Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
Shop
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

Here’s the Cognitive Assessment Test That Trump Took – What’s Your Score?

January 18, 2018
Staff

WRITER

It’s customary for the sitting president to undergo a physical exam each year, but President Donald Trump decided to add another test to the mix: one that checks your cognitive abilities.

The White House medical team selected the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), a 30-point test that screens for memory loss and dementia. The unusual decision may have been influenced by critics’ accusations that Trump is not mentally fit to be president.

On today’s show, Glenn and Stu looked at the test, and Glenn had “Dr. Stu” check out his mental health. Can Glenn identify a lion, draw a cube and remember five words? Listen to the full clip (above) to find out, and then check out the test for yourself.

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

GLENN: So the president had a -- had some -- a series of tests done on him yesterday. And his doctor said he is as strong as an ox. Now, this is not the crazy -- remember the doctor he had on that was like our movie doctor. You're like Dr. What's-his-face from Back to the Future. I would like a real doctor, please.

STU: Oh, yeah. This was during the campaign, you mean? And they were like, yeah, and he's super mega healthy.

Wait. Mega. Did you use the word mega as a physician? It was that type of thing.

GLENN: Yeah. I know you were from Columbia. But he just looked crazy.

STU: And they talked to him. And he didn't really examine him. And he was using strange words. He was using Trump words. It looked like Trump gave him the script to write. And no one, I don't think, really believed he wasn't healthy. But there was speculation in the media for sure --

GLENN: Yeah. I wanted the doctor questioned. Not because I didn't think Trump was healthy. Just because I thought he was nuts.

STU: Right.

GLENN: So yesterday, the president's results -- his test results were released to the press. And first, let's talk about his physical health. Here's what his doctor said.

VOICE: How a guy who eats McDonald's and fried chicken and all those Diet Cokes and never exercises is in as good a shape as you say he's in.

VOICE: It's called genetics. I don't know. Some people have just, you know, great genes.

I told the president that if he had a healthier diet over the last 20 years, he might live to be 200 years old. I don't know.

He has incredible -- he has incredible genes, I just assume, you know. If I -- if I didn't watch what I ate, I wouldn't have the cardiac and overall health that he has.

GLENN: So he is in good, physical health. And you got to believe Donald Trump loves the gene talk.

STU: Oh, yeah. He's big on that.

GLENN: Yeah, he's big on the racehorse theory. Hey, we breed racehorses. Kind of a 1910 progressive eugenics kind of thing. He is all in, and so is the whole family.

STU: I love the, how can a guy eat McDonald's and be healthy? You can actually -- you know what, almost everyone in America eats McDonald's at times. You can be healthy.

It's funny, seeing people that are like, well, yes, I put butter in my coffee, but how can this man eat McDonald's? Well, of course nine stacks of avocado toast are completely fine, along with coconut butter. But how dare he have a piece of chicken.

GLENN: And who doesn't understand the genetics thing, that there are people who can smoke, drink, and eat sticks of butter, and live to 120?

STU: Yeah. Is it a good idea? Does it hurt your percentage chance to live longer? Yes. That does not mean that eating these things -- especially if you eat them without a ridiculous amount, that doesn't mean you're going to be unhealthy at all.

And then they have to throw the, how can he have all these Diet Cokes? I don't know. Maybe him eating zero-calorie beverages is the reason he can have McDonald's. Is that possible?

Brainiac. I hate that stuff. But he did pass the test and did pretty well. I think you could look at him and say, wow, he --

GLENN: I would hope --

STU: You're impressed by --

GLENN: I would hope that I would be as healthy as he is when I'm his age.

STU: Or now.

GLENN: Or now. I would take it five years ago.

(laughter)

STU: Retroactively trying to match a 73-year-old's health. That's good.

GLENN: Yep. I don't have the genetic predisposition to long life.

(laughter)

STU: That's not good.

GLENN: No.

STU: The other thing was -- by the way, we also found out today, apparently Sanjay Gupta, who is -- you know, you might think of him as a TV doctor. But they wanted him to be a high role, I can't remember was it? Attorney general?

GLENN: No, I think it was surgeon general.

STU: Yeah. For the Obama administration. He was their first choice. And he wound up turning that down. Apparently was saying, if you look at the numbers, that guy has heart disease.

Wait a minute. His doctor didn't say he had heart disease. But Sanjay, looking at the numbers, has been able to take the code and suck out heart disease from these numbers, apparently.

So we'll get more on that as that develops.

GLENN: Well, how old is he? Seventy-two? Seventy-three?

STU: Seventy-three, something like that, yeah.

GLENN: I mean, if you're 73 and you're living like Donald Trump, you know, I think you kind of -- you're kind of like, "A little heart disease isn't bad for me."

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: Seventy-three, 75 years old, I'm thinking, oh, I only have a little heart disease. Good.

STU: Exactly. You think the guy has been able to do whatever he wants for how many years. He owns a lot of the best restaurants in America.

GLENN: He never exercises.

STU: Doesn't exercise.

GLENN: He's my hero. He never exercises.

He eats whatever he wants. And he's 4 pounds heavier than he was a year ago?

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: God bless him.

STU: Especially going into that job, I mean, I would put on 60 in a week.

GLENN: We would have to have soup makers on constant standby.

STU: At some point, you just start building them with release flaps, where you can just expand --

GLENN: Oh, yeah. Just staple. Staple the sides together because you'll need the extra material later.

STU: Yeah, make it for someone who weighs 600, and I'll grow into it. I promise.

GLENN: That's right. That's right.

STU: But the other big thing about this was people wanted him to take a cognitive test.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: And to test his brain. Because everybody thinks in the media, apparently, that he is just mentally unfit to be president. Now, mentally unfit to be president is completely different than I don't like his policies, I don't like his character, I don't like his demeanor. Like those are all things that the media obviously doesn't like. But it's completely different than whether he is mentally capable of thinking -- you know, thinking in a normal, human way.

GLENN: I think there are times that he is mentally lazy. Intentionally. He just hasn't thought things through. Just hasn't -- you know, I think he has changed from the personality that if you go back and look at the videotapes in the 1980s and '90s, but I don't think that's a decline in his mental health. I think that's just a -- you know, I haven't thought about it in a while. I'm 73 years old. I'm a little lazy on that.

STU: Right. But none of that stuff you would be able to detect in a mental test. So he took a mental test for the first time ever, apparently. No president has ever had to take one of these tests before. And it wasn't because the doctor was like, well, I'm unsure of this guy. Apparently Trump wanted it done so he could prove that he was okay.

GLENN: Yeah. Well, when you have people around you going, I don't know. The Twenty-Fifth Amendment, we could get him out of here. I'm taking a mental test.

STU: Yeah, why not? Let's prove that -- and that's obviously a ridiculous media narrative, right? You know, the idea that he is incapable of thinking like a normal human being is completely absurd.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: We do have the test, an example of the test.

GLENN: Yeah. So we thought -- because, you know, when you're given a mental test, I don't know, the president passed it. Could you pass it? We'll give you the mental test they gave the president in a minute.

GLENN: So the president passed his mental agility test. And, you know, they can't use the 25th Amendment against him because he's passed a -- you know, a sanity test, or a mental agility test. I will tell you, I have had these tests before. I've had it at Columbia, and I've had it at the Mayo Clinic. Because for a while, I was testing like I had severe concussions. And they couldn't figure out what was going on. And we were afraid that maybe I was going into early Alzheimer's or something. And so I had these tests.

And they're kind of spooky in a way. I mean, they're -- they're tough. And, you know, Stu won't let me see the paper now, so I'm a little nervous now.

STU: Call me doctor, please.

GLENN: Well, no, I'm the doctor.

STU: Call me Dr. Stu for today.

GLENN: Okay. Okay. Dr. Stu.

STU: Because you're right, I won't let you see it in advance. That will not give us the results we're looking for. I will say this, looking at this test, it is not a test of let's do a deep dive and search to see if there's anything wrong with your thought process.

It's more of a test that you would give someone if you highly suspect they have dementia or they just had a stroke and you want to be able to check whether they're able to complete basic human thought. Right?

It's not a -- it's not a type of test that you're going to read into and be like, oh, my gosh.

You know, it doesn't say --

GLENN: Do you have the whole test? Because the whole test, at least the one I took, took at least an hour.

STU: Yeah. This is one page. We can do it quickly.

GLENN: Oh. Okay. Okay.

STU: It's a basic test though. Your uncle has a stroke. They're at the hospital. Is there major problems with his brain? Here's a cognitive test. You go through it quickly. This shows you can do basic processes. Do you have a pen? We'll do it here?

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: The first part is, there's three visual tests that won't work particularly well on radio. But we'll explain them. There's a bunch of numbers and letters for the first test and it gives you the beginning of the path. For example, the number one, there's a line drawn to A. Then there's a line drawn to two. You have to complete the pattern.

GLENN: Then a line drawn to B.

STU: That's a good. Yeah, why don't I just give you the answers?

So going down to B. Then B would go to three.

GLENN: Then that would go to C. Then it would go to 4. Then it would go to D. And then it would go to 5, and that would go to E. This is not a real --

STU: Let me see -- the next one. It is. This is the test. It's the Montreal Cognitive Test. Now, there's another one that says for Glenn to draw -- copy a box.

GLENN: I'm sorry. But this is a -- this is not -- this is not an invasive test.

STU: What it is, is the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, and don't -- I mean, you can rush through all you want. I don't know if you're trying to prove something here.

GLENN: No, it's just easy.

STU: Okay. So it's easy for Glenn. So there's three tests here. We'll be posting the results here online. How much time do we have, Sarah? Should we go through the next questions?

GLENN: Did I get those right, Doctor?

STU: I will grade you at the end. Thank you for calling me doctor.

GLENN: All right. I will tell you, I just -- I didn't even read the directions, they're so easy. If I have any wrong, it's because I didn't read the directions.

STU: Wow, President Trump was able to read the directions and get them right.

GLENN: Okay. I'll read the directions.

STU: I'll show you a picture. I'd like you to tell me what that picture is. What is that?

GLENN: That's a lion.

STU: A lion is the answer. Get that to my physician's assistant. The first answer was lion. Next one, I'm showing you a picture. What is this picture?

GLENN: That is a rhino. Rhino.

STU: A rhino. And finally I'm showing you this picture, what is this picture?

GLENN: That is an ostrich, a zebra -- a camel. Trust me, this is not --

STU: Lion, just writing down your answers. Rhino.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: And a camel.

GLENN: Okay.

STU: Next up. Are you ready?

GLENN: I'm ready.

STU: I am going to read a list of words.

GLENN: Oh, boy.

STU: You must repeat them. Okay?

GLENN: Do I have to wait for a while and then repeat them or just repeat the word you just said?

STU: I'm going to read all five words, you're going to repeat them in that order. Are you ready?

GLENN: All right. Okay. Yes.

STU: Face, velvet, church, daisy, red.

GLENN: Faith, velvet. Daisy, church -- I'm bad at these.

STU: Okay. We're going to try it one more time.

Here is the five words. Repeat them in this order. Face, velvet, church, daisy, red.

GLENN: Face, velvet, daisy -- church, daisy. I can't remember.

STU: Okay. Premiere, we're going need to a new host.

GLENN: Going need to a new host.

STU: We're going to need a new host.

GLENN: I've gone through more difficult tests than these. I have a difficult time with some of them. I have a difficult time with them.

STU: We are learning things -- so far, we've learned many things. In my studies of your test so far, I've learned many things --

GLENN: When you see the lion is actually a chicken, we're -- you'll see how troubled -- how troubled we really are. Back in just a second.

GLENN: Now, I'm under -- I'm under a great deal of stress now.

STU: Welcome to the Dr. Stu Program. 1-800-DR-STU.

GLENN: That's not enough numbers.

STU: We're giving Glenn the cognitive test that the president passed with flying colors yesterday. And we're learning some interesting things as we go through this.

GLENN: Well, now he's telling me that there's certain grades for how well the clock is drawn and stuff. I made a clock face quickly. And just...

STU: Okay. That's --

GLENN: Okay. Here's a picture of a more detailed clock. Here's a grandfather clock. Does that help?

STU: There's an interesting section in the instructions about people who make excuses for their incorrect answers, that we can get into a little bit later.

GLENN: Okay. All right. Okay.

STU: We're now in the next section.

GLENN: Yes, next section.

STU: And here is --

GLENN: By the way, the president passed this with flying colors. I'm still in jeopardy here.

STU: I'm going to read you a list of digits. You need to repeat them in four-word order.

GLENN: Digits. Wait. What do you mean in four-word order?

STU: Normal order. The way I'm going to give them. All right. Two --

GLENN: Two --

STU: No. When I'm done with all five of them, you will then repeat the five.

GLENN: All right. Okay. Okay. All right.

STU: Yeah, two --

GLENN: Somebody write them down.

STU: No, you can't write them down. Just saying. Two.

GLENN: Two. All right. I'm sorry. Go ahead -- I got the first --

STU: I'm about to subtract some points. Listen to the five numbers. Two, one, eight, five, four.

GLENN: Two, one, eight, five, four.

But I would like to say, that it is five, two, one, eight, five, four. Because you said five several times before.

STU: I said two many times because you kept interrupting me.

GLENN: Yeah. Right. And two, two, two. Five, five, five -- it's actually five, two, five, two, five, two.

STU: Sir, we can remove you from office.

GLENN: All right. Go ahead.

STU: There's a silliness clause in this test.

GLENN: All right.

STU: I would like you to repeat these numbers in backward order. Put your pen down, sir.

GLENN: In backward order. I'm just finishing clock face.

STU: Put your pen down. You've already failed the clock test. Well, we'll see how you did on the clock. Repeat these in backward order. Seven --

GLENN: Backward order. Sorry.

STU: Seven, four, two. There are three numbers I just gave you.

GLENN: Two, four, seven.

STU: That is correct. You'll be getting the full test results here in just a moment.

GLENN: See, this is not like a real test. Is this really the one they gave the president?

STU: This is the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, and, yes, this is the test.

GLENN: Because I will tell you, I've had these before, and here's how they usually go, I'm going to give you five numbers. Okay. Let me give them to you here, Stu. Let me see if I can do this with you.

STU: He is stalling to get out of it. I'm getting that from my physician's assistant here in the other room.

GLENN: No. Seven, 14, 21, eight, three. Say them.

STU: Wait. You didn't tell me what we were doing.

GLENN: I'm saying. I'm giving you five numbers, you repeat them back. Seven, 14, 21, eight, three.

STU: Seven, 14, 21, eight, three. So you're saying the test designer has a problem?

GLENN: Yeah, he's a little insane.

STU: Is that the issue here? Are you trying to delay so we don't get to the end of the test?

GLENN: No, no, no.

Five numbers. Ready?

STU: Uh-huh.

GLENN: Five, three, 17, 40, nine.

STU: Five, three, 17, 40, nine.

GLENN: Give me the first five numbers that I gave you.

STU: Seven, 14, 21, eight, one, three.

GLENN: Okay. So the real tests, they keep doing this. They just keep adding five numbers. And they'll give you five numbers. Five numbers. Five numbers. What were the first five numbers?

STU: That would be impossible. And, again, that's an interesting distinction between the tests. The one you're talking about is, let's do an incredibly deep dive to see if we can find any hint of anything that's at the very beginning stages.

GLENN: Correct.

STU: What this is, you just had a massive stroke. Can you do the basics? That's what the president passed.

GLENN: In this test, they had the president draw a three-dimensional box. In the test that I've seen, they'll show you something like this.

STU: Where you're seeing like a rectangle, circle, square --

GLENN: Like a little antenna thing coming off the end. And then it comes out and it juts out. And they don't make any sense. And they show it to you for like are five or ten seconds. Say, remember this. They put it away. Now, draw it.

STU: Right. Much more challenging.

GLENN: And you have to draw it. Because it's very intricate. And there's no rhyme or reason to why it's built that way.

STU: And, Sarah, you would say this is a delay to not get to the answers in the test.

SARAH: Absolutely.

STU: Okay. Thank you. Okay. There you go. I would like you to clap your hands. Okay. Thank you. Here you go --

GLENN: You didn't say stop clapping.

STU: Please stop clapping your hand. Okay. Now, every time I say the letter A, I would like you to clap. Okay. That's it.

GLENN: That had A in it.

STU: When I say the letter A, you should clap. Ready?

GLENN: Got it.

STU: F, B, A, C, M --

GLENN: Go ahead.

STU: -- N, A.

GLENN: A. A.

STU: J.

STU: K. L, B, F --

GLENN: Now, is this the letter -- because they sound --

STU: F, A, K, D, E, A --

GLENN: Uh-huh. Uh-huh.

STU: A, A, J, A, M -- this is harder than I thought.

GLENN: Well, because the K and the J, if it's not in the letter, it does have J-A-Y. So it has an A in it. I'm just saying.

STU: Now, the next question, you specifically warned me not to give you any math questions, which is not something you could ask the doctor. You can't say anything, but blood tests. You can't do that.

GLENN: Yeah, I didn't ask the doctor to not --

STU: I'm going to give you a number. I would like you to subtract seven from that number.

GLENN: Seven.

STU: Okay?

GLENN: Fourteen.

STU: I haven't started yet.

GLENN: All right.

STU: The number is --

GLENN: Twenty-one.

STU: I haven't started yet, so you can't --

GLENN: Seven. Six, five, four, three, two, one.

STU: I think we lock you up after this. Okay. One hundred. Subtract seven.

GLENN: Ninety-three.

STU: Subtract seven from that.

GLENN: It would be 93. Ninety-two, 91 --

STU: You can use your fingers. It doesn't say you can't.

GLENN: Oh. Ninety-three, 92, 91, 90, 98 -- no, that the be right. Eighty-nine, 88, 87, which would be wrong.

STU: See, in the test materials, there's no point, where it recommends the doctor harass the patient to try to pressure him into correct answers, but that is what I'm too good.

GLENN: Okay. Seventy-one.

STU: All right. We're going to move on. Repeat the sentence.

GLENN: Twelve.

STU: I only know that John is the one to help today.

GLENN: I only know that John is the one to help today. But the trick is repeat this sentence, because that's what you just said. So it's a trick question.

STU: Okay. Here's another one I'm going to give you, and I would like you to repeat it. Here it goes: The cat always hid under the couch when dogs were in the room.

GLENN: Here it goes: The cat always hid under the couch when dogs were in the room.

STU: Okay.

Let's see.

GLENN: Twenty-nine.

STU: I don't even understand that question. Okay. Let me ask you this one. We're looking for similarity here. For example, a banana and an orange. The similarity would be they are both --

GLENN: Round.

STU: Fruit. Okay.

GLENN: Colorful.

STU: Similarities between trains and bicycles.

GLENN: Both have wheels.

STU: Okay. Of course, obviously not true.

GLENN: Yeah, but trains have wheels, bikes have wheels.

STU: I'm not here to judge you, sir, except for --

GLENN: Both are made out of metal.

STU: Okay. A watch and a ruler.

GLENN: A watch and a ruler.

STU: What's the similarity there?

GLENN: I'm trying to think of something that just doesn't work. They both have numbers. They're both measurement.

STU: Don't try to justify --

GLENN: They're both round.

STU: Okay. Now, I earlier on gave you five words --

GLENN: Oh, you --

STU: If you get one of these --

GLENN: It is that.

STU: That is in here.

GLENN: Yeah, it was. Face, velvet -- all I can think of cake -- so I think automatically cake.

Face, velvet. I don't remember.

STU: Okay. And -- all right. And then what -- well, I'm not going to give you the date, month, year, all that stuff. You know where you are. Date.

GLENN: Do not ask me that. I really don't know the date.

STU: I don't know it either.

GLENN: I don't know the date. The 18th?

VOICE: It's Wednesday, January 17th.

STU: Thank you. We have it at the beginning of every show.

GLENN: It's Wednesday, January 17th.

STU: What year?

GLENN: 2018.

STU: What's today?

GLENN: Wouldn't it be great if it was -- if one of the real legitimate questions, who is president? You would be like, me.

GLENN: Me.

STU: What place are you in?

GLENN: A chair. Studio.

STU: What city?

GLENN: Las Colinas. Earth.

STU: City, you got that.

VOICE: You're listening to the Glenn Beck Program.

GLENN: Okay. Got it.

STU: We'll take a break. And I will go through and grade this for you.

GLENN: Could you kick me off the show? Is there the 25th Amendment that you could just kick me right off --

STU: This has been a giant ruse to make you take this test and see if you're mentally fit to do this program.

GLENN: Wow. I will tell you, that is -- with the exception of one of the last questions of, oh, and what was those five words? That was not --

STU: Not hard, right?

GLENN: Yeah, not hard. You know --

STU: You could easily screw one of them up. You could easily have a problem here or there. Now, Trump did very well on it. But, again, he also knew, if he got anything wrong, it would be a major news story. So he maybe focused a little bit more than you. However, we could make it a major news story too.

GLENN: No, I don't think so. I think somebody questioning your mental agility, if you're taking it seriously, that's a lot of pressure.

STU: Okay. We'll hold you to the same standards then. I was going to give you a break, but we'll be happy to hold you to the same standard as the president. I think that's fair.

GLENN: That's not what --

STU: I'll go through a little grading here. And you do the commercial, if you can get through it.

GLENN: Face, velvet, cake. Orange. Trapdoor.

STU: Is this the commercial? Or are you --

GLENN: Just trying to remember what those words were.

STU: Got it.

Faith, family, and freedom—The forgotten core of conservatism

Gary Hershorn / Contributor | Getty Images

Conservatism is not about rage or nostalgia. It’s about moral clarity, national renewal, and guarding the principles that built America’s freedom.

Our movement is at a crossroads, and the question before us is simple: What does it mean to be a conservative in America today?

For years, we have been told what we are against — against the left, against wokeism, against decline. But opposition alone does not define a movement, and it certainly does not define a moral vision.

We are not here to cling to the past or wallow in grievance. We are not the movement of rage. We are the movement of reason and hope.

The media, as usual, are eager to supply their own answer. The New York Times recently suggested that Nick Fuentes represents the “future” of conservatism. That’s nonsense — a distortion of both truth and tradition. Fuentes and those like him do not represent American conservatism. They represent its counterfeit.

Real conservatism is not rage. It is reverence. It does not treat the past as a museum, but as a teacher. America’s founders asked us to preserve their principles and improve upon their practice. That means understanding what we are conserving — a living covenant, not a relic.

Conservatism as stewardship

In 2025, conservatism means stewardship — of a nation, a culture, and a moral inheritance too precious to abandon. To conserve is not to freeze history. It is to stand guard over what is essential. We are custodians of an experiment in liberty that rests on the belief that rights come not from kings or Congress, but from the Creator.

That belief built this country. It will be what saves it. The Constitution is a covenant between generations. Conservatism is the duty to keep that covenant alive — to preserve what works, correct what fails, and pass on both wisdom and freedom to those who come next.

Economics, culture, and morality are inseparable. Debt is not only fiscal; it is moral. Spending what belongs to the unborn is theft. Dependence is not compassion; it is weakness parading as virtue. A society that trades responsibility for comfort teaches citizens how to live as slaves.

Freedom without virtue is not freedom; it is chaos. A culture that mocks faith cannot defend liberty, and a nation that rejects truth cannot sustain justice. Conservatism must again become the moral compass of a disoriented people, reminding America that liberty survives only when anchored to virtue.

Rebuilding what is broken

We cannot define ourselves by what we oppose. We must build families, communities, and institutions that endure. Government is broken because education is broken, and education is broken because we abandoned the formation of the mind and the soul. The work ahead is competence, not cynicism.

Conservatives should embrace innovation and technology while rejecting the chaos of Silicon Valley. Progress must not come at the expense of principle. Technology must strengthen people, not replace them. Artificial intelligence should remain a servant, never a master. The true strength of a nation is not measured by data or bureaucracy, but by the quiet webs of family, faith, and service that hold communities together. When Washington falters — and it will — those neighborhoods must stand.

Eric Lee / Stringer | Getty Images

This is the real work of conservatism: to conserve what is good and true and to reform what has decayed. It is not about slogans; it is about stewardship — the patient labor of building a civilization that remembers what it stands for.

A creed for the rising generation

We are not here to cling to the past or wallow in grievance. We are not the movement of rage. We are the movement of reason and hope.

For the rising generation, conservatism cannot be nostalgia. It must be more than a memory of 9/11 or admiration for a Reagan era they never lived through. Many young Americans did not experience those moments — and they should not have to in order to grasp the lessons they taught and the truths they embodied. The next chapter is not about preserving relics but renewing purpose. It must speak to conviction, not cynicism; to moral clarity, not despair.

Young people are searching for meaning in a culture that mocks truth and empties life of purpose. Conservatism should be the moral compass that reminds them freedom is responsibility and that faith, family, and moral courage remain the surest rebellions against hopelessness.

To be a conservative in 2025 is to defend the enduring principles of American liberty while stewarding the culture, the economy, and the spirit of a free people. It is to stand for truth when truth is unfashionable and to guard moral order when the world celebrates chaos.

We are not merely holding the torch. We are relighting it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn Beck: Here's what's WRONG with conservatism today

Getty Images / Handout | Getty Images

What does it mean to be a conservative in 2025? Glenn offers guidance on what conservatives need to do to ensure the conservative movement doesn't fade into oblivion. We have to get back to PRINCIPLES, not policies.

To be a conservative in 2025 means to STAND

  • for Stewardship, protecting the wisdom of our Founders;
  • for Truth, defending objective reality in an age of illusion;
  • for Accountability, living within our means as individuals and as a nation;
  • for Neighborhood, rebuilding family, faith, and local community;
  • and for Duty, carrying freedom forward to the next generation.

A conservative doesn’t cling to the past — he stands guard over the principles that make the future possible.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: You know, I'm so tired of being against everything. Saying what we're not.

It's time that we start saying what we are. And it's hard, because we're changing. It's different to be a conservative, today, than it was, you know, years ago.

And part of that is just coming from hard knocks. School of hard knocks. We've learned a lot of lessons on things we thought we were for. No, no, no.

But conservatives. To be a conservative, it shouldn't be about policies. It's really about principles. And that's why we've lost our way. Because we've lost our principles. And it's easy. Because the world got easy. And now the world is changing so rapidly. The boundaries between truth and illusion are blurred second by second. Machines now think. Currencies falter. Families fractured. And nations, all over the world, have forgotten who they are.

So what does it mean to be a conservative now, in 2025, '26. For a lot of people, it means opposing the left. That's -- that's a reaction. That's not renewal.

That's a reaction. It can't mean also worshiping the past, as if the past were perfect. The founders never asked for that.

They asked that we would preserve the principles and perfect their practice. They knew it was imperfect. To make a more perfect nation.

Is what we're supposed to be doing.

2025, '26 being a conservative has to mean stewardship.

The stewardship of a nation, of a civilization.

Of a moral inheritance. That is too precious to abandon.

What does it mean to conserve? To conserve something doesn't mean to stand still.

It means to stand guard. It means to defend what the Founders designed. The separation of powers. The rule of law.

The belief that our rights come not from kings or from Congress, but from the creator himself.
This is a system that was not built for ease. It was built for endurance, and it will endure if we only teach it again!

The problem is, we only teach it like it's a museum piece. You know, it's not a museum piece. It's not an old dusty document. It's a living covenant between the dead, the living and the unborn.

So this chapter of -- of conservatism. Must confront reality. Economic reality.

Global reality.

And moral reality.

It's not enough just to be against something. Or chant tax cuts or free markets.

We have to ask -- we have to start with simple questions like freedom, yes. But freedom for what?

Freedom for economic sovereignty. Your right to produce and to innovate. To build without asking Beijing's permission. That's a moral issue now.

Another moral issue: Debt! It's -- it's generational theft. We're spending money from generations we won't even meet.

And dependence. Another moral issue. It's a national weakness.

People cannot stand up for themselves. They can't make it themselves. And we're encouraging them to sit down, shut up, and don't think.

And the conservative who can't connect with fiscal prudence, and connect fiscal prudence to moral duty, you're not a conservative at all.

Being a conservative today, means you have to rebuild an economy that serves liberty, not one that serves -- survives by debt, and then there's the soul of the nation.

We are living through a time period. An age of dislocation. Where our families are fractured.

Our faith is almost gone.

Meaning is evaporating so fast. Nobody knows what meaning of life is. That's why everybody is killing themselves. They have no meaning in life. And why they don't have any meaning, is truth itself is mocked and blurred and replaced by nothing, but lies and noise.

If you want to be a conservative, then you have to be to become the moral compass that reminds a lost people, liberty cannot survive without virtue.

That freedom untethered from moral order is nothing, but chaos!

And that no app, no algorithm, no ideology is ever going to fill the void, where meaning used to live!

To be a conservative, moving forward, we cannot just be about policies.

We have to defend the sacred, the unseen, the moral architecture, that gives people an identity. So how do you do that? Well, we have to rebuild competence. We have to restore institutions that actually work. Just in the last hour, this monologue on what we're facing now, because we can't open the government.

Why can't we open the government?

Because government is broken. Why does nobody care? Because education is broken.

We have to reclaim education, not as propaganda, but as the formation of the mind and the soul. Conservatives have to champion innovation.

Not to imitate Silicon Valley's chaos, but to harness technology in defense of human dignity. Don't be afraid of AI.

Know what it is. Know it's a tool. It's a tool to strengthen people. As long as you always remember it's a tool. Otherwise, you will lose your humanity to it!

That's a conservative principle. To be a conservative, we have to restore local strength. Our families are the basic building blocks, our schools, our churches, and our charities. Not some big, distant NGO that was started by the Tides Foundation, but actual local charities, where you see people working. A web of voluntary institutions that held us together at one point. Because when Washington fails, and it will, it already has, the neighborhood has to stand.

Charlie Kirk was doing one thing that people on our side were not doing. Speaking to the young.

But not in nostalgia.

Not in -- you know, Reagan, Reagan, Reagan.

In purpose. They don't remember. They don't remember who Dick Cheney was.

I was listening to Fox news this morning, talking about Dick Cheney. And there was somebody there that I know was not even born when Dick Cheney. When the World Trade Center came down.

They weren't even born. They were telling me about Dick Cheney.

And I was like, come on. Come on. Come on.

If you don't remember who Dick Cheney was, how are you going to remember 9/11. How will you remember who Reagan was.

That just says, that's an old man's creed. No, it's not.

It's the ultimate timeless rebellion against tyranny in all of its forms. Yes, and even the tyranny of despair, which is eating people alive!

We need to redefine ourselves. Because we have changed, and that's a good thing. The creed for a generation, that will decide the fate of the republic, is what we need to find.

A conservative in 2025, '26.

Is somebody who protects the enduring principles of American liberty and self-government.

While actively stewarding the institutions. The culture. The economy of this nation!

For those who are alive and yet to be unborn.

We have to be a group of people that we're not anchored in the past. Or in rage! But in reason. And morality. Realism. And hope for the future.

We're the stewards! We're the ones that have to relight the torch, not just hold it. We didn't -- we didn't build this Torch. We didn't make this Torch. We're the keepers of the flame, but we are honor-bound to pass that forward, and conservatives are viewed as people who just live in the past. We're not here to merely conserve the past, but to renew it. To sort it. What worked, what didn't work. We're the ones to say to the world, there's still such a thing as truth. There's still such a thing as virtue. You can deny it all you want.

But the pain will only get worse. There's still such a thing as America!

And if now is not the time to renew America. When is that time?

If you're not the person. If we're not the generation to actively stand and redefine and defend, then who is that person?

We are -- we are supposed to preserve what works.

That -- you know, I was writing something this morning.

I was making notes on this. A constitutionalist is for restraint. A progressive, if you will, for lack of a better term, is for more power.

Progressives want the government to have more power.

Conservatives are for more restraint.

But the -- for the American eagle to fly, we must have both wings.

And one can't be stronger than the other.

We as a conservative, are supposed to look and say, no. Don't look at that. The past teaches us this, this, and this. So don't do that.

We can't do that. But there are these things that we were doing in the past, that we have to jettison. And maybe the other side has a good idea on what should replace that. But we're the ones who are supposed to say, no, but remember the framework.

They're -- they can dream all they want.
They can come up with all these utopias and everything else, and we can go, "That's a great idea."

But how do we make it work with this framework? Because that's our job. The point of this is, it takes both. It takes both.

We have to have the customs and the moral order. And the practices that have stood the test of time, in trial.

We -- we're in an amazing, amazing time. Amazing time.

We live at a time now, where anything -- literally anything is possible!

I don't want to be against stuff. I want to be for the future. I want to be for a rich, dynamic future. One where we are part of changing the world for the better!

Where more people are lifted out of poverty, more people are given the freedom to choose, whatever it is that they want to choose, as their own government and everything.

I don't want to force it down anybody's throat.

We -- I am so excited to be a shining city on the hill again.

We have that opportunity, right in front of us!

But not in we get bogged down in hatred, in division.

Not if we get bogged down into being against something.

We must be for something!

I know what I'm for.

Do you?

From Pharaoh to Hamas: The same spirit of evil, new disguise

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

The drone footage out of Gaza isn’t just war propaganda — it’s a glimpse of the same darkness that once convinced men they were righteous for killing innocents.

Evil introduces itself subtly. It doesn’t announce, “Hi, I’m here to destroy you.” It whispers. It flatters. It borrows the language of justice, empathy, and freedom, twisting them until hatred sounds righteous and violence sounds brave.

We are watching that same deception unfold again — in the streets, on college campuses, and in the rhetoric of people who should know better. It’s the oldest story in the world, retold with new slogans.

Evil wins when good people mirror its rage.

A drone video surfaced this week showing Hamas terrorists staging the “discovery” of a hostage’s body. They pushed a corpse out of a window, dragged it into a hole, buried it, and then called in aid workers to “find” what they themselves had planted. It was theater — evil, disguised as victimhood. And it was caught entirely on camera.

That’s how evil operates. It never comes in through the front door. It sneaks in, often through manipulative pity. The same spirit animates the moral rot spreading through our institutions — from the halls of universities to the chambers of government.

Take Zohran Mamdani, a New York assemblyman who has praised jihadists and defended pro-Hamas agitators. His father, a Columbia University professor, wrote that America and al-Qaeda are morally equivalent — that suicide bombings shouldn’t be viewed as barbaric. Imagine thinking that way after watching 3,000 Americans die on 9/11. That’s not intellectualism. That’s indoctrination.

Often, that indoctrination comes from hostile foreign actors, peddled by complicit pawns on our own soil. The pro-Hamas protests that erupted across campuses last year, for example, were funded by Iran — a regime that murders its own citizens for speaking freely.

Ancient evil, new clothes

But the deeper danger isn’t foreign money. It’s the spiritual blindness that lets good people believe resentment is justice and envy is discernment. Scripture talks about the spirit of Amalek — the eternal enemy of God’s people, who attacks the weak from behind while the strong look away. Amalek never dies; it just changes its vocabulary and form with the times.

Today, Amalek tweets. He speaks through professors who defend terrorism as “anti-colonial resistance.” He preaches from pulpits that call violence “solidarity.” And he recruits through algorithms, whispering that the Jews control everything, that America had it coming, that chaos is freedom. Those are ancient lies wearing new clothes.

When nations embrace those lies, it’s not the Jews who perish first. It’s the nations themselves. The soul dies long before the body. The ovens of Auschwitz didn’t start with smoke; they started with silence and slogans.

Andrew Harnik / Staff | Getty Images

A time for choosing

So what do we do? We speak truth — calmly, firmly, without venom. Because hatred can’t kill hatred; it only feeds it. Truth, compassion, and courage starve it to death.

Evil wins when good people mirror its rage. That’s how Amalek survives — by making you fight him with his own weapons. The only victory that lasts is moral clarity without malice, courage without cruelty.

The war we’re fighting isn’t new. It’s the same battle between remembrance and amnesia, covenant and chaos, humility and pride. The same spirit that whispered to Pharaoh, to Hitler, and to every mob that thought hatred could heal the world is whispering again now — on your screens, in your classrooms, in your churches.

Will you join it, or will you stand against it?

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Bill Gates ends climate fear campaign, declares AI the future ruler

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The Big Tech billionaire once said humanity must change or perish. Now he claims we’ll survive — just as elites prepare total surveillance.

For decades, Americans have been told that climate change is an imminent apocalypse — the existential threat that justifies every intrusion into our lives, from banning gas stoves to rationing energy to tracking personal “carbon scores.”

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates helped lead that charge. He warned repeatedly that the “climate disaster” would be the greatest crisis humanity would ever face. He invested billions in green technology and demanded the world reach net-zero emissions by 2050 “to avoid catastrophe.”

The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch.

Now, suddenly, he wants everyone to relax: Climate change “will not lead to humanity’s demise” after all.

Gates was making less of a scientific statement and more of a strategic pivot. When elites retire a crisis, it’s never because the threat is gone — it’s because a better one has replaced it. And something else has indeed arrived — something the ruling class finds more useful than fear of the weather.The same day Gates downshifted the doomsday rhetoric, Amazon announced it would pay warehouse workers $30 an hour — while laying off 30,000 people because artificial intelligence will soon do their jobs.

Climate panic was the warm-up. AI control is the main event.

The new currency of power

The world once revolved around oil and gas. Today, it revolves around the electricity demanded by server farms, the chips that power machine learning, and the data that can be used to manipulate or silence entire populations. The global contest is no longer over barrels and pipelines — it is over who gets to flip the digital switch. Whoever controls energy now controls information. And whoever controls information controls civilization.

Climate alarmism gave elites a pretext to centralize power over energy. Artificial intelligence gives them a mechanism to centralize power over people. The future battles will not be about carbon — they will be about control.

Two futures — both ending in tyranny

Americans are already being pushed into what look like two opposing movements, but both leave the individual powerless.

The first is the technocratic empire being constructed in the name of innovation. In its vision, human work will be replaced by machines, and digital permissions will subsume personal autonomy.

Government and corporations merge into a single authority. Your identity, finances, medical decisions, and speech rights become access points monitored by biometric scanners and enforced by automated gatekeepers. Every step, purchase, and opinion is tracked under the noble banner of “efficiency.”

The second is the green de-growth utopia being marketed as “compassion.” In this vision, prosperity itself becomes immoral. You will own less because “the planet” requires it. Elites will redesign cities so life cannot extend beyond a 15-minute walking radius, restrict movement to save the Earth, and ration resources to curb “excess.” It promises community and simplicity, but ultimately delivers enforced scarcity. Freedom withers when surviving becomes a collective permission rather than an individual right.

Both futures demand that citizens become manageable — either automated out of society or tightly regulated within it. The ruling class will embrace whichever version gives them the most leverage in any given moment.

Climate panic was losing its grip. AI dependency — and the obedience it creates — is far more potent.

The forgotten way

A third path exists, but it is the one today’s elites fear most: the path laid out in our Constitution. The founders built a system that assumes human beings are not subjects to be monitored or managed, but moral agents equipped by God with rights no government — and no algorithm — can override.

Hesham Elsherif / Stringer | Getty Images

That idea remains the most “disruptive technology” in history. It shattered the belief that people need kings or experts or global committees telling them how to live. No wonder elites want it erased.

Soon, you will be told you must choose: Live in a world run by machines or in a world stripped down for planetary salvation. Digital tyranny or rationed equality. Innovation without liberty or simplicity without dignity.

Both are traps.

The only way

The only future worth choosing is the one grounded in ordered liberty — where prosperity and progress exist alongside moral responsibility and personal freedom and human beings are treated as image-bearers of God — not climate liabilities, not data profiles, not replaceable hardware components.

Bill Gates can change his tune. The media can change the script. But the agenda remains the same.

They no longer want to save the planet. They want to run it, and they expect you to obey.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.