People Now Say ‘Unsafe’ When They Really Feel ‘Uncomfortable’

November 08, 2017

WRITER

Glenn shared some words of wisdom in an audio clip from Justice Clarence Thomas on today’s show. Thomas remembered how his grandparents lived, with a “calmness and a contentment about life.” They emphasized context, priorities, education, respect for others and wisdom for picking your battles.

The justice pointed out that people now live with a one-size-fits-all approach to life where people are expected to think the same and not say anything that makes others feel uncomfortable.

Ginni Thomas — Wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas — Visits With Glenn at CPAC

People have exchanged “uncomfortable” for the word “unsafe,” wanting a world where they are never confronted with ideas they disagree with. Glenn noted the distinction between truly feeling unsafe and simply being uncomfortable. Not being properly secured on an amusement park ride would be an unsafe feeling.

“What we used to call ‘uncomfortable’ we now call ‘unsafe,’” Glenn said. “I feel uncomfortable when somebody is challenging me.”

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

GLENN: Tonight at 5 o'clock, I'm going to go deeper into this. I started yesterday on the TV show, on what do we have in common? What is our unum? And showed you the problems that we're experiencing right now because we don't have an unum. E pluribus unum. From many, one. That was our national motto. We're now e pluribus pluribus. From many, many. It doesn't work. And now we're adding arrogance to it, on it's my way or the highway. I can kill you, if I don't agree with you.

Clarence Thomas said this recently. I want you to listen to this.

VOICE: When you think of people like my grandparents, these were people who had been through quite a bit and had a calmness and a contentment about life and they understood putting things in context, what was important, priorities, what battles are you going to fight today, what decisions are you going to make? What decisions you're going to make today will result in you being able to eat, those sorts of things. And the long-term. That these two boys, they were raising will be educate. And that they will have good manners and go to school and be polite to the neighbors, et cetera.

I think that today, we seem to think that everything has to be one-size-fits-all. And people can't have opinions that make us uncomfortable or ideas that make us uncomfortable or that we don't agree with.

GLENN: I want you to -- I want you to think of that. See, we've -- we have -- we're changing language. What we used to call uncomfortable, we now call unsafe.

I feel unsafe. No. You feel uncomfortable. Unsafe is when somebody comes into the office with a gun. That's when I feel unsafe. I feel unsafe when I go to a theme park and they haven't locked me in. I feel unsafe.

I feel uncomfortable when somebody is challenging me. That's huge. Because we can't even promise safety. There's no one that can say to you, you're going to be safe your entire life, unless you're in a bubble. And even then, there could be a fire. And if you're in a bubble, maybe the oxygen tanks blow up. I mean, I can't promise you safety, no one can.

But you should never want to be promised a lack of uncomfortability. I am only uncomfortable when I'm learning something new. For instance, yesterday, I was in a -- I was in a meeting, and I was very uncomfortable. I was very uncomfortable.

But I was very uncomfortable, because we were all learning something new. Never been there before.

Didn't know exactly how to handle it. None of us did. And we were all uncomfortable. But we will be better because we had that moment of uncomfortability. If we didn't have that uncomfortable moment, we would never solve it. It would just decay and get worse and worse and worse.

Your kids are uncomfortable doing their homework. They don't like it. You do it because you know it's important.

So the first thing that we have to -- the first thing that we have to change is the understanding of being unsafe and uncomfortable.

If somebody says to you, hey, I like that dress, and would you like to go out? That may make you uncomfortable. And say, that makes me uncomfortable. Don't do that anymore.

Somebody stalking you is making you unsafe. And they are very different. Learn that first. More in a minute.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

All right. So Clarence Thomas said, you know, a couple of things. And could we play this again, Sarah, please? This is Clarence Thomas.

GLENN: Okay. Stop. First of all, I want to start there. What he said here is, our grandparents were content.

And why? Because they had priorities. They put things in context. They put -- they knew what mattered.

This is why I've been on this kick lately in my own life. What matters most? Once you know and you make a list of what matters most, this is what matters most to me. This is where I'm headed. This is what I want to do.

Once you start doing that, oh, my gosh, your life changes. You suddenly have no tolerance for stuff that just doesn't matter. You're just like -- you want to have this conversation, go someplace else and have this conversation.

I'm working on this. Once we know -- Stu, what is the greatest gift from God? What would you say -- I thought of this yesterday. What would you say God's greatest gift to us is? Most precious gift.

STU: Probably queso, I would think. It's a tough line.

GLENN: Right. That was the first one that I thought of too. But now go to the second level.

STU: Obviously chips --

GLENN: Well, I'll help you a little. I'll bet a lot of people would say and I've said most of my life, forgiveness.

STU: Grace.

GLENN: Yeah, grace. The chance to start all ovary again is phenomenal.

But I don't think that's his greatest gift. Time -- time is our greatest, most precious commodity. Time.

And there's a limited amount of it. There's enough grace for the entire universe, for all eternity. But time is limited.

What are we doing with our time? We are not putting things into order. What matters most? We're like -- we are so ADD driven -- think of this. Where are we on ISIS today, talking about what happened in ISIS? We're not talking about it. Because we're currently talking about guns because of the shooting. Last week, we were all about ISIS. Last week, we got to be all about ISIS. This week, shooting, shooting, guns. First Amendment. Next week, it will be something else.

What the hell is wrong with us? We are, shiny object, shiny object, squirrel!

STU: Yeah. If you were super-duper into the NFL protests a few weeks ago, now that's ancient history. Was there any purpose in getting all fired up about that? I don't know.

GLENN: Nope. Nope.

STU: And this goes, every single week, there's another one of these stories.

GLENN: No. So we have to say: What matters most? For our time. But we have for look at that also as, in our society, what matters most?

What matters most? And I will tell you, that it is not getting rid of ISIS or getting -- or, I'm sorry. Getting rid of the Nazis or getting rid of Antifa. It's not getting rid of the Democrats or the Republicans. It's not getting rid of Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton.

Because another one will appear. Have you ever thought -- I don't watch the news anymore. And you're all keyed up from it from it.

And then you leave, what have I missed? And it's the same crap, different names. Have you ever noticed when you read the Bible, it's the same crap, just different names. You're reading this, and you're like, did these people not see what happened 500 years before? Did they not see?

They didn't see it. We're not seeing it. It's the same story over and over again.

So what matters most? We could do all kinds of things to get rid of guns. But is that what matters most?

We want to get rid of guns because we're against guns. No, I am for security. I am for the defense of the innocent. I am for the defense of the helpless. Now, that changes things. Because if I'm against guns, I can solve what happened in a Petri dish. Not actual solve it. I could solve what happened in a petri dish, by telling you that I'm going to make sure that that gunman on Sunday, isn't going to get a gun. Well, he's going to find someplace else. He'll mow a bunch of people down with a truck. You know, and if they're really committed, they'll fly a 747 or 727 into a building. They'll find a way. That doesn't solve anything. That kicks the can down the road.

What matters most is, I am for security and safety. I am for a -- a society that doesn't want to rip the throats out of each other. Well, now that's a different problem. That's a totally different problem.

That's going to make me now look at the shooter on Sunday and say, we have to look at mental health. We have to look at the divide between Christians and atheists. How can Christians and atheists -- what would be better in our country? If we were having a discussion this week about, how do we get together with atheists? You know what, see if we can get Penn Jillette on tomorrow. Penn, this guy was an atheist, what can the Christian community do to reach out, to atheists, and say, "We don't want to be those kinds of people, and I know you don't want to be those kinds of people. How can we break down some of these barriers?"

Wouldn't that do more for the safety of our nation and the -- and the calmness of the nation? Wouldn't that make us feel more safe? It's going to make us feel uncomfortable. But if you're not willing to be uncomfortable in thought, what you're saying to the world is, I got it all figured out, and it's my way or the highway. And that leads to Nazis. That leads to Antifa. That leads to rounding people up.

We have to be for things. I'm going to show you tonight at 5 o'clock, on TheBlaze TV, I'm going to take to the chalkboard, and I'm going to show you the things that people are saying now that we need to solve. We have to do something. And I'm going to show you that if you are against something, that solution will look really good. That solution will be like, yep. That could take care of it. I'm not going to guarantee it. But that could take care of it. But unless you're for something -- and these are really big principles that we should all be for, you will destroy those big principles. Because you're just going to pick them off, one by one, without even noticing.

I'll show you that tonight on the chalkboard at 5 o'clock, only on TheBlaze TV. Become a subscriber now at TheBlaze TV. That's TheBlaze.com/TV. And you can watch them all -- I think it's a buck an episode or something. And you can watch them all. But we just did -- last week was all about socialism. This week is kind of turning out to be e pluribus unum. What do we believe that will bring us together? Because if we don't bring ourselves together, we're toast. We're absolutely toast.

The Woodrow Wilson strategy to get out of Mother’s Day

Stock Montage / Contributor, Xinhua News Agency / Contributor | Getty Images

I’ve got a potentially helpful revelation that’s gonna blow the lid off your plans for this Sunday. It’s Mother’s Day.

Yeah, that sacred day where you’re guilt-tripped into buying flowers, braving crowded brunch buffets, and pretending you didn’t forget to mail the card. But what if I told you… you don’t have to do it? That’s right, there’s a loophole, a get-out-of-Mother’s-Day-free card, and it’s stamped with the name of none other than… Woodrow Wilson (I hate that guy).

Back in 1914, ol’ Woody Wilson signed a proclamation that officially made Mother’s Day a national holiday. Second Sunday in May, every year. He said it was a day to “publicly express our love and reverence for the mothers of our country.” Sounds sweet, right? Until you peel back the curtain.

See, Wilson wasn’t some sentimental guy sitting around knitting doilies for his mom. No, no, no. This was a calculated move.

The idea for Mother’s Day had been floating around for decades, pushed by influential voices like Julia Ward Howe. By 1911, states were jumping on the bandwagon, but it took Wilson to make it federal. Why? Because he was a master of optics. This guy loved big, symbolic gestures to distract from the real stuff he was up to, like, oh, I don’t know, reshaping the entire federal government!

So here’s the deal: if you’re looking for an excuse to skip Mother’s Day, just lean into this. Say, “Sorry, Mom, I’m not celebrating a holiday cooked up by Woodrow Wilson!” I mean, think about it – this is the guy who gave us the Federal Reserve, the income tax, and don’t even get me started on his assault on basic liberties during World War I. You wanna trust THAT guy with your Sunday plans? I don’t think so! You tell your mom, “Look, I love you, but I’m not observing a Progressive holiday. I’m keeping my brunch money in protest.”

Now, I know what you might be thinking.

“Glenn, my mom’s gonna kill me if I try this.” Fair point. Moms can be scary. But hear me out: you can spin this. Tell her you’re honoring her EVERY DAY instead of some government-mandated holiday. You don’t need Wilson’s permission to love your mom! You can bake her a cake in June, call her in July, or, here’s a wild idea, visit her WITHOUT a Woodrow Wilson federal proclamation guilting you into it.

Shocking Christian massacres unveiled

Aldara Zarraoa / Contributor | Getty Images

Is a Christian Genocide unfolding overseas?

Recent reports suggest an alarming escalation in violence against Christians, raising questions about whether these acts constitute genocide under international law. Recently, Glenn hosted former U.S. Army Special Forces Sniper Tim Kennedy, who discussed a predictive model that forecasts a surge in global Christian persecution for the summer of 2025.

From Africa to Asia and the Middle East, extreme actions—some described as genocidal—have intensified over the past year. Over 380 million Christians worldwide face high levels of persecution, a number that continues to climb. With rising international concern, the United Nations and human rights groups are urging protective measures by the global community. Is a Christian genocide being waged in the far corners of the globe? Where are they taking place, and what is being done?

India: Hindu Extremist Violence Escalates

Yawar Nazir / Contributor | Getty Images

In India, attacks on Christians have surged as Hindu extremist groups gain influence within the country. In February 2025, Hindu nationalist leader Aadesh Soni organized a 50,000-person rally in Chhattisgarh, where he called for the rape and murder of all Christians in nearby villages and demanded the execution of Christian leaders to erase Christianity. Other incidents include forced conversions, such as a June 2024 attack in Chhattisgarh, where a Hindu mob gave Christian families a 10-day ultimatum to convert to Hinduism. In December 2024, a Christian man in Uttar Pradesh was attacked, forcibly converted, and paraded while the mob chanted "Death to Jesus."

The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) recommends designating India a "Country of Particular Concern" and imposing targeted sanctions on those perpetrating these attacks. The international community is increasingly alarmed by the rising tide of religious violence in India.

Syria: Sectarian Violence Post-Regime Change

LOUAI BESHARA / Contributor | Getty Images

Following the collapse of the Assad regime in December 2024, Syria has seen a wave of sectarian violence targeting religious minorities, including Christians, with over 1,000 killed in early 2025. It remains unclear whether Christians are deliberately targeted or caught in broader conflicts, but many fear persecution by the new regime or extremist groups. Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a dominant rebel group and known al-Qaeda splinter group now in power, is known for anti-Christian sentiments, heightening fears of increased persecution.

Christians, especially converts from Islam, face severe risks in the unstable post-regime environment. The international community is calling for humanitarian aid and protection for Syria’s vulnerable minority communities.

Democratic Republic of Congo: A "Silent Genocide"

Hugh Kinsella Cunningham / Stringer | Getty Images

In February 2025, the Allied Democratic Forces (ADF), an ISIS-affiliated group, beheaded 70 Christians—men, women, and children—in a Protestant church in North Kivu, Democratic Republic of Congo, after tying their hands. This horrific massacre, described as a "silent genocide" reminiscent of the 1994 Rwandan genocide, has shocked the global community.

Since 1996, the ADF and other militias have killed over six million people, with Christians frequently targeted. A Christmas 2024 attack killed 46, further decimating churches in the region. With violence escalating, humanitarian organizations are urging immediate international intervention to address the crisis.

POLL: Starbase exposed: Musk’s vision or corporate takeover?

MIGUEL J. RODRIGUEZ CARRILLO / Contributor | Getty Images

Is Starbase the future of innovation or a step too far?

Elon Musk’s ambitious Starbase project in South Texas is reshaping Boca Chica into a cutting-edge hub for SpaceX’s Starship program, promising thousands of jobs and a leap toward Mars colonization. Supporters see Musk as a visionary, driving economic growth and innovation in a historically underserved region. However, local critics, including Brownsville residents and activists, argue that SpaceX’s presence raises rents, restricts beach access, and threatens environmental harm, with Starbase’s potential incorporation as a city sparking fears of unchecked corporate control. As pro-Musk advocates clash with anti-Musk skeptics, will Starbase unite the community or deepen the divide?

Let us know what you think in the poll below:

Is Starbase’s development a big win for South Texas?

Should Starbase become its own city?

Is Elon Musk’s vision more of a benefit than a burden for the region?

Shocking truth behind Trump-Zelenskyy mineral deal unveiled

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy have finalized a landmark agreement that will shape the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations. The agreement focuses on mineral access and war recovery.

After a tense March meeting, Trump and Zelenskyy signed a deal on Wednesday, April 30, 2025, granting the U.S. preferential mineral rights in Ukraine in exchange for continued military support. Glenn analyzed an earlier version of the agreement in March, when Zelenskyy rejected it, highlighting its potential benefits for America, Ukraine, and Europe. Glenn praised the deal’s strategic alignment with U.S. interests, including reducing reliance on China for critical minerals and fostering regional peace.

However, the agreement signed this week differs from the March proposal Glenn praised. Negotiations led to significant revisions, reflecting compromises on both sides. What changes were made? What did each leader seek, and what did they achieve? How will this deal impact the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations and global geopolitics? Below, we break down the key aspects of the agreement.

What did Trump want?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump aimed to curb what many perceive as Ukraine’s overreliance on U.S. aid while securing strategic advantages for America. His primary goals included obtaining reimbursement for the billions in military aid provided to Ukraine, gaining exclusive access to Ukraine’s valuable minerals (such as titanium, uranium, and lithium), and reducing Western dependence on China for critical resources. These minerals are essential for aerospace, energy, and technology sectors, and Trump saw their acquisition as a way to bolster U.S. national security and economic competitiveness. Additionally, he sought to advance peace talks to end the Russia-Ukraine war, positioning the U.S. as a key mediator.

Ultimately, Trump secured preferential—but not exclusive—rights to extract Ukraine’s minerals through the United States-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund, as outlined in the agreement. The U.S. will not receive reimbursement for past aid, but future military contributions will count toward the joint fund, designed to support Ukraine’s post-war recovery. Zelenskyy’s commitment to peace negotiations under U.S. leadership aligns with Trump’s goal of resolving the conflict, giving him leverage in discussions with Russia.

These outcomes partially meet Trump’s objectives. The preferential mineral rights strengthen U.S. access to critical resources, but the lack of exclusivity and reimbursement limits the deal’s financial benefits. The peace commitment, however, positions Trump as a central figure in shaping the war’s resolution, potentially enhancing his diplomatic influence.

What did Zelenskyy want?

Global Images Ukraine / Contributor | Getty Images

Zelenskyy sought to sustain U.S. military and economic support without the burden of repaying past aid, which has been critical for Ukraine’s defense against Russia. He also prioritized reconstruction funds to rebuild Ukraine’s war-torn economy and infrastructure. Security guarantees from the U.S. to deter future Russian aggression were a key demand, though controversial, as they risked entangling America in long-term commitments. Additionally, Zelenskyy aimed to retain control over Ukraine’s mineral wealth to safeguard national sovereignty and align with the country’s European Union membership aspirations.

The final deal delivered several of Zelenskyy’s priorities. The reconstruction fund, supported by future U.S. aid, provides a financial lifeline for Ukraine’s recovery without requiring repayment of past assistance. Ukraine retained ownership of its subsoil and decision-making authority over mineral extraction, granting only preferential access to the U.S. However, Zelenskyy conceded on security guarantees, a significant compromise, and agreed to pursue peace talks under Trump’s leadership, which may involve territorial or political concessions to Russia.

Zelenskyy’s outcomes reflect a delicate balance. The reconstruction fund and retained mineral control bolster Ukraine’s economic and sovereign interests, but the absence of security guarantees and pressure to negotiate peace could strain domestic support and challenge Ukraine’s long-term stability.

What does this mean for the future?

Handout / Handout | Getty Images

While Trump didn’t secure all his demands, the deal advances several of his broader strategic goals. By gaining access to Ukraine’s mineral riches, the U.S. undermines China’s dominance over critical elements like lithium and graphite, essential for technology and energy industries. This shift reduces American and European dependence on Chinese supply chains, strengthening Western industrial and tech sectors. Most significantly, the agreement marks a pivotal step toward peace in Europe. Ending the Russia-Ukraine war, which has claimed thousands of lives, is a top priority for Trump, and Zelenskyy’s commitment to U.S.-led peace talks enhances Trump’s leverage in negotiations with Russia. Notably, the deal avoids binding U.S. commitments to Ukraine’s long-term defense, preserving flexibility for future administrations.

The deal’s broader implications align with the vision Glenn outlined in March, when he praised its potential to benefit America, Ukraine, and Europe by securing resources and creating peace. While the final agreement differs from Glenn's hopes, it still achieves key goals he outlined.

Glenn's Show Prep