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

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.

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.

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 --

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.

What is the Secret Service trying to hide about Trump's assassination attempt?

KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI / Contributor, Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

This past weekend we were mere inches away from a radically different America than the one we have today. This was the first time a president had been wounded by a would-be assassin since 1981, and the horrific event has many people questioning the competency and motives of the supposedly elite agents trusted with the president's life.

The director of the Secret Service apparently knew about the assassin's rooftop before the shooting—and did nothing.

Kimberly Cheatle has come under intense scrutiny these last couple of weeks, as Secret Service director she is responsible for the president's well-being, along with all security operations onsite. In a recent interview with ABC, Cheatle admitted that she was aware of the building where the assassin made his mark on American history. She even said that she was mindful of the potential risk but decided against securing the site due to "safety concerns" with the slope of the roof. This statement has called her competence into question. Clearly, the rooftop wasn't that unsafe if the 20-year-old shooter managed to access it.

Glenn pointed out recently that Cheatle seems to be unqualified for the job. Her previous position was senior director in global security at America's second-favorite soda tycoon, PepsiCo. While guarding soda pop and potato chips sounds like an important job to some, it doesn't seem like a position that would qualify you to protect the life of America's most important and controversial people. Even considering her lack of appropriate experience, this seems like a major oversight that even a layperson would have seen. Can we really chalk this up to incompetence?

Former Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

The Secret Service and DHS said they'd be transparent with the investigation...

Shortly after the attempted assassination, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which oversees the Secret Service, launched an investigation into the shooting and the security protocols in place at the rally. The DHS promised full transparency during the investigation, but House Republicans don't feel that they've been living up to that promise. Republican members of the House Oversight Committee are frustrated with Director Cheatle after she seemingly dodged a meeting scheduled for Tuesday. This has resulted in calls for Cheatle to step down from her position.

Two FBI agents investigate the assassin's rooftop Jeff Swensen / Stringer | Getty Images

Why is the Secret Service being so elusive? Are they just trying to cover their blunder? We seem to be left with two unsettling options: either the government is even more incompetent than we'd ever believed, or there is more going on here than they want us to know.

Cheatle steps down

Following a horrendous testimony to the House Oversight Committee Director Cheatle finally stepped down from her position ten days after the assassination attempt. Cheatle failed to give any meaningful answer to the barrage of questions she faced from the committee. These questions, coming from both Republicans and Democrats, were often regarding basic information that Cheatle should have had hours after the shooting, yet Cheatle struggled with each and every one. Glenn pointed out that Director Cheatle's resignation should not signal the end of the investigation, the American people deserve to know what happened.

What we DO and DON'T know about Thomas Matthew Crooks

Jim Vondruska / Stringer | Getty Images

It has been over a week since 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks narrowly failed to assassinate President Trump while the president gave a speech at a campaign rally in Butler, Pennslyvania. Despite the ongoing investigations, we still know very little about the would-be assassin, which has left many wondering if the agencies involved are limiting the information that Congress and the public are receiving.

As Glenn has pointed out, there are still major questions about the shooter that are unanswered, and the American people are left at the whim of unreliable federal agencies. Here is everything we know—and everything we don't know—about Thomas Matthew Crooks:

Who was he?

What we know:Thomas Crooks lived in Bethel Parks, Pennsylvania, approximately an hour south of Butler. Crooks went to high school in Bethel Parks, where he would graduate in 2022. Teachers and classmates described him as a loner and as nerdy, but generally nice, friendly, and intelligent. Crooks tried out for the school rifle team but was rejected due to his poor aim, and reports indicate that Crooks was often bullied for his nerdy demeanor and for wearing camo hunting gear to school.

After high school, Crooks began work at Bethel Park Skilled Nursing and Rehabilitation Center as a dietary aide. In fact, he was scheduled to work on the day of the rally but requested the day off. He passed a background check to work at the facility and was reportedly an unproblematic employee. Crooks was also a member of a local gun club where he practiced shooting the day before the rally.

It was recently revealed that sometime before his attempted assassination, Crooks posted the following message on Steam, a popular computer application used for playing video games: "July 13 will be my premiere, watch as it unfolds." Aside from this, Crooks posted no warning or manifesto regarding his attack, and little other relevant information is known about him.

What we don't know:It is unclear what Crook's political affiliations or views were, or if he was aligned with any extremist organizations. Crooks was a registered Republican, and his classmates recall him defending conservative ideas and viewpoints in class. On the other hand, the Federal Election Commission has revealed he donated to a progressive PAC on the day Biden was inaugurated. He also reportedly wore a COVID mask to school much longer than was required.

Clearly, we are missing the full picture. Why would a Republican attempt to assassinate the Republican presidential nominee? What is to gain? And why would he donate to a progressive organization as a conservative? This doesn't add up, and so far the federal agencies investigating the attack have yet to reveal anything more.

What were his goals?

What we know: Obviously we know he was trying to assassinate President Trump—and came very close to succeeding, but beyond that, Crooks' goals are unknown. He left no manifesto or any sort of written motive behind, or if he did, the authorities haven't published it yet. We have frustratingly little to go off of.

What we don't know: As stated before, we don't know anything about the movies behind Crooks' heinous actions. We are left with disjointed pieces that make it difficult to paint a cohesive picture of this man. There is also the matter that he left explosives, ammo, and a bulletproof vest in his car. Why? Did he assume he was going to make it back to his car? Or were those supplies meant for an accomplice that never showed up?

The shocking lack of information on Crooks' motives makes it seem likely that we are not being let on to the whole truth.

Did he work alone?

What we know: Reportedly, Crooks was the only gunman on the site, and as of now, no other suspects have been identified. The rifle used during the assassination attempt was purchased and registered by Crooks' father. However, it is unlikely that the father was involved as he reported both his son and rifle missing the night of the assassination attempt. Crooks' former classmates described him as a "loner," which seems to corroborate the narrative that he worked alone.

What we don't know: We know how Crooks acquired his rifle, but what about the rest of his equipment? He reportedly had nearly a hundred extra rounds of ammunition, a bulletproof vest, and several homemade bombs in his car. Could these have been meant for a co-conspirator who didn't show? Did Crooks acquire all of this equipment himself, or did he have help?

There's also the matter of the message Crooks left on the video game platform Steam that served as his only warning of the attack. Who was the message for? Are there people out there who were aware of the attack before it occurred? Why didn't they alert authorities?

We know authorities have access to Crooks' laptop and cellphone that probably contain the answers to these pertinent questions. Why haven't we heard any clarity from the authorities? It seems we are again at the mercy of the federal bureaucracy, which begs one more question: Will we ever know the whole truth?

Who will be Kamala Harris' VP pick?

JIM WATSON / Contributor, Chris duMond / Stringer, Justin Sullivan / Staff | Getty Images

Over the weekend, President Joe Biden officially dropped out of the 2024 presidential election and put forward his endorsement behind his Vice President Kamala Harris.

Glenn recently predicted that Biden would step down due to the mountain of pressure within his party to do so. But now that we are here we are faced with an all-new line of questions, like, who will be the candidate on the Democratic ticket? Who will be their pick for vice president?

As of now, the answer to the first question seems to be Kamala Harris, who received the support of the president and several prominent democrats. It's still too early to call for certain, and Glenn doesn't think it's likely, but assuming Kamala becomes the Democrat nominee, who will her VP pick be? There are endless possible options, but there are a 5 big names that could prove beneficial to Harris' campaign:

California Gov. Gavin Newsom

Bill Pugliano / Stringer | Getty Images

Governor Newsom has spiked in popularity within his party since his taking office in 2019 due to his scathing criticisms of President Trump and other Republicans. Newsom has been a popular contender as a possible Biden replacement, and a future presidential bid seems likely.

His widespread recognition may be a boon to Kamala's ticket, but the California governor comes with a dark side. Newsom was famously nearly recalled as Governor in 2021, hanging on to his office by a narrow margin. He also faced criticism for his hypocrisy during the COVID lockdowns, attending large gatherings while the rest of his state was locked inside. There's also the issue that both Newsom and Kamala are from California, meaning that if they were to appear on the same ticket, that ticket would lack geographical balance and would potentially lead to a Constitutional issue that would force the duo to forfeit all 54 of the states' Electoral College votes.

Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro

Tom Williams / Contributor | Getty Images

Another prominent Democrat Governor, Josh Shapiro has also been floated as a potential VP pick. Governor Shapiro has become a viable pick due to his well-received performance as Pennslyvania's Governor. The governor has good support within the swing state due to his handling of the I-95 bridge collapse, the train derailment in East Palestine, which had effects on his state, and the assassination attempt on the former president last week. Shapiro would bring much-needed support from the swing state if he was put on the ticket.

That being said, Shapiro has little time to build nationwide name recognition before the DNC in August and the November election. This would be Shapiro's debut on the national stage, and he would find himself in the most unforgiving situation possible.

Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg

FREDERIC J. BROWN / Contributor | Getty Images

Former mayor of South Bend, Indiana, and opponent of Biden during the 2020 Democratic primaries, "Mayor Pete's" name recognition might be what Kamala needs on her presidential ticket. Buttigieg rose to popularity during the 2020 election due to his youth and status as "openly gay." Buttigieg has served as the Secretary of Transportation during the Biden administration for the past four years and has formally endorsed Harris.

Nevertheless, Buttigieg has some dark spots on his resume. The East Palestine train derailment disaster has besmirched his reputation as Secretary of Transportation. And while his youth may work in his favor when compared to the other elderly members of our federal government, it also means Buttigieg lacks the experience and prestige that other politicians enjoy.

Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer

Noam Galai / Stringer | Getty Images

Yet another governor of a crucial swing state, Whitmer was elected in 2018, two years after President Trump was elected, helping secure the state for the Democrats. Whitmer is known for her strong opposition to Trump, both during his presidency and his reelection campaign. Whitmer serves as co-chair for the Biden-Harris campaign and as vice chairperson of the DNC, which gives her influence over the Democratic party, something that would come in handy as a Vice President. Gov. Whitmer also established the Fight Like Hell PAC, which is dedicated to helping Democrats get elected and to stopping Trump by any means.

On the other hand, in a statement following Biden's resignation from the election, Governor Whitmer stated that her role “will remain the same.” It is also worth noting that if she were to be chosen as Kamala's VP, that would make their ticket all-female, which may foster some "woke points," but is politically risky.

Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear

Lexington Herald-Leader / Contributor | Getty Images

Andy Bashear has seemingly beaten the odds twice, having been elected and reelected as the Governor of Kentucky, despite the deep-red nature of the state. Beshear, who has moderate tendencies, would be a boon to the Harris campaign as he has a track record of reaching rural, typically conservative regions where Democrats tend to struggle. He is also known for his propensity to talk about his Christian faith and willingness to work with Republicans, which are traits that might help win over moderates.

But, like Gov. Shapiro, Bashear has very little time to whip up national support and recognition. He also is unlikely to be very much help for the Harris campaign in winning over important swing states.

Five times Glenn had J.D. Vance on his show and where he stands on key issues

CHANDAN KHANNAMANDEL NGAN / Contributor | Getty Images

We finally have an answer to the long-awaited question of who Trump will pick for his running mate, and it's none other than Ohio Senator and friend of the show, J.D. Vance. At the RNC in Milwaukee, Trump officially accepted the party's nomination as the Republican candidate and announced J.D. Vance as his running mate.

Glenn has had Senator Vance on the show several times to discuss everything from DEI to the Southern Border. If you are looking to familiarize yourself with the next potential Vice President, look no further, here are five conversations Glenn had with Trump's VP pick:

Why Biden Won't Stop "Racist" Government DEI Programs, But Trump Would

How Trump’s Trials Could HELP Him in the 2024 Election

Could THIS new Senate bill DOOM a Trump presidency?

MIDTERM UPDATE: What Republicans must do to WIN BACK the Senate

'Greatest risk of a terrorist attack in 20 years': Senator SLAMS 'atrocious' Biden move