know, babies are supposed to.

And then I've seen recent pictures, and he's thin. Is that how it first -- you first noticed, was he wasn't eating? Or?

RUSSELL: Well, he actually -- he started out thin.

MICHELLE: Yeah.

RUSSELL: And then he just got -- he's porky now.

GLENN: Oh, so I've seen the pictures in reverse. Okay.

MICHELLE: When the disease originally started manifesting itself, it manifested as failure to thrive first. He wasn't eating on his own. We started with the NG tube. Now he has a G tube placed in his stomach, and that has really helped him thrive and get to the point to where he's a nice, chubby, plump little guy now.

GLENN: So do you guys have insurance?

RUSSELL: Yes, I carry insurance through work. And we also have Medicaid through the state.

GLENN: So does your insurance cover this?

RUSSELL: They have started to pay something.

(chuckling)

We're working on the treatment. That's what they're working on. Prior authorization for us to go there to be seen. And then the work on -- it all depends on how it's billed. If it's billed as experimental, more than likely not.

GLENN: Can I ask -- you don't have to tell me: Can I ask what insurance carrier it is?

RUSSELL: Yes, I carry Priority Health.

GLENN: I'm sure Priority Health wants to do the right thing and help you out.

RUSSELL: From everybody I've talked to, they're doing pretty good so far. They're trying.

MICHELLE: They're trying.

GLENN: Yeah. The -- the Medicaid is kicking in, for what?

RUSSELL: Anything state-wise. In-state. They've said they don't pay out of state.

MICHELLE: But they're being helpful -- very helpful right now picking up copays, deductibles.

RUSSELL: I haven't had to pay anything out-of-pocket yet.

GLENN: Good for you. What have you -- what do you guys do for a living?

RUSSELL: I -- well, she's a stay-at-home mother now because he requires so much work.

GLENN: Yeah. Right.

RUSSELL: But I do -- I'm in construction.

GLENN: And how is business?

RUSSELL: We're busy. We're busy. I don't know if I'm getting 60, 70 hours a week.

GLENN: Good. Good.

Is there a way to donate if people wanted to help, you know, cover any of the bills as they begin to mount up?

RUSSELL: Yes. There's a YouCaring. It's -- and if you go on YouCaring, you can just search up Bubby or Russell Cruzan. Russell Cruzan should get you directly to it.

GLENN: Okay.

MICHELLE: Right now, we're fundraising to cover some of the travel costs to Boston. If we are accepted into -- into the treatment trial, there would multiple trips to Boston. So, you know, those travel costs add up very quickly. We live in Michigan.

GLENN: You guys sound -- I mean, I have to tell you, I read about your story a couple of weeks ago. And so I've got about you. And as a family, we have prayed for you all. And I thought to myself, you know, gosh if -- if -- if my son was diagnosed with something that Charlie Gard had, at the time of the Charlie Gard story, I think I would lose my mind. And you guys both seem happy.

MICHELLE: We lose it all the time.

RUSSELL: Yeah, we do.

MICHELLE: We put -- we put on this brave face. I'm used to putting the brave face on for the specialists because I can't -- you know, when a specialist, doctor is trying to tell me what's going on with my son, you know, I can't be emotional. I have to put on my brave face and say, "Okay. Tell me what I need to do. Tell me what needs to be done to keep him as healthy as possible." So we try.

GLENN: And, Russell, how are you doing it?

RUSSELL: I look at my other three kids and see how they react. And I don't want them to be upset by seeing me upset. So, I mean, it's pretty much the other -- to see how strong he is. He's this -- I mean, he's the strongest person I've ever seen in my life.

MICHELLE: He's our superhero.

RUSSELL: So everything he's been through. And he still puts a smile on his face and laughs. That's how I do it.

MICHELLE: We cry in the shower.

(laughter)

Yeah.

GLENN: Hmm.

What a -- what a great couple. And thanks, strangely, for lifting my spirits. Thanks for making me feel good in talking to you both. We will keep you in our prayers. And please check in with us if there's something that you need or something we can do to help. Please feel free to call. You have our -- you have our -- all of our digits and our email. So you can get a hold of us.

If you would like to get involved and help the family, you can go to youcaring.com. If this just helps you remember, Bubby. B-U-B-B-Y. Bubby.

STU: We tweeted out from @worldofStu. It's up there. We're going to tweet it from @GlennBeck as well.

GLENN: Yep. And we will have it at GlennBeck.com. But please, if you -- if you can, help the family not have to worry about any kind of expenses so that they can do what they have to do. Guys, thank you so much. God bless.

MICHELLE: Thank you.

RUSSELL: Thank you.

GLENN: Isn't that great?

STU: You're right. Their attitude is like so positive. They are putting on a brave face if that is --

GLENN: They said -- you know, there's a difference between putting on a brave face and finding your way to joy.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: They sound to me like it's not a brave face. It is -- and maybe it was just nervous laughter. Maybe that's what it was. But it seems to me that they have found a way to joy. And, boy, that's hard to do. Hard to do. God bless them.

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

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

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

What Lee actually proposed

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

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

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

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

The Biden land-grab

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

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

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

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

  Smith Collection/Gado / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

American families pay the price

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

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

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

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

Divide and conquer

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

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


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

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

MANAURE QUINTERO / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

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

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

  

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

Ban engagement-optimized AI companions for kids

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

Establish basic liability laws

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

Pass increased whistleblower protections

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

Prevent AI from having legal rights

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

Oppose the state moratorium on AI 

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

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

Tasos Katopodis / Stringer | Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Operation Midnight Hammer

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

   USAF / Handout | Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

What comes next

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

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

That would be catastrophic.

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

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

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

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

Now we pray

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

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

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


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

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

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rising Islamism

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

   Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

 

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

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

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

Blending the worst ideologies

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

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

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

Call out radicalism

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

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

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.