The Democratic Party is a death cult, and they are killing off their own future

OLIVIER CHASSIGNOLE / Contributor | Getty Images

The Washington Post covered the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee last month with a story full of contempt for the rich. It vilified the corporate bigwigs flocking to town to rub shoulders with Donald Trump.

Twenty years ago, Wall Street and big business may have been in the pocket of the Republicans, but that’s no longer the case. All the large corporations belong to the World Economic Forum and the global public-private partnership that Joe Biden and Kamala Harris have been pushing.

During the Republican gathering, the Post described oil and gas executives, crypto packers, and powerful Republican politicians engaging in hushed conversations in luxury suites about prospective tax breaks. The piece claimed Donald Trump would only serve America’s wealthiest. It painted a picture of greedy, evil businessmen making deals in dimly lit rooms. After all, as the Post likes to remind us, “Democracy dies in darkness.”

You will own nothing and be happy.

Even if the Post’s portrayal of the Republican convention’s attendees was entirely accurate, I would still prefer rich CEOs over the groups invading the Democratic National Convention in Chicago this week. Unsurprisingly, the Post and others have failed to scrutinize them with the same intensity.

According to the Capitol Research Center, 279 extremist groups were on the streets of Chicago as a part of a coalition to march on the convention Monday. Of that number, 147 have expressed support for or have ties to terrorist groups, such as Hamas, or terrorist attacks, including deadly attacks on Israel in October. The Hamas-allied and Iran-backed Marxist-Leninist group called the Popular Front for Liberation of Palestine is also on the ground, openly planning to replicate the violent 1968 Democratic National Convention.

Is anyone on the left going to cover these people?

Abortion, anti-family, anti-life

It's very hard to make Planned Parenthood look good, but these groups are giving them a run for their money. One is calling for Jewish blood, and the other is calling for baby blood. This is a blood death cult.

Planned Parenthood was parked outside the convention with vans, offering free vasectomies and abortions for those who are lucky enough to sign up before all the spots were filled.

Conservative media reacted to the news with shock and disgust. Libs of TikTok called Planned Parenthood’s efforts “demonic.” It is. The pro-life group Students for Life says this proves the far left is “the party of death.” That is true. But free abortions really shouldn’t be all that shocking. After all, pro-abortion groups like Aid Access, run by a team of European doctors, have been mailing abortion pills to women in all 50 states for as low as $100 for years.

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, the Democratic Party’s vice presidential candidate, signed a bill into law last year that removed the requirement for doctors to use all reasonable measures to preserve the life and health of a baby who survives an abortion attempt. He signed a bill enabling doctors to let babies die in the hospital room after they’ve been born.

Moreover, the nominee for the president, Kamala Harris, made what I think is a slip of the tongue when she said: “When we invest in clean energy and electric vehicles and reduced population, more of our children can breathe clean air and drink clean water.”

Maybe it was a mistake for the prompter, but maybe she accidentally said the quiet part out loud. I’m sure the prompter said, “Reduce pollution.” But I'm also sure reducing the population is a part of the deal. Bill Gates and other WEF pundits have been promoting population control for decades, a remnant of eugenics that is being ushered into the 21st-century Democratic platform.

This is a death cult.

Return of the DINKs

The left has revealed it’s no longer just the party of killing babies. It's also the party of eliminating the possibility of having them at all. JD Vance received immense backlash from the left, recently calling out the “childless cat ladies” running the Democratic Party. He’s right. Democratic voters are more likely to not have children by choice. They aren’t childless due to medical reasons or the inability to conceive, but by choice, more than their Republican counterparts.

There was a University of Chicago poll that was conducted in 2022 that found 38% of Democrats had no children compared to 26% of those on the right. Like Planned Parenthood’s free abortions, it shouldn’t be surprising. This has been an ongoing movement pushed by the left for decades.

William A. Burly argued in a New York Times op-ed in 1990 that having “fewer children mean[s] a better life and a healthier environment.” He went on to say, “This truth should be taught to our kids," which, unfortunately, he was in the perfect position to do as the principal of an elementary school in New Milford, Connecticut, teaching yesterday’s Millennials, who are now reproducing today at staggeringly low levels. It’s no wonder since they were taught that having kids is a death sentence for personal freedom.

Thirty-four years after Burly’s op-ed appeared, Timothy Carney in the Washington Examiner wrote that New Milford has suffered such a decline in birthrate that it closed its community birthing center. Student population at the high school dropped so much that the JV and varsity football teams had to combine.

This is happening all throughout the country.

Why fight the fight when you can just eliminate the children?

In 2023, the term “DINK” resurfaced on TikTok after a long hibernation from the late 1980s. It stands for “dual income, no kids.” DINK videos of child-free couples bragging about the ample time and money they have to travel and eat at nice restaurants surpassed 33 million views last year. Social media’s glamorization of refusing to “reproduce” may push thousands of potential parents, who are grappling with the decision of whether to go “child-free,” over the edge. How different would fertility rates look today if TikTok videos romanticized parenthood instead?

Surely, a political party starving for power and control would realize that it needs a future populace to carry the torch, but it's aborting its own future voters. That party also stands directly alongside globalists who want “freedom thinkers” to have as little power as possible.

But having kids gives you just that.

Having kids makes you a free thinker because it gives you something to live for beyond yourself. It requires you to reflect on the future and the kind of country you want for your kids. It forces you to reflect on what citizenship means and how to teach that to the next generation. It gives you a reason to fight. It gives you the kind of autonomous power that globalist governments do not want citizens to have in any shape or form. Whether it’s financial freedom in owning a home or the intellectual freedom in knowing that my kid is mine, you can’t force me to teach them the dark principles and beliefs of the far left.

Ultimately, the far left knows that the much bigger and tougher battle is indoctrinating the sacred home where parents have complete control over the lessons and the principles that they choose to shape their kids.

So why fight the fight when you can just eliminate the children? You will own nothing and be happy. You will raise no one and be happy — like the DINK couple. You’ll have extra money to spend on gifts and lavish trips around the world, the freedom to stay up late, the freedom to live for “yourself.”

Will Trump hatred win?

But like so much of what the far left believes, the opposite is true.

I don’t know what will convince people of the lies that they’re buying into. The first night of the Democratic National Convention was filled with stunning, provable lies. Democrats are counting on their voters to be stupid, and they’ve laid the groundwork to deceive the rest.

They need you to hate Donald Trump more than you worry about your personal finances. They need you to hate Donald Trump more than their open borders. They need you to hate Donald Trump more than fentanyl and drugs on our streets and our children being killed by illegal aliens. They need you to hate Donald Trump more than exploiting your taxpayer dollars to house illegal immigrants in hotel rooms while veterans are on the streets. They need you to hate Donald Trump more than you notice the people who are strung out on drugs in our cities and suburbs. They need you to hate Donald Trump more than communism or the possibility of nuclear war. They need you to hate Donald Trump more than their cult of death.

When we get into the voting booth, do Americans actually hate Donald Trump more than what’s in their own best interest? Will you buy what they’re selling?

Editor's Note: This article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.

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.