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

Author: Nazis Killed Disabled People First – Here's Why This History Still Matters

September 20, 2017
Staff

WRITER

They say that history repeats itself. It’s up to us to remember terrible atrocities so they never happen again.

Memoirist and poet Kenny Fries talked about the history of how disabled people were the first to be murdered under the Nazi regime on Wednesday’s “The Glenn Beck Radio Program.” Born missing bones in both of his legs, Fries knows what it’s like to face life with a disability.

The disabled were sterilized, used for experiments and killed even before the Nazis were in power; the Germans began abusing people with disabilities as far back as the 1920s. “Permitting the Destruction of Unworthy Life” by psychiatrist Alfred Hoche and the jurist Karl Binding was later used as a template by the Third Reich to exterminate disabled people.

“These feelings about disability are prevalent in a lot of cultures; I would say probably all cultures,” Fries said. “They just manifest themselves differently.”

People in the U.S. often don’t realize their own country’s history of abusing disabled people. In 1927, the Supreme Court ruled that compulsory sterilization of “unfit” people was constitutional, and the decision still technically stands. “Ugly laws” beginning in the late 1860s made it illegal for “unsightly or unseemly” people to be out in public; the last one was repealed in 1974.

Glenn Beck talked about his own experience of being a dad with a child who has disabilities.

“I wouldn’t wish this for my child. It’s difficult; however, her life has real meaning and real purpose,” Glenn said. When it comes to our society deciding which people are valuable, “we’re crossing some spooky lines,” he said.

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

GLENN: We're changing as a people. And I just want to drop a pin in the map. And I just want to say, we're going over a cliff. And as I learn from one of the Righteous Among the Nations in Poland a few years ago, and I've shared many times, the righteous didn't suddenly become righteous. They just refused to go over the cliff with everyone else. Don't go over the cliff. There's a -- there's a new survey out. We'll talk about it later, about how so many college students are now saying freedom of speech is not that important.

It is. Societies can go crazy quickly. In 1923, there was a survey of parents of disabled children. Would you agree, definitely, to a painless shortcut of your child's life after it's determined by experts that it is incurably stupid?

The results of this survey, this study were published in 1925. 73 percent of those -- of those adults who had children said they were willing to have their children killed if they weren't told about it.

Well, what do you think happened in Germany after these kinds of polls started to come out? And we're headed down the same road.

STU: Stat comes from an amazing op-ed in the New York Times called the Nazi's first victims were disabled. Comes from Kenny Fries. He's the author of not only that op-ed, but also the book In the Province of the Gods. And he joins us live from Germany.

GLENN: So, Kenny, first of all, you were born without bones in your legs?

KENNY: Yep. I was born in 1960, missing fibula in my legs, and spent the first four weeks of my life in an incubator. People didn't know whether I would be able to walk. Some thought I shouldn't be, you know, allowed to live. But luckily, my parents weren't amongst them. So, yeah. And then lived a pretty, you know, normal life. I was one of the first kids to be schooled in the mainstream school in Brooklyn, New York, in the 1960s. And, you know, went to college. And after college, I started to write about my disability experience. Which then, you know, much later in 2002, brought me to Japan. I wanted to look at what another country -- culture very different from our own looked at how they looked at disability. So I went to Japan. And the result was my new book In the Province of the Gods.

And I learned some interesting things there, Glenn. I was very surprised when I went to Japan that I was treated more as a foreigner, which I was, than I was as a disabled person. Whereas, in my own country, in the United States, I was always looked at as different because I was disabled. I kind of felt like a foreigner in my own country.

I also found out a lot about how central disability -- you know, central disability was to Japanese culture at the -- you know, historically at the same time where it was looked at as something shameful. And you talk about, you know, what happened with Germany. There was a story that happened in Yokohama, Japan, in the early 1970s, where a mother had a child with cerebral palsy. And she had numerous children. And in true Japanese fashion, you know, the husband was away a lot. And she was very overburdened by having the child. And she killed the child.

And though she was -- she was, you know, charged with murder and found guilty, the outcry was so great, that people felt so sorry for her, that she really got off without any -- any -- you know, any -- any punishment for killing her own child.

GLENN: Kenny, there was a story that came out in a couple of weeks ago, I think, about Reykjavik. How Reykjavik is becoming a country that will -- and it was celebrated. The -- this first city or country now that will be Down syndrome-free. Because they're doing early testing. And most people are aborting these children before they're born.

So Reykjavik now is Down syndrome-free birth. And I found that article really disturbing. As a dad of a child of special needs, my daughter has cerebral palsy, I wouldn't wish this for my child. It is -- it's difficult. However, her life has real meaning and real purpose. And I don't understand -- we're -- we're crossing some spooky lines.

KENNY: Yep. We are. And we can't forget that -- and, you know, as I pointed out in my New York Times article that the history of -- in our own country in the United States is not free of these things. Back in 1927 in the Buck v. Bell decision, you know, Oliver Wendell Holmes, that three generations of imbeciles was enough. And it was constitutional to sterilize, you know, disabled people. So that was one thing. In our own culture, we used to have what they called ugly laws. Where you were prohibited from being in public if you were disabled, if you looked different, if you looked, you know, deformed. And the last of those laws wasn't rescinded until 1974, Glenn.

GLENN: Was that -- because I had never heard -- I've never heard of the ugly law. I mean, I know about the human betterment society. And I know all about the nastiness of what we've done with eugenics. I think we were -- in some ways, we taught the Germans an awful lot.

But when it comes to -- when it comes to the ugly laws, was that one of those laws that just happened to still be on the looks like, you know, you can't tie your horse up at the supermarket. And it just wasn't removed?

KENNY: No. They started being passed in the 1860s, 1870s, in various cities across the country. Some states tried to pass them. And they weren't as successful as cities. So there were basic local odor ordinances that just basically said that you can't --

GLENN: That's crazy.

KENNY: Yeah, yeah. There's also a case in Germany that happened a couple of decades ago called the Frankfurt judgment, where people went on a holiday -- you know, they booked a holiday, and they encountered disabled people on their holiday. And they asked to be reimbursed for -- by their travel agents, you know, because they happened upon these disabled people. And they got -- they got -- they won in court.

GLENN: Wow.

KENNY: So these feelings about disability are prevalent in a lot of cultures. I would say probably all cultures. They just manifest themselves differently.

GLENN: So can we have an adult conversation here, Kenny? And it's not popular to do. And it will be taken and chopped up. But we have to have real conversations. Because we're dealing with really scary stuff.

I -- I -- as we're looking at health care, the argument is about, we just can't let people die. Et cetera, et cetera. But when a state is in control, it -- there has not been -- there's too many examples of, it just comes down to the money. And if you can't opt out of that, you know, and the state says, hey, you're not producing enough potatoes, I got to give this to somebody else who has a better quality of life and who are actually going to put into the system. And it becomes this horror show, versus, well, these people can't afford any health care. And so they're just going to die. Which is also awful.

I mean, how do you balance those two? In my mind, I would rather have the chance to opt out or opt in, than being stuck in a system where whatever they call and say, I'm sorry, you're done. You're done.

KENNY: Well, I mean, you know, to go back to Japan. You know, in Japan, I don't know if you know the movie Ballad of Narayama, where they basically take these small villages in Japan -- a while back, they would take their elderly, when they were go to just go to the mountain and to basically die alone in the mountain. Which I don't think is a good thing to do either.

GLENN: No. That's like Logan's Run, low-tech.

KENNY: Yeah. But the problem, Glenn is you -- in a society that disvalues disability, that misunderstands disability, that fears disability, you can't make a true voluntary choice. If, you know, people say that if -- if somebody -- when I get dementia, Alzheimer's, I don't want to live like that. It's not a dignified life. But what are they reacting to? They're reacting to a fear about the body changing. And if the disability experience teaches anything, it's about the fact that that's what our life is. Our life is change.

You know, I talk about this in, In the Province of the Gods. Because Japan deals with the idea of change -- which, ultimate change is mortality. That we're all, you know, not going to be here for a while.

So it's this fear that I think gets in the way of making a decision of what one would want to do if one was severely disabled, you know, Alzheimer's or whatever it is. And I don't think you can make a rational choice in a society that disvalues disability and disabled lives.

So what is dignity? The only dignity you could have is to die? I mean, is that dignified? I don't think that's dignified.

GLENN: What you're saying, Kenny, is going counter culture. I mean, I agree with you. But it's really going counter culture now. And I, as a Libertarian, I don't want to tell you what you have to do. But we are going into a culture that is wanting to make the decisions for people. And -- and based on quality of -- of life.

I -- I don't know where to -- how do we change this? How do we restart this human spark?

KENNY: We look at why we're afraid of difference. And why in this particular -- why are we afraid of disability? Why are we afraid of morality?

GLENN: So why are we? Do you have a thought on it? Why are we?

(laughter)

KENNY: Well, yeah, I have lots of thoughts on it. I think we're afraid because we're all afraid of death. For example, I was once -- I was once on book tour with an anthology called Staring Back, that I edited. And a very, very wonderful writer named Susan (inaudible), who lives in Chicago, was sitting at breakfast, minding her own business, and a woman just came over to her and said, "I'm so glad you're here." And Susan looked at her and said, "What? I'm eating breakfast. What do you mean I'm so glad you're here?"

And the woman said to her, "I'm so glad I'm not you," because she had a disability.

GLENN: Oh, my gosh.

KENNY: Yeah, and this woman had the need to go over and actually say that to Susan. It wasn't like, you know, she was in conversation with her. Susan was just minding her own business. And it's -- what's the -- I'm Jewish, I'm not Christian. So if I mess up the phrase, as for the grace of God, go I, yeah, if you look, throughout history, disability has been looked at through the religious moral model. Where the disabled person is looked at as either totally good, a saint, or evil, a devil.

And then we move to the medical model, where the only way to deal with disability is to basically kill it or cure it. When if you really look at it as the only way -- disability is really defined by the society that you're in, by the barriers that are put in your way. It's really the society that disables people, not the impairment itself in most cases.

I mean, if you ask anybody, you know, what's more difficult, being disabled or dealing with the barriers put in your way, they're going to say it's the barriers. So that's -- that's the dilemma we're in.

GLENN: Kenny, I hope that we get a chance to speak again. I thank you so much for your time. But I'd love to have you in and -- and to have this continuing conversation with you. It's one I think we desperately need as a society. Thanks.

How Anti-Trump Media Rhetoric to Blame for New Assassination Attempt

Spencer Platt / Staff, - / Contributor | Getty Images

Ryan Routh was the second person to be tipped over the edge by the corporate media’s propaganda, convinced that he would be saving democracy by taking out Trump.

We are just about 50 days away from the presidential election. Can we take the next seven weeks and try to refrain from assassinating Donald Trump? If you were wondering if we are living in a banana republic, rest assured: We are officially here.

Here is what reportedly happened during the second assassination attempt against Trump in Florida on Sunday. Early reports said that police recovered an AK-47 from the bushes outside the golf course where the president was golfing, as well as a GoPro recording device attached to the fence pointed out at the putting green. Why would you have a GoPro recording device unless you were planning on recording the assassination attempt so that your deeds would live forever?

If this doesn’t reveal the dangerous game our political elites are playing, I don’t know what will.

Is anything else recorded on that GoPro? Did the would-be assassin make a statement? Why would you record your deeds without recording a message for all to hear? I would like to know what was on the GoPro, if anything, because this guy obviously had an agenda.

A Secret Service agent was eagle-eyed enough to spot the barrel of a gun poking out from the bushes in the perimeter of the golf course. The suspected gunman was later identified as Ryan Wesley Routh. He had taken two backpacks and tied them to the fence on each side of where he would have been sitting. The barrel of the gun would have been right between them.

The media merely reported that he had ceramic tiles in his backpack and didn’t go into further detail. Perhaps they didn’t want to report on the fact that ceramic tile is what you put inside a bulletproof vest if you are expecting a chest shot. A bulletproof vest will not stop a high-powered rifle. However, ceramic tile will. That’s why he put ceramic tile in his backpacks, right where he would have been crouched with the gun. He was expecting a shoot-out.

How did the Secret Service agent see the gun? I don’t know, but I want to take it at face value and believe he was doing his job. The reason I say this is that I was with Trump on Saturday, and I posted on X that this was the very first time in 15 years that I have seen the Secret Service actually do its job. I've been railing about this for 15 years, and Saturday was the first time I thought the Secret Service was taking it seriously. There was no way you were getting into the event unless you were an invited guest, and there was absolutely no way you were getting close to the president unless you were supposed to.

So what happened?

I want to believe that the Secret Service was doing its job. The agent was allegedly scoping the perimeter a hole or two ahead of Trump when he noticed the gun barrel poking out of the bushes. The agent fired on Routh. Routh reportedly fled rather than return fire. He did not get a shot off at the president.

Somebody saw Routh run from the bushes and get into his car and had the wherewithal to write down the plate number and remember the car’s make and model. The witness called police immediately and relayed this information, and law enforcement captured Routh quickly.

Who exactly is Trump’s second wannabe assassin, Ryan Routh? His son, Oran, said his father hates Donald Trump as “every reasonable person does.” It’s quite telling that this comment was his immediate response after hearing that his father tried to kill the president. Yet Oran insisted his dad was a hardworking, decent, nonviolent person and that he’s never known him to own a gun.

Well, I don't think you know your dad, Oran, but you might be interested to know that in 2002, Ryan Routh barricaded himself into his office with a fully automatic machine gun and had a three-hour standoff with police. The FBI said Routh was in possession of "a weapon of mass destruction.” He went to jail — not prison. If you're caught with an automatic weapon without the proper permits, you would typically be sentenced to between 10 and 20 years in prison. Why was his sentence so short, and why didn’t he even go to prison?

His son also said his dad is a peaceful person. Did he know that he flew to Ukraine to recruit Afghan soldiers to join the Ukrainian war effort?

After he learned of his dad’s attempt on Trump’s life, Oran offered a revealing comment:

I hate this game every four years, and think that we all do, and if my father wants to be a martyr to how broken and disassociated the process has become from the real problems and practical solutions, then that’s his choice.

He went on:

"South Park" said it best. Every four years, we’re forced to choose between a turd sandwich and a giant douche, and it all stays f***ed in the same ways by different degrees, and we’re exhausted and embarrassed by it all.

So the ends justifies the means? That’s what I’m hearing here.

The media has been peddling this dangerous rhetoric depicting Trump as a dictator and an imminent threat to democracy. Ryan Routh was the second person to be tipped over the edge by this propaganda, convinced that he would be saving democracy by taking out Trump. His own son’s visceral reaction to hearing the news about his father was one of justification and understanding rather than outright condemnation. If this doesn’t reveal the dangerous game our political elites are playing, I don’t know what will.

Editor’s Note: This article was originally published on TheBlaze.com

Who is Ryan Wesley Routh, Trump's second would-be Assassin?

- / Contributor | Getty Images

For the second time in two months, Donald Trump survived an assassination attempt.

Fortunately, this time the former president walked away from the incident unharmed, as did everyone else involved. Is anyone surprised that as the election cycle heats up and Democrats and the mainstream media have increased their false and hateful rhetoric against Trump, another assassination attempt should be made against him?

The second would-be assassin, Ryan Wesley Routh, was allegedly deeply affected by the rhetoric and propaganda regurgitated by the media and evidently decided to take matters into his own hands. Delving into the turbulent past of Ryan Routh reveals a violent and unstable man with many radical beliefs and an impressionable mind. How Routh apparently managed to avoid any FBI/terrorist watchlists is just one of the mysteries surrounding the second attempted assassination of President Trump.

Here's what we know about Ryan Wesley Routh so far:

The assassination attempt

Photo of Routh's Sniper Nest

Joe Raedle / Staff | Getty Images

At approximately 1:30 p.m. on Sunday, September, 15th, the Secret Service opened fire on a concealed gunman who was hidden in some bushes along the perimeter of Trump’s golf club in West Palm Beach, Florida. The gunman was in a makeshift sniper's nest on the outside of the perimeter chain-link fence only a couple hundred yards from where Trump was golfing. He had been camping there for over 12 hours. After being fired on, the gunman ran back to his car and was quickly apprehended by the police, where he was identified as Ryan Wesley Routh.

After Routh's arrest, investigators discovered the sniper's nest built within the perimeter fence. Routh had hung two backpacks with bullet-proof ceramic plates inside on the fence with a narrow gap between them for his rifle to poke through. It is clear that Routh had come prepared for a shoot-out and had possibly taken notes from the last would-be Trump assassin, who was taken out by counter-snipers before he could finish his task.

His background

Routh at a pro-Ukraine rally Kyiv, Ukraine

Global Images Ukraine / Contributor | Getty Images

Routh is a long-time supporter of the Democrat party and a vehement Trump hater. He has written a multitude of deranged social media posts that express his loathing of the Republican nominee and parrot the rhetoric spewed by the mainstream media. Last year, Routh wrote a book urging Iran to assassinate President Trump for the "tremendous blunder” of leaving the Iran nuclear deal.

Routh is an outspoken advocate for the Ukrainian cause, and many of his social media posts are centered around this interest. He even made a trip to Ukraine with the bizarre mission of recruiting former Afghanistan troopers to fight for the Ukrainian cause. He returned home after six months without accomplishing his goal.

Shortly after the shoot-out, Ryan Routh's son, Oran Routh,, gave some personal information about his father. He claimed that he had no prior knowledge of the planned assassination attempt, and in fact, he had grown distant from his father after a falling-out. Oran did admit to sharing his father's "reasonable" hatred of Trump and claimed that his father was a peaceful, hard-working man. He also claimed that, as far as he knew, his father had only a few speeding tickets on his criminal record and had never even owned a firearm. This claim was quite contrary to reality.

Ryan Wesley Routh has quite the criminal record, which culminated in an arrest in 2002 when he fled the police during a traffic stop and barricaded himself in his roofing business with a machine gun. Routh was later convicted of possessing a weapon of mass destruction, but managed to dodge the 20-plus years in prison typically associated with charges of that nature.

His goals

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

While Routh's exact motives are still unknown, we can infer some things from his background.

It is clear that Routh has an extreme hatred of President Trump that has been brewing for many years, as expressed by his social media posts and deranged book. Routh is also not immune to extreme ideologies, as demonstrated by his strange Ukrainian escapade, and he is clearly no stranger to violence, as evidenced by his criminal record.

There is also the matter of his weapon of mass destruction conviction, along with many other crimes. How did he manage to avoid the lengthy prison sentence typical of convictions of such magnitude?

One thing is clear: Routh is clearly a disturbed individual who has been exposed to the onslaught of anti-Trump propaganda that has portrayed him as an embodiment of evil and an existential threat to the country and the world.


Presidential debate recap: The good, the bad and the ugly

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The second presidential debate was many things--some good, some bad, but one thing was made clear: this election is far from over.

If you were watching the debate with Glenn during the BlazeTV exclusive debate coverage, then you already know how the debate went: Kamala lied through her teeth and Trump faced a three-pronged attack from Harris and the two ABC moderators. This was not the debate performance we were hoping for, but it could have gone far worse. If you didn't get the chance to watch the debate or can't bring yourself to watch it again and are looking for a recap, we got you covered. Here are the good, the bad, and the ugly from the second presidential debate:

The Good

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Let's start with what went well.

While there was certainly room for improvement, Trump's performance wasn't terrible, especially compared to his performance in other debates. He showed restraint, kept himself from being too brash, and maintained the name-calling to a minimum. In comparison, Kamala Harris was struggling to maintain her composure. Harris was visibly emotional and continued to make obnoxious facial expressions, which included several infuriating eye-rolls and patronizing smirks.

The Bad

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Despite all that, the debate could have gone much better...

While Trump was able to keep his cool during the debate, he was not able to stay on track. Kamala kept making inflammatory comments meant to derail Trump, and every time, he took the bait. Trump spent far too long defending his career and other extraneous issues instead of discussing issues relevant to the American people and revealing Kamala's failures as Vice President.

Trump's biggest blunder during the debate was his failure to prevent Kamala from leaving that debate looking like a credible option as president. Kamala was fairly unknown to the American people and had remained that way on purpose, giving only one interview after Biden stepped down from the campaign. This is because every time Kamala opens her mouth, she typically makes a fool of herself. Trump needed to give Kamala more time to stick her foot in her mouth and to press Kamala on the Biden administration's failures over the past four years. Instead, he took her bait and let her run down the clock, and by the end of the debate, she left looking far more competent than she actually is.

The Ugly

If anything, the debate reminded us that this election is far from over, and it's more important now than ever for Trump to win.

The most noteworthy occurrence of the debate was the blatantly obvious bias of the ABC debate moderators against Trump. Many people have described the debate as a "three vs. one dogpile," with the moderators actively participating in debating Trump. If you didn't believe that the media was in the back pocket of the Democrats before, it's hard to deny it now. Kamala stood on stage and lied repeatedly with impunity knowing that the moderators and the mainstream media at large would cover for her.

The stakes have never been higher. With so many forces arrayed against Trump, it's clear to see that the Left cannot afford to let Trump win this November. The shape of America as we know it is on the line. Kamala represents the final push by the globalist movement to take root and assimilate America into the growing global hivemind.

The election is far from over. This is our sign to stand up and fight for our nation and our values and save America.

Glenn: Illegal aliens could swing the 2024 election, and it spells trouble for Trump

ELIZABETH RUIZ / Stringer | Getty Images

Either Congress must pass the SAVE Act, or states must protect the integrity of their elections — especially the seven swing states that could shift the outcome of 2024 by a hair’s breadth.

Progressives rely on three main talking points about illegal aliens voting in our elections.

The first is one of cynical acceptance. They admit that illegal immigrants are already voting but argue that there is nothing we can do to stop it, suggesting that it’s just another factor we should expect in future elections. This position shows no respect for our electoral system or the rule of law and doesn’t warrant further attention.

This election will be very similar to 2020. It’s like football — a game of inches.

The second talking point targets the right. Progressives question why Republicans care, asking why they assume illegal immigrants voting would only benefit the other side. They suggest that some of these voters might also support the GOP.

On this point, the data says otherwise.

Across the board, immigrants vote overwhelmingly for Democrats, regardless of what state they’re in. The vast majority of migrants are coming up from South America, a region that is undergoing a current “left-wing” experiment by voting for far-left candidates practically across the board. Ninety-two percent of South America’s population favors the radical left, and they’re pouring over our border in record numbers — and, according to the data, they’re not changing their voting habits.

The third main talking point concedes that illegal immigrants are voting but not enough to make a significant dent in our elections — that their effect is minuscule.

That isn’t what the numbers show either.

Texas just audited its voter rolls and had to remove more than 1 million ineligible voters. The SAVE Act would mandate all states conduct such audits, but the left in Congress is currently trying to stop its passage. Dare I say that the left's pushback is because illegal immigration actually plays in Democrats' favor on Election Day?

Out of the 6,500 noncitizens removed from the voter rolls, nearly 2,000 had prior voting history, proving that illegal aliens are voting. But do the numbers matter, or are they “minuscule,” as the left claims? Let’s examine whether these illegal voting trends can make a dent in the states that matter the most on Election Day.

The corporate legacy media agree that Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin will swing the election in November. By Election Day, an estimated 8 million illegal aliens will be living in the United States. Can these 8 million illegal immigrants change the course of the 2024 election? Let’s look at the election data from each of these seven swing states:

These are the numbers being sold to us as “insignificant” and “not enough to make a difference.” Arizona and Georgia were won in 2020 by a razor-thin margin of approximately 10,000 votes, and they have the most illegal immigrants — besides North Carolina — of all the swing states.

This election will be very similar to 2020. It’s like football — a game of inches. The progressives are importing an electorate to extend their ground by feet, yards, and often miles.

This is why Democrats in Congress oppose the SAVE Act, why the Justice Department has ignored cases of illegal voting in the past, and why the corporate left-wing media is gaslighting the entire country on its significance. This is a power play, and the entire Western world is under the same assault.

If things stay the status quo, these numbers prove the very real possibility of an election swing by illegal immigrants, and it will not favor our side of the aisle. Congress must pass the SAVE Act. If it fails, states must step up to protect the integrity of their elections — especially the seven swing states that could shift the outcome of 2024 by a hair’s breadth.

Editor's Note: This article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.