Three Things You Need to Know - January 12, 2018

Constitution Not Needed: FISA Expanded

The government has just expanded its ability to unconstitutionally spy on you.

Happy Friday!

Yesterday, the House voted to renew the FISA surveillance program that collects American’s email, text messages, and photos without a warrant for another six years.

The bill was originally approved by Congress in 2008 under the promise of protecting America against big, bad terrorists.

But that’s a flawed platform to base legislation on. There will always be terrorists. We don’t need to violate American citizens rights in order to keep our country safe.

That’s why Justin Amash offered up an alternative bill, “The USA RIGHTS Act” which would have required federal agents to get warrants before searching through data that was secretly collected.

It failed.

Like Amash, Trump also seemed to be against the FISA extension, tweeting “House votes on controversial FISA ACT today. This is the act that may have been used, with the help of the discredited and phony Dossier, to so badly surveil and abuse the Trump Campaign by the previous administration and others.”

But that was at 7:33 AM.

He flipped his position literally two hours later by tweeting, “Today’s vote is about foreign surveillance of foreign bad guys on foreign land. We need it! Get smart!"

What leadership. Just like a politician to be on both sides of the issue.

The bill will now go to the Senate where it is expected to pass.

Rand Paul is already talking about filibustering the vote.

Thank goodness Rand is standing up for the rights of the American people.

Look, either we choose the Fourth Amendment or we don’t.

Either we choose the Constitution or we don’t.

It’s one or the other.

Why do our representatives continue to make the wrong choice?

The Increasing Ideological Slant of Social Media

Two-hundred million Americans consume their news via social media. That’s almost 75% of the country. The gatekeepers of information have evolved from the local paper, to radio, TV, and now social media.

I’m going to go against the narrative for a second. We’ve heard a lot lately about the power the internet has given to those trying to spread fake news. Whether it’s the Russians, Nazis, or radical leftists. They all have the ability to push their narrative more easily to whomever they want.

Here’s the flip side to that coin. Never in the history of the planet has so much information been available to the common man. In this day and age there’s simply no excuse for people failing to be their own fact checkers and truth finders. A bot tweeted meme should not be able to pull the wool over the eyes of thousands. If this were a hundred years ago sure, but this is the age of information.

So, with all that being said, why are social media platforms looking to block certain points of view? Project Veritas released an undercover video yesterday that showed Twitter employees talking about plans to filter a certain quote, “way of talking.” A Twitter engineer explained how the algorithm works:

“Yeah you look for Trump, or America, and you have like five thousand keywords to describe a redneck. Then you look and parse all the messages, all the pictures, and then you look for stuff that matches that stuff.”

He continues “I would say the majority of it are for Republicans.”

Now, I get censoring violence, but ideas are absolutely off limits. The real question now is, who is telling Twitter what type of “talk” is acceptable? In a leaked Media Matters memo, called their “Strategic Plan of Action”, David Brock’s progressive hit-squad detailed how they were going to operate in this new era. It mentions very specifically how they’ve already begun working with Facebook, Google and Twitter. Under the heading “Collaborating with Social Media Platforms” it states:

“Social media platforms need help in identifying vulnerabilities and crafting solutions. To this end, Media Matters will serve as their partner, speaking to them in their language of big data and encouraging changes based on what we see happening in the landscape.”

So who are the modern-day gatekeepers for information? Social Media companies like Twitter and now apparently, liberal progressive smear artists like David Brock and Media Matters are telling them what is or isn’t acceptable. Do your own homework. Be your own fact checker. It’s never been more important than right now.

No Best Friend for You!

Having a best friend is not inclusive. And that’s a huge problem.

An emerging trend in some American schools is banning kids from having “best friends.” Because it’s not inclusive enough.

Here’s a question – do we ever reach a point where we’re too inclusive? Just asking for a friend. Because I still believe in those.

Does inclusiveness just keep going until kids in a classroom are chained together all day, that way no one will ever feel left out? Everyone goes everywhere together. Lunchtime chained together. Recess, the same. Playing red rover or going to the restroom will be tricky, but hey, at least it will be inclusive.

Dr. Barbara Greenberg, a child psychologist writes, “There is, in my opinion, merit to the movement to ban having best friends.” She says, “The phrase best friend is inherently exclusionary.” She says it implies a ranking system, which creates conflict.

She goes on to explain that kids throw the “best friend” label around so irresponsibly that many end up with their feelings hurt, when they lose “best friend” status to someone else.

In some sane cultures throughout history, that’s called part of growing up.

This trend is bizarre on so many levels. But one of the main problems with the Left’s attempt to change language in order to change reality is that it never changes anything. Did the Left not learn anything from Jurassic Park? “Life finds a way.” Kids will always find a way to have best friends. And yes, some will get their feelings hurt. And yes, they will still somehow survive.

Patrick Moore was one of the founders of Green Peace. He helped grow the organization for several years until he started to realize that, “Science and logic no longer held sway.” The final straw for Moore came when his fellow directors decided Green Peace had to try to ban the element Chlorine, which they started calling “the devil’s element”. Moore asked if they realize Chlorine is actually one of the elements of the periodic table, and that adding chlorine to drinking water was one of the greatest advances in the history of public health. Yes, and they had to ban it. He left Green Peace and never looked back.

Having best friends is on the periodic table of life. It’s not something you could ban, no matter how hard you try.

MORE 3 THINGS

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

'Rage against the dying of the light': Charlie Kirk lived that mandate

PHILL MAGAKOE / Contributor | Getty Images

Kirk’s tragic death challenges us to rise above fear and anger, to rebuild bridges where others build walls, and to fight for the America he believed in.

I’ve only felt this weight once before. It was 2001, just as my radio show was about to begin. The World Trade Center fell, and I was called to speak immediately. I spent the day and night by my bedside, praying for words that could meet the moment.

Yesterday, I found myself in the same position. September 11, 2025. The assassination of Charlie Kirk. A friend. A warrior for truth.

Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins.

Moments like this make words feel inadequate. Yet sometimes, words from another time speak directly to our own. In 1947, Dylan Thomas, watching his father slip toward death, penned lines that now resonate far beyond his own grief:

Do not go gentle into that good night. / Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Thomas was pleading for his father to resist the impending darkness of death. But those words have become a mandate for all of us: Do not surrender. Do not bow to shadows. Even when the battle feels unwinnable.

Charlie Kirk lived that mandate. He knew the cost of speaking unpopular truths. He knew the fury of those who sought to silence him. And yet he pressed on. In his life, he embodied a defiance rooted not in anger, but in principle.

Picking up his torch

Washington, Jefferson, Adams — our history was started by men who raged against an empire, knowing the gallows might await. Lincoln raged against slavery. Martin Luther King Jr. raged against segregation. Every generation faces a call to resist surrender.

It is our turn. Charlie’s violent death feels like a knockout punch. Yet if his life meant anything, it means this: Silence in the face of darkness is not an option.

He did not go gently. He spoke. He challenged. He stood. And now, the mantle falls to us. To me. To you. To every American.

We cannot drift into the shadows. We cannot sit quietly while freedom fades. This is our moment to rage — not with hatred, not with vengeance, but with courage. Rage against lies, against apathy, against the despair that tells us to do nothing. Because there is always something you can do.

Even small acts — defiance, faith, kindness — are light in the darkness. Reaching out to those who mourn. Speaking truth in a world drowning in deceit. These are the flames that hold back the night. Charlie carried that torch. He laid it down yesterday. It is ours to pick up.

The light may dim, but it always does before dawn. Commit today: I will not sleep as freedom fades. I will not retreat as darkness encroaches. I will not be silent as evil forces claim dominion. I have no king but Christ. And I know whom I serve, as did Charlie.

Two turning points, decades apart

On Wednesday, the world changed again. Two tragedies, separated by decades, bound by the same question: Who are we? Is this worth saving? What kind of people will we choose to be?

Imagine a world where more of us choose to be peacemakers. Not passive, not silent, but builders of bridges where others erect walls. Respect and listening transform even the bitterest of foes. Charlie Kirk embodied this principle.

He did not strike the weak; he challenged the powerful. He reached across divides of politics, culture, and faith. He changed hearts. He sparked healing. And healing is what our nation needs.

At the center of all this is one truth: Every person is a child of God, deserving of dignity. Change will not happen in Washington or on social media. It begins at home, where loneliness and isolation threaten our souls. Family is the antidote. Imperfect, yes — but still the strongest source of stability and meaning.

Mark Wilson / Staff | Getty Images

Forgiveness, fidelity, faithfulness, and honor are not dusty words. They are the foundation of civilization. Strong families produce strong citizens. And today, Charlie’s family mourns. They must become our family too. We must stand as guardians of his legacy, shining examples of the courage he lived by.

A time for courage

I knew Charlie. I know how he would want us to respond: Multiply his courage. Out of this tragedy, the tyrant dies, but the martyr’s influence begins. Out of darkness, great and glorious things will sprout — but we must be worthy of them.

Charlie Kirk lived defiantly. He stood in truth. He changed the world. And now, his torch is in our hands. Rage, not in violence, but in unwavering pursuit of truth and goodness. Rage against the dying of the light.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn Beck is once again calling on his loyal listeners and viewers to come together and channel the same unity and purpose that defined the historic 9-12 Project. That movement, born in the wake of national challenges, brought millions together to revive core values of faith, hope, and charity.

Glenn created the original 9-12 Project in early 2009 to bring Americans back to where they were in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. In those moments, we weren't Democrats and Republicans, conservative or liberal, Red States or Blue States, we were united as one, as America. The original 9-12 Project aimed to root America back in the founding principles of this country that united us during those darkest of days.

This new initiative draws directly from that legacy, focusing on supporting the family of Charlie Kirk in these dark days following his tragic murder.

The revival of the 9-12 Project aims to secure the long-term well-being of Charlie Kirk's wife and children. All donations will go straight to meeting their immediate and future needs. If the family deems the funds surplus to their requirements, Charlie's wife has the option to redirect them toward the vital work of Turning Point USA.

This campaign is more than just financial support—it's a profound gesture of appreciation for Kirk's tireless dedication to the cause of liberty. It embodies the unbreakable bond of our community, proving that when we stand united, we can make a real difference.
Glenn Beck invites you to join this effort. Show your solidarity by donating today and honoring Charlie Kirk and his family in this meaningful way.

You can learn more about the 9-12 Project and donate HERE

The critical difference: Rights from the Creator, not the state

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

When politicians claim that rights flow from the state, they pave the way for tyranny.

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) recently delivered a lecture that should alarm every American. During a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, he argued that believing rights come from a Creator rather than government is the same belief held by Iran’s theocratic regime.

Kaine claimed that the principles underpinning Iran’s dictatorship — the same regime that persecutes Sunnis, Jews, Christians, and other minorities — are also the principles enshrined in our Declaration of Independence.

In America, rights belong to the individual. In Iran, rights serve the state.

That claim exposes either a profound misunderstanding or a reckless indifference to America’s founding. Rights do not come from government. They never did. They come from the Creator, as the Declaration of Independence proclaims without qualification. Jefferson didn’t hedge. Rights are unalienable — built into every human being.

This foundation stands worlds apart from Iran. Its leaders invoke God but grant rights only through clerical interpretation. Freedom of speech, property, religion, and even life itself depend on obedience to the ruling clerics. Step outside their dictates, and those so-called rights vanish.

This is not a trivial difference. It is the essence of liberty versus tyranny. In America, rights belong to the individual. The government’s role is to secure them, not define them. In Iran, rights serve the state. They empower rulers, not the people.

From Muhammad to Marx

The same confusion applies to Marxist regimes. The Soviet Union’s constitutions promised citizens rights — work, health care, education, freedom of speech — but always with fine print. If you spoke out against the party, those rights evaporated. If you practiced religion openly, you were charged with treason. Property and voting were allowed as long as they were filtered and controlled by the state — and could be revoked at any moment. Rights were conditional, granted through obedience.

Kaine seems to be advocating a similar approach — whether consciously or not. By claiming that natural rights are somehow comparable to sharia law, he ignores the critical distinction between inherent rights and conditional privileges. He dismisses the very principle that made America a beacon of freedom.

Jefferson and the founders understood this clearly. “We are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights,” they wrote. No government, no cleric, no king can revoke them. They exist by virtue of humanity itself. The government exists to protect them, not ration them.

This is not a theological quibble. It is the entire basis of our government. Confuse the source of rights, and tyranny hides behind piety or ideology. The people are disempowered. Clerics, bureaucrats, or politicians become arbiters of what rights citizens may enjoy.

John Greim / Contributor | Getty Images

Gifts from God, not the state

Kaine’s statement reflects either a profound ignorance of this principle or an ideological bias that favors state power over individual liberty. Either way, Americans must recognize the danger. Understanding the origin of rights is not academic — it is the difference between freedom and submission, between the American experiment and theocratic or totalitarian rule.

Rights are not gifts from the state. They are gifts from God, secured by reason, protected by law, and defended by the people. Every American must understand this. Because when rights come from government instead of the Creator, freedom disappears.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

POLL: Is America’s next generation trading freedom for equity?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

A recent poll conducted by Justin Haskins, a long-time friend of the show, has uncovered alarming trends among young Americans aged 18-39, revealing a generation grappling with deep frustrations over economic hardships, housing affordability, and a perceived rigged system that favors the wealthy, corporations, and older generations. While nearly half of these likely voters approve of President Trump, seeing him as an anti-establishment figure, over 70% support nationalizing major industries, such as healthcare, energy, and big tech, to promote "equity." Shockingly, 53% want a democratic socialist to win the 2028 presidential election, including a third of Trump voters and conservatives in this age group. Many cite skyrocketing housing costs, unfair taxation on the middle class, and a sense of being "stuck" or in crisis as driving forces, with 62% believing the economy is tilted against them and 55% backing laws to confiscate "excess wealth" like second homes or luxury items to help first-time buyers.

This blend of Trump support and socialist leanings suggests a volatile mix: admiration for disruptors who challenge the status quo, coupled with a desire for radical redistribution to address personal struggles. Yet, it raises profound questions about the roots of this discontent—Is it a failure of education on history's lessons about socialism's failures? Media indoctrination? Or genuine systemic barriers? And what does it portend for the nation’s trajectory—greater division, a shift toward authoritarian policies, or an opportunity for renewal through timeless values like hard work and individual responsibility?

Glenn wants to know what YOU think: Where do Gen Z's socialist sympathies come from? What does it mean for the future of America? Make your voice heard in the poll below:

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism comes from perceived economic frustrations like unaffordable housing and a rigged system favoring the wealthy and corporations?

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism, including many Trump supporters, is due to a lack of education about the historical failures of socialist systems?

Do you think that these poll results indicate a growing generational divide that could lead to more political instability and authoritarian tendencies in America's future?

Do you think that this poll implies that America's long-term stability relies on older generations teaching Gen Z and younger to prioritize self-reliance, free-market ideals, and personal accountability?

Do you think the Gen Z support for Trump is an opportunity for conservatives to win them over with anti-establishment reforms that preserve liberty?