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

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

5 reasons WHY the Declaration of Independence defined America as exceptional

July 03, 2021
Jonathon Dunne

Contributor

I am an Irishman and in 2006, I was blessed with the opportunity to spend Independence Day in America. It was a magical experience I will never forget and one I am desperate to repeat.

Everything about the day was magical. I can remember every little detail: seeing the pure joy on people's faces when they saw family members, not seen since Christmas; enjoying burgers and hot dogs being grilled to perfection in the mid-afternoon; jumping on a boat and witnessing an awe-inspiring fireworks display with the feel of a cold beverage in my hand; coming ashore and sitting around an open fire, toasting marshmallows.

As fun as these activities were, they are NOT what made the day magical.

The day was and is made magical remembering WHAT Americans are celebrating: being thankful for the 56 men who signed the Declaration of Independence and the idea of America which improved EVERY aspect of our world.

I would be honored if you would allow me to share five pivotal points from the Declaration, explaining how they started America on the path to becoming an exceptional nation, and how you can learn from the founders' example today.

1 The Layout

Take a look around society today, and you will notice a prevalent theme. The majority of people are angry, upset, and frustrated. They love to highlight the parts of society they view as a problem and tear it down. This requires zero talent. Even newborn babies with no verbal skills and very little knowledge of the outside world will let you know when they are unhappy by crying for a clean diaper, food or attention.

History is filled with people complaining and starting wars because they feel they have been wronged and sought a future "free from their oppressor".

Thomas Jefferson and your founders were different. Before mentioning any issues with the King (they waited 1338 words), they first explained their vision and how America would be different from other nations. They boldly declared that all men were created equal and have a God-given right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

This principle of explaining what you are for has a long track record in American society and has long lead to effective change.

This principle of explaining what you are for has a long track record in American society and has long lead to effective change. This includes famous speeches by John F. Kennedy declaring, "We will go to the moon by the end of this decade," or the great Martin Luther King Jr. telling everyone how he "had a dream."

LESSON: Tell the world what you stand for -- not what you stand against!

2 Role of Government

I have spent over seven years with The Blaze, promoting your founding principles and explaining how America is unique and different to every other nation in the world. Every principle, policy, plan and idea can be traced back to one core principle: How we view government and its role in society.

On the surface of history, it is very easy to believe that our world is very different and would provide many different answers to this simple question.

Just look at our world today and you see many different power structures. England retains a monarch. European countries, like mine, are democracies. Iran is a theocratic-controlled country. Russia is an oligarchy. Inside those countries, you will notice differences in ideologies between communism, socialism, fascism, liberalism and even conservatism.

YES, they all look very different. However, if you look deeper into those countries, you will notice they all view government the exact same.

Government is a central agency that possesses the power to be the moral arbiters of society, the ability to be the great equalizer and most importantly they are the provider of rights.

Does this mean every government uses this power every day?

NO.

Clearly, there are governments around the world who are more open to freedom and view government as the last resort. However, every country believes government always has that power and there are situations when government must take control for the "greater good".

If you doubt this, look at the response to the coronavirus pandemic. Even countries that love to talk about freedom and identify as freedom-loving, removed their citizens' rights in the name of public safety. You witnessed everything from governments shutting down businesses, banning you from traveling more than three miles from your home, limiting the number of people you could have to visit your own house and enforcing you to wear a mask.

How could they do this? Because government is the power structure of all these countries and providers of rights. Any government that has the power to confer can also rescind them under the right circumstances.

Your founders were very clear that they did not share the world vision of an all-powerful government.

The idea of America is different. Your founders were very clear that they did not share the world vision of an all-powerful government. You can see this by reviewing the structure of the Constitution, but that foundation was started in the Declaration of Independence when they spoke about the Law of Nature and Nature's God, which highlights ALL rights come from God. You are born with these rights and it is the government's sole responsibility to ensure these rights are never taken away.

3 RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES

Take a step back and look at the public discourse today. You will notice the majority of people love to talk about their rights. My friends on the right love to talk about their right to free speech and guns. My friends on the left love to talk about their right to healthcare and abortions. When was the last time you saw anyone online talk about their duty and responsibilities? It's not a very popular topic.

Your founders were not dumb men.

Their genius was understanding the laws of nature and basic first principles. They researched world history -- from the great empires of the past to senates that were supposed to last forever, examining why they failed. While there are countless reasons for each, understanding one concept is critical. When freedom becomes all about rights and forgets about responsibilities, it creates a vacuum. Historically, the government always fills that vacuum. This creates a prime opportunity for a tyrant to come to power and solve a public need and always ends the same way - gaining more power and stripping you of your individual rights.

Your founders feared this vacuum and warned against it TWICE in the opening paragraphs of the Declaration of Independence. They spoke about your right to alter and abolish your government, instituting new safeguards. Then they spoke about your right, and duty, to throw off the government and provide new guards.

LESSON: Freedom without responsibility will always lead to tyranny.

4 RACIST FOUNDERS

As an outsider, nothing annoys me more than the constant attacks on your founders and their brilliance. Were they perfect? NOPE. Should they be worshipped like Idols? NOPE. Are there things we can improve upon? Yes. For example, it's 2021; why does the post office need to be included in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution?

Despite their flaws, they provided America with a great platform on which to build. If America is to survive and prosper, the IGNORANT attacks that America's founders were old racist white men with wooden teeth must stop. Why? Because it is a LIE!!!

I could write at length about this issue alone, but I will provide two simple facts.

Firstly, please close your eyes and imagine an actual racist (no, not your typical Donald Trump supporter). Imagine how they look, how they sound, what words they use and everything down to what aftershave they wear. Got that vision? Good. Now try imagining that vile, disgusting racist say the following:

ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL!

Did your vision say those words? Do you think people like David Duke would say them, let alone sign their name to a statement declaring this as a self-evident principle for the world to see?

Answer: NO!

The second fact requires you to have a reading of history before America. Thomas Jefferson could have very easily left these five powerful words out entirely or just use the accepted language of the day from the Magma Carta which stated:

"All FREE men are created equal."

If Jefferson and the founders were racist, why did they improve on the language of the day and declare this truth as self-evident?

If ...the founders were racist, why did they improve on the language of the day and declare this truth as self-evident?

5 FORGOTTEN FOUNDERS

If you look at culture and politics today, you will notice a common theme where everyone just wants to win, regardless of the cost. Society tells us winning is everything, and there is no room for failure. Is this true? Can society progress really progress without failure and sacrificing everything they have for the greater good?

American history is so vast and deep that it can be straightforward to focus on the great and famous leaders who survived like Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Madison and Franklin.

This particular weekend, I would like to briefly highlight three patriots who took the ultimate risk by signing the Declaration of Independence. They lost everything, and are sadly forgotten by many who teach history.

JOHN HART: John was a widowed farmer in New Jersey with 12 kids. He was rich, well-known in society, and employed many. When he signed the Declaration, troops attacked his farm with orders to execute him in Hopewell. He fled and eventually died in hiding.

FRANCES LEWIS: Frank was involved in international business and made a fortune on the mercantile exchange. Like John, he was rich, powerful and employed many. When he signed, he returned to find armed troops at his home, taking possession of it. They arrested his wife, starved and mistreated her and although she was later released, she soon passed away due to the horrific treatment.

RICHARD STOCKTON: Richard was a wealthy lawyer who studied at Princeton. He served on the New Jersey Supreme Court and had the respect of his peers. After signing, he was locked up, starved, tortured, and robbed of his possessions. His treatment was so bad that his final days were spent living on the charity of friends.

These brave men could have chosen a much easier road in life. They could have ignored the calls for Independence, paid any additional taxes to the King and still lived a great life. They had everything you would deem desirable in society -- money, earthly possessions, name recognition, and respect.

...these men... risked everything they had so everyone could have a brighter and freer tomorrow.

When they signed the Declaration of Independence, the only thing they could gain was an opportunity for absolute freedom. This ideal was so powerful that these men, and countless others, risked everything they had so everyone could have a brighter and freer tomorrow.

LESSON: Pursuing a higher aspiration is more important than winning.

Personal Request:

It is popular for Americans to say "Happy 4th" or "Happy 4th of July."

PLEASE STOP SAYING IT!

After reading this, realize how important and significant your founders to America and the world. It is disrespectful to them, their memory, their sacrifice, and everything they fought for. After all, would you go up to a Christian and say "Happy 25th?"

NOPE.

May I wish you and your exceptional nation a very HAPPY INDEPENDENCE DAY!

If you enjoyed this column, I released a special on The Blaze this week where I did a deep dive into the Declaration of Independence with KrisAnne Hall. You can listen for free on Apple or Spotify or The Blaze.

Is the U.N. plotting to control 30% of U.S. land by 2030?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

A reliable conservative senator faces cancellation for listening to voters. But the real threat to public lands comes from the last president’s backdoor globalist agenda.

Something ugly is unfolding on social media, and most people aren’t seeing it clearly. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) — one of the most constitutionally grounded conservatives in Washington — is under fire for a housing provision he first proposed in 2022.

You wouldn’t know that from scrolling through X. According to the latest online frenzy, Lee wants to sell off national parks, bulldoze public lands, gut hunting and fishing rights, and hand America’s wilderness to Amazon, BlackRock, and the Chinese Communist Party. None of that is true.

Lee’s bill would have protected against the massive land-grab that’s already under way — courtesy of the Biden administration.

I covered this last month. Since then, the backlash has grown into something like a political witch hunt — not just from the left but from the right. Even Donald Trump Jr., someone I typically agree with, has attacked Lee’s proposal. He’s not alone.

Time to look at the facts the media refuses to cover about Lee’s federal land plan.

What Lee actually proposed

Over the weekend, Lee announced that he would withdraw the federal land sale provision from his housing bill. He said the decision was in response to “a tremendous amount of misinformation — and in some cases, outright lies,” but also acknowledged that many Americans brought forward sincere, thoughtful concerns.

Because of the strict rules surrounding the budget reconciliation process, Lee couldn’t secure legally enforceable protections to ensure that the land would be made available “only to American families — not to China, not to BlackRock, and not to any foreign interests.” Without those safeguards, he chose to walk it back.

That’s not selling out. That’s leadership.

It's what the legislative process is supposed to look like: A senator proposes a bill, the people respond, and the lawmaker listens. That was once known as representative democracy. These days, it gets you labeled a globalist sellout.

The Biden land-grab

To many Americans, “public land” brings to mind open spaces for hunting, fishing, hiking, and recreation. But that’s not what Sen. Mike Lee’s bill targeted.

His proposal would have protected against the real land-grab already under way — the one pushed by the Biden administration.

In 2021, Biden launched a plan to “conserve” 30% of America’s lands and waters by 2030. This effort follows the United Nations-backed “30 by 30” initiative, which seeks to place one-third of all land and water under government control.

Ask yourself: Is the U.N. focused on preserving your right to hunt and fish? Or are radical environmentalists exploiting climate fears to restrict your access to American land?

Smith Collection/Gado / Contributor | Getty Images

As it stands, the federal government already owns 640 million acres — nearly one-third of the entire country. At this rate, the government will hit that 30% benchmark with ease. But it doesn’t end there. The next phase is already in play: the “50 by 50” agenda.

That brings me to a piece of legislation most Americans haven’t even heard of: the Sustains Act.

Passed in 2023, the law allows the federal government to accept private funding from organizations, such as BlackRock or the Bill Gates Foundation, to support “conservation programs.” In practice, the law enables wealthy elites to buy influence over how American land is used and managed.

Moreover, the government doesn’t even need the landowner’s permission to declare that your property contributes to “pollination,” or “photosynthesis,” or “air quality” — and then regulate it accordingly. You could wake up one morning and find out that the land you own no longer belongs to you in any meaningful sense.

Where was the outrage then? Where were the online crusaders when private capital and federal bureaucrats teamed up to quietly erode private property rights across America?

American families pay the price

The real danger isn’t in Mike Lee’s attempt to offer more housing near population centers — land that would be limited, clarified, and safeguarded in the final bill. The real threat is the creeping partnership between unelected global elites and our own government, a partnership designed to consolidate land, control rural development, and keep Americans penned in so-called “15-minute cities.”

BlackRock buying entire neighborhoods and pricing out regular families isn’t by accident. It’s part of a larger strategy to centralize populations into manageable zones, where cars are unnecessary, rural living is unaffordable, and every facet of life is tracked, regulated, and optimized.

That’s the real agenda. And it’s already happening , and Mike Lee’s bill would have been an effort to ensure that you — not BlackRock, not China — get first dibs.

I live in a town of 451 people. Even here, in the middle of nowhere, housing is unaffordable. The American dream of owning a patch of land is slipping away, not because of one proposal from a constitutional conservative, but because global powers and their political allies are already devouring it.

Divide and conquer

This controversy isn’t really about Mike Lee. It’s about whether we, as a nation, are still capable of having honest debates about public policy — or whether the online mob now controls the narrative. It’s about whether conservatives will focus on facts or fall into the trap of friendly fire and circular firing squads.

More importantly, it’s about whether we’ll recognize the real land-grab happening in our country — and have the courage to fight back before it’s too late.


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

URGENT: FIVE steps to CONTROL AI before it's too late!

MANAURE QUINTERO / Contributor | Getty Images

By now, many of us are familiar with AI and its potential benefits and threats. However, unless you're a tech tycoon, it can feel like you have little influence over the future of artificial intelligence.

For years, Glenn has warned about the dangers of rapidly developing AI technologies that have taken the world by storm.

He acknowledges their significant benefits but emphasizes the need to establish proper boundaries and ethics now, while we still have control. But since most people aren’t Silicon Valley tech leaders making the decisions, how can they help keep AI in check?

Recently, Glenn interviewed Tristan Harris, a tech ethicist deeply concerned about the potential harm of unchecked AI, to discuss its societal implications. Harris highlighted a concerning new piece of legislation proposed by Texas Senator Ted Cruz. This legislation proposes a state-level moratorium on AI regulation, meaning only the federal government could regulate AI. Harris noted that there’s currently no Federal plan for regulating AI. Until the federal government establishes a plan, tech companies would have nearly free rein with their AI. And we all know how slowly the federal government moves.

This is where you come in. Tristan Harris shared with Glenn the top five actions you should urge your representatives to take regarding AI, including opposing the moratorium until a concrete plan is in place. Now is your chance to influence the future of AI. Contact your senator and congressman today and share these five crucial steps they must take to keep AI in check:

Ban engagement-optimized AI companions for kids

Create legislation that will prevent AI from being designed to maximize addiction, sexualization, flattery, and attachment disorders, and to protect young people’s mental health and ability to form real-life friendships.

Establish basic liability laws

Companies need to be held accountable when their products cause real-world harm.

Pass increased whistleblower protections

Protect concerned technologists working inside the AI labs from facing untenable pressures and threats that prevent them from warning the public when the AI rollout is unsafe or crosses dangerous red lines.

Prevent AI from having legal rights

Enact laws so AIs don’t have protected speech or have their own bank accounts, making sure our legal system works for human interests over AI interests.

Oppose the state moratorium on AI 

Call your congressman or Senator Cruz’s office, and demand they oppose the state moratorium on AI without a plan for how we will set guardrails for this technology.

Glenn: Only Trump dared to deliver on decades of empty promises

Tasos Katopodis / Stringer | Getty Images

The Islamic regime has been killing Americans since 1979. Now Trump’s response proves we’re no longer playing defense — we’re finally hitting back.

The United States has taken direct military action against Iran’s nuclear program. Whatever you think of the strike, it’s over. It’s happened. And now, we have to predict what happens next. I want to help you understand the gravity of this situation: what happened, what it means, and what might come next. To that end, we need to begin with a little history.

Since 1979, Iran has been at war with us — even if we refused to call it that.

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell.

It began with the hostage crisis, when 66 Americans were seized and 52 were held for over a year by the radical Islamic regime. Four years later, 17 more Americans were murdered in the U.S. Embassy bombing in Beirut, followed by 241 Marines in the Beirut barracks bombing.

Then came the Khobar Towers bombing in 1996, which killed 19 more U.S. airmen. Iran had its fingerprints all over it.

In Iraq and Afghanistan, Iranian-backed proxies killed hundreds of American soldiers. From 2001 to 2020 in Afghanistan and 2003 to 2011 in Iraq, Iran supplied IEDs and tactical support.

The Iranians have plotted assassinations and kidnappings on U.S. soil — in 2011, 2021, and again in 2024 — and yet we’ve never really responded.

The precedent for U.S. retaliation has always been present, but no president has chosen to pull the trigger until this past weekend. President Donald Trump struck decisively. And what our military pulled off this weekend was nothing short of extraordinary.

Operation Midnight Hammer

The strike was reportedly called Operation Midnight Hammer. It involved as many as 175 U.S. aircraft, including 12 B-2 stealth bombers — out of just 19 in our entire arsenal. Those bombers are among the most complex machines in the world, and they were kept mission-ready by some of the finest mechanics on the planet.

USAF / Handout | Getty Images

To throw off Iranian radar and intelligence, some bombers flew west toward Guam — classic misdirection. The rest flew east, toward the real targets.

As the B-2s approached Iranian airspace, U.S. submarines launched dozens of Tomahawk missiles at Iran’s fortified nuclear facilities. Minutes later, the bombers dropped 14 MOPs — massive ordnance penetrators — each designed to drill deep into the earth and destroy underground bunkers. These bombs are the size of an F-16 and cost millions of dollars apiece. They are so accurate, I’ve been told they can hit the top of a soda can from 15,000 feet.

They were built for this mission — and we’ve been rehearsing this run for 15 years.

If the satellite imagery is accurate — and if what my sources tell me is true — the targeted nuclear sites were utterly destroyed. We’ll likely rely on the Israelis to confirm that on the ground.

This was a master class in strategy, execution, and deterrence. And it proved that only the United States could carry out a strike like this. I am very proud of our military, what we are capable of doing, and what we can accomplish.

What comes next

We don’t yet know how Iran will respond, but many of the possibilities are troubling. The Iranians could target U.S. forces across the Middle East. On Monday, Tehran launched 20 missiles at U.S. bases in Qatar, Syria, and Kuwait, to no effect. God forbid, they could also unleash Hezbollah or other terrorist proxies to strike here at home — and they just might.

Iran has also threatened to shut down the Strait of Hormuz — the artery through which nearly a fifth of the world’s oil flows. On Sunday, Iran’s parliament voted to begin the process. If the Supreme Council and the ayatollah give the go-ahead, we could see oil prices spike to $150 or even $200 a barrel.

That would be catastrophic.

The 2008 financial collapse was pushed over the edge when oil hit $130. Western economies — including ours — simply cannot sustain oil above $120 for long. If this conflict escalates and the Strait is closed, the global economy could unravel.

The strike also raises questions about regime stability. Will it spark an uprising, or will the Islamic regime respond with a brutal crackdown on dissidents?

Early signs aren’t hopeful. Reports suggest hundreds of arrests over the weekend and at least one dissident executed on charges of spying for Israel. The regime’s infamous morality police, the Gasht-e Ershad, are back on the streets. Every phone, every vehicle — monitored. The U.S. embassy in Qatar issued a shelter-in-place warning for Americans.

Russia and China both condemned the strike. On Monday, a senior Iranian official flew to Moscow to meet with Vladimir Putin. That meeting should alarm anyone paying attention. Their alliance continues to deepen — and that’s a serious concern.

Now we pray

We are either on the verge of a remarkable strategic victory or a devastating global escalation. Time will tell. But either way, President Trump didn’t start this. He inherited it — and he took decisive action.

The difference is, he did what they all said they would do. He didn’t send pallets of cash in the dead of night. He didn’t sign another failed treaty.

He acted. Now, we pray. For peace, for wisdom, and for the strength to meet whatever comes next.


This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Globalize the Intifada? Why Mamdani’s plan spells DOOM for America

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

If New Yorkers hand City Hall to Zohran Mamdani, they’re not voting for change. They’re opening the door to an alliance of socialism, Islamism, and chaos.

It only took 25 years for New York City to go from the resilient, flag-waving pride following the 9/11 attacks to a political fever dream. To quote Michael Malice, “I'm old enough to remember when New Yorkers endured 9/11 instead of voting for it.”

Malice is talking about Zohran Mamdani, a Democratic Socialist assemblyman from Queens now eyeing the mayor’s office. Mamdani, a 33-year-old state representative emerging from relative political obscurity, is now receiving substantial funding for his mayoral campaign from the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

CAIR has a long and concerning history, including being born out of the Muslim Brotherhood and named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror funding case. Why would the group have dropped $100,000 into a PAC backing Mamdani’s campaign?

Mamdani blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone.

Perhaps CAIR has a vested interest in Mamdani’s call to “globalize the intifada.” That’s not a call for peaceful protest. Intifada refers to historic uprisings of Muslims against what they call the “Israeli occupation of Palestine.” Suicide bombings and street violence are part of the playbook. So when Mamdani says he wants to “globalize” that, who exactly is the enemy in this global scenario? Because it sure sounds like he's saying America is the new Israel, and anyone who supports Western democracy is the new Zionist.

Mamdani tried to clean up his language by citing the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, which once used “intifada” in an Arabic-language article to describe the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising. So now he’s comparing Palestinians to Jewish victims of the Nazis? If that doesn’t twist your stomach into knots, you’re not paying attention.

If you’re “globalizing” an intifada, and positioning Israel — and now America — as the Nazis, that’s not a cry for human rights. That’s a call for chaos and violence.

Rising Islamism

But hey, this is New York. Faculty members at Columbia University — where Mamdani’s own father once worked — signed a letter defending students who supported Hamas after October 7. They also contributed to Mamdani’s mayoral campaign. And his father? He blamed Ronald Reagan and the religious right for inspiring Islamic terrorism, as if the roots of 9/11 grew in Washington, not the caves of Tora Bora.

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

This isn’t about Islam as a faith. We should distinguish between Islam and Islamism. Islam is a religion followed peacefully by millions. Islamism is something entirely different — an ideology that seeks to merge mosque and state, impose Sharia law, and destroy secular liberal democracies from within. Islamism isn’t about prayer and fasting. It’s about power.

Criticizing Islamism is not Islamophobia. It is not an attack on peaceful Muslims. In fact, Muslims are often its first victims.

Islamism is misogynistic, theocratic, violent, and supremacist. It’s hostile to free speech, religious pluralism, gay rights, secularism — even to moderate Muslims. Yet somehow, the progressive left — the same left that claims to fight for feminism, LGBTQ rights, and free expression — finds itself defending candidates like Mamdani. You can’t make this stuff up.

Blending the worst ideologies

And if that weren’t enough, Mamdani also identifies as a Democratic Socialist. He blends political Islam with Marxist economics — two ideologies that have left tens of millions dead in the 20th century alone. But don’t worry, New York. I’m sure this time socialism will totally work. Just like it always didn’t.

If you’re a business owner, a parent, a person who’s saved anything, or just someone who values sanity: Get out. I’m serious. If Mamdani becomes mayor, as seems likely, then New York City will become a case study in what happens when you marry ideological extremism with political power. And it won’t be pretty.

This is about more than one mayoral race. It’s about the future of Western liberalism. It’s about drawing a bright line between faith and fanaticism, between healthy pluralism and authoritarian dogma.

Call out radicalism

We must call out political Islam the same way we call out white nationalism or any other supremacist ideology. When someone chants “globalize the intifada,” that should send a chill down your spine — whether you’re Jewish, Christian, Muslim, atheist, or anything in between.

The left may try to shame you into silence with words like “Islamophobia,” but the record is worn out. The grooves are shallow. The American people see what’s happening. And we’re not buying it.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.