Steve Deace: Why America must PAUSE AI data centers before it's too late



The race to build the infrastructure powering artificial intelligence is accelerating at breakneck speed, but BlazeTV host Steve Deace warns that the public is being asked to accept sweeping changes without meaningful scrutiny.

“There’s a real sense that this stuff has just kind of gone from zero to 60 like that,” he explains. “Like why do we have to do all this like right now, right? And you know, we’re all realizing now the aftermath of ‘we have to shut the country down right now. It’s the worst thing right now. You don’t want to kill Grandma right now.’”


“And now, you know, we’re seeing the evidence of how much of that was a lie from the very beginning. So anticipate moving forward that an instant crisis that needs to be solved right now that no one knew about 10 minutes ago is going to be met with wide swaths of suspicion,” he continues.

However, there is a nuanced discussion to be had on data centers.

“Two things can be true at once, right? We certainly shouldn’t be taking people’s land in order to put up a monstrosity that almost none of the people in that community will then ultimately get a job to work at. At the same token, we need data,” Deace says, noting that the government simply needs to “pause and listen to the people.”

“Hear what they have to say. Make your case to the people. I would not just pause. I would pause for a purpose. And it would be a purpose of we’re going to have a national conversation about this,” he adds.

Want more from Steve Deace?

To enjoy more of Steve's take on national politics, Christian worldview, and principled conservatism with a snarky twist, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Americans bear ‘significant responsibility’ for heat wave killing the French, Paris official says



As Europe's record-breaking heat wave continues and excess deaths in France climb past 1,300, a Paris official says Americans bear responsibility for the crisis because of emissions and air conditioning.

Audrey Pulvar, Paris' deputy mayor for international relations, lashed out at American tourists and influencers who had mocked the city for its lack of widespread air conditioning as temperatures soared past 104 degrees Fahrenheit.

'OMG, this is so rich.'

"Dear American journalists and social media 'influencers': for days, some of you have been criticising and making fun of Paris because the city does not have A/C in every room. ... OMG, this is so rich!" she wrote on Instagram.

She argued the U.S., which she claims is the world's second-largest greenhouse gas emitter, bears a "significant amount of responsibility responsibility" for the warming driving the crisis, noting American cities are roughly 90% air-conditioned. "So please, enough with the lecture. Just start doing your part."

France has recorded at least 1,300 excess deaths since June 21, according to Sante Publique France, with officials warning the count could climb higher.

About 15,000 elderly people died in France's 2003 heat wave, though air conditioning still hasn't caught on nationwide. As of June 25, officials had confirmed at least 55 drowning deaths — a toll likely to keep climbing — after many have sought relief in unsupervised waterways.

Paris went so far as to ban public alcohol consumption on streets and in parks to "preserve emergency services and allow medics to concentrate on taking care of the most vulnerable."

RELATED: Here's what the war in Iran means for you at the gas pump

Dimitar DILKOFF/AFP/Getty Images

Only about a quarter of French households have air conditioning, versus roughly half in Spain and Italy and 90% in the U.S. and Japan. The French have long associated air conditioning with illness, attributing colds to "thermal shock" from sudden temperature changes, according to GB News.

With Parisians sleeping in parks and booking hotel rooms to escape the heat, even traditionally AC-skeptical politicians — including France's Green Party — have conceded wider adoption may now be unavoidable.

U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright drew fire days earlier, telling a London conference that "cold is a vastly larger killer than heat is," citing deaths tied to high energy prices after Russia's 2022 Ukraine invasion.

On Europe's air conditioning scarcity specifically, Wright said a "shale gas revolution" in the U.K. could have cut electricity bills and avoided the shortage altogether.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

20 years of failed doomsday: The Al Gore grift exposed



It’s been 20 years since Al Gore scared the world and dropped the climate film "An Inconvenient Truth," which detailed all the catastrophes that would befall us.

And while he still claims he was right — the receipts tell a much different story.

“His predictions ... none of them came true,” BlazeTV host Pat Gray comments.

“The Arctic sea ice, remember that? Supposed to be gone completely. ... You might notice if you look, the polar ice caps in the Arctic are not gone. They have not disappeared. They are there,” he says.

“How about the melting glaciers and the snows of Kilimanjaro?” he asks, adding, “Still there.”

The film warned that there would be a "rapid retreat of the snow on Mount Kilimanjaro and that the Glacier National Park glaciers would be gone" by now.


“In fact, in Montana, where the park is, they used to have signs that read, ‘These are disappearing soon, so make sure you enjoy and take a picture.’ And they finally took the signs down in 2020 because it wasn’t happening,” Gray says.

Sea levels were also supposed to rise and cause catastrophic flooding, making the Westside Highway in New York disappear.

“The reality is the Westside Highway is still there. The sea levels have not risen 20 feet. In fact, global sea levels have risen nine inches since 1880,” Gray explains.

“But right now there’s gradual retreat occurring rather than rapid city sinking inundations of these places. In other words, what’s happening is the opposite of what he predicted. The opposite. The sea levels are actually receding now,” he continues.

Gore also claimed that carbon dioxide and emissions would see a rapid unchecked rise in atmospheric CO2 levels past the 500 parts per million mark and that hurricane activity would rapidly increase.

Neither of those happened either.

“He was hysterical about everything, and he won an Oscar for it, and he won a Nobel Prize for it in 2007, and he got virtually nothing right,” Gray says, emphasizing, “Nothing.”

Want more from Pat Gray?

To enjoy more of Pat's biting analysis and signature wit as he restores common sense to a senseless world, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

US birth rate plummets to record low in 2025 amid estimated 1,126,000 abortions



Vice President JD Vance, who with second lady Usha Vance is expecting the delivery of their fourth child in July, told pro-life advocates gathered for the 52nd annual March of Life last year, "I want more babies in the United States of America; I want more happy children in our country; and I want beautiful young men and young women who are eager to welcome them into the world and eager to raise them."

While an American baby boom might be in the cards, it certainly did not take place last year.

'This is the choice that Americans now face, and the stakes could not be higher.'

New data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reveal that U.S. fertility rates dropped to an all-time low in 2025.

There were an estimated 3,606,400 births last year — a 1% decline from 2024. A plurality of babies — just over 1.11 million — were born to mothers in the 30-34 age group, which conforms to the years-long trend of women increasingly delaying family generation until older ages or putting it off altogether.

The general fertility rate, which references the average number of children born to a woman in her lifetime if she were to experience the age-specific fertility rates of a given year, was 53.1 births per 1,000 women ages 15-44. The rate has decreased by 23% since 2007, the year of the Great Recession.

Whereas the year-over-year decline in births per woman in the 15-44 cohort was 1%, the fertility rate for females ages 15-19 declined by 7% last year, dropping to 11.7 births per 1,000 females — another record low. The CDC notes that the fertility rate for teenagers has decreased by 72% since 2007 and 81% since 1991.

RELATED: 5 steps to reset your body's clock to God's natural design

Bettman/Getty Images

The total fertility rate averaged 3.7 births per woman in 1960; 2.12 births in 2007; 1.64 in 2020; and 1.6 in 2024. It fell again last year to 1.57, according to a Wall Street Journal calculation using the new CDC data.

This is particularly bad news for those keen to bequeath the nation to heritage Americans since the total fertility rate necessary for a population to maintain stability and replenish itself without requiring replacement by foreign nationals — what is referred to as replacement level fertility — is 2.1.

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said last year that a rate below replacement "is a national security threat to our country."

Total fertility rates have plummeted across the first world. In the European Union, for example, the rate reportedly dropped from 2.62 in 1964 to 1.34 in 2024. The same year, the rate in Scotland dropped to 1.25 and to 1.41 in England and Wales.

Canada became one of the developed nations suffering "ultra-low fertility" in 2024, with a total fertility rate of 1.25 kids per woman. The Canadian government credited "increased educational levels, greater participation in the labor market, changing social norms, and the widespread use of contraception" for helping drive down the number.

The U.S. Congressional Budget Office projected in a report earlier this year that the fertility rate for foreign-born women in America this year will be substantially higher than the rate for native-born women, leading the home team 1.79 to 1.53.

The report noted further that:

on the basis of recent laws, policies, and demographic trends, CBO projects that the rate of population growth will generally slow over the next 30 years, from an average of 0.3% a year in the next decade to an average of 0.1% a year from 2037 to 2056. The total population is projected to stop growing in 2056 and remain roughly the same size as in the previous year.

The CBO added that net immigration is expected "to become an increasingly important source of population growth, especially if the annual number of deaths begin to exceed the annual number of births as expected in 2030."

Some analysts have attempted to put a positive spin on America's dwindling fertility rate.

"Women now have better control over their reproductive lives, so there’s not as much unintended pregnancy as there used to be," Alison Gemmill, an associate professor of epidemiology at the UCLA School of Public Health, told CNN. "Our timelines have shifted."

According to data released last month by the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute, there were an estimated 1,126,000 clinician-provided abortions last year — nearly one-third the number of the reported live births.

In addition to exerting "better control" over their God-given procreative ability, Gemmill suggested that some would-be parents are rethinking having kids in light of concerns about so-called climate change, the economy, and raising a child in a supposedly "inequitable world."

Karen Benjamin Guzzo, a demographer at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, recently told the New York Times, "There’s been a lot of doom and gloom about the birth rate, but the decline is also a success story."

The Heritage Foundation has, alternatively, acknowledged this bleak trend as a crisis, noting in a January report, "American family life is truly at a crossroads. One path is marked by unwed childbearing, low rates of marriage, low fertility, low commitment, and easy divorce. This path is associated with the view that family formation (or its avoidance) is primarily about fulfilling adult desires and adult needs."

"The other path elevates the family unit as an inherent good based on the commitment and sacrifice of husbands and wives for each other’s sake and for the sake of children that their union would welcome into the world. This path is associated with the view that all life is sacred and that sees the family as a source of fulfillment for adults because they direct their energies to the good of the family unit instead of to themselves alone," continued the report. "Underlying this view is a deep sense of gratitude in knowing that human beings are here by God’s grace and that children are divine gifts."

"This is the choice that Americans now face, and the stakes could not be higher," the report added.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Schools made boys the villain. The internet gave them a hero.



After Nick Fuentes catapulted into the spotlight following his appearance on “The Tucker Carlson Show,” Americans faced an unwelcome reckoning: Who is this person, what are “Groypers,” and is he really so revered by young boys and men?

The media frenzy produced predictable reactions. Republicans insisted he doesn’t represent them. Democrats blamed Donald Trump and “fascism.” Reporters rushed to diagnose “extremism” in young men. Everyone condemned the boys who followed him. Almost no one asked what made those boys susceptible to Fuentes’ content in the first place.

In today’s school culture, behaving and learning like a boy are treated as failure.

We labeled these boys racist, anti-Semitic, and homophobic without ever considering how we got here. It is easier to scold than to understand. But when it comes to Gen Z and social media-saturated boys, we default to quick, reductive narratives that ignore the larger picture.

Here is the real crux of the issue: If you ignore boys’ needs in school, the red-pill internet is more than happy to fill that void.

One father of an 11-year-old boy went viral after describing what he saw at his son’s elementary school band orientation night. “I despise the Groyper movement,” he wrote, “… [but] as the night went on it became obvious to me why young men rage against the larger social system.”

He described classrooms covered in DEI messaging, trans Pride flags, and “basically ever[y] sort of race and gender social justice messaging you can imagine.” He also noted the political commentary from teachers and the strict behavioral expectations placed on boys throughout the school day.

He shared two points that reflect what millions of boys experience today: “The boys are treated almost as though they are defective girls,” he wrote. His son even came home excited because he had seen a male teacher at school.

That is the reality for boys across the country. Thousands of families report a growing feminization of schools that leaves boys bored and disengaged. As author Richard Reeves put it on “On Point,” many parents feel their sons are square pegs being forced into round holes.

Boys just aren’t engaged. I wonder why?

But it isn’t just boys. The ongoing assault on male teachers — and their resulting exodus from the school system — leaves boys without anyone to look up to.

Scott Yenor captured what is happening in a recent article for the Federalist. “Today’s schools emphasize belonging and nurturing at the expense of objective standards,” he wrote. Turning in work on time is no longer imperative; loose grading is expected; schools are now run by inclusivity and "gentle parenting."

Yenor ends with a pointed observation: “Men should be given enough credit to know where they are not wanted.”

With schools shifting ideologically and male teachers disappearing, boys lose crucial role models. Research shows male teachers — especially in elementary and middle school — boost test scores, engagement, and behavior. Young boys, particularly those from unstable backgrounds, rely on male teachers for support they cannot get elsewhere.

The effects on boys who are “treated like malfunctioning girls” go far beyond academics. Boys are falling behind both emotionally and developmentally. They read at lower levels, enter kindergarten less prepared, and take on fewer leadership roles.

In today’s school culture, behaving and learning like a boy are treated as failure.

RELATED: America’s new lost generation is looking for home — and finding the wrong ones

Olga Yastremska via iStock/Getty Images

So the internet, in all its damaged glory, fills the void. As Rolling Stone’s Eli Thompson observed, Fuentes’ content once popped up on Instagram occasionally, but now his voice is everywhere for teenage boys.

“But even when he makes comments they see as fringe, it boosts his popularity because he’s edgy and willing to say whatever comes to his mind,” Thompson noted. “That has become his perfect recipe to get young male fans.”

Thompson identifies a hard truth: It is not the extremist content that hooks them. Boys don’t necessarily identify with what is being said. They identify with being identified.

Does Nick Fuentes promote views we wouldn’t want spreading in a democratic society? Certainly. Is he anti-Semitic, racist, and everything we don’t want boys absorbing? Yes. Boys do need better media literacy so that they aren’t enthralled by money-driven influencers like him.

But none of that changes the basic reality: In times of isolation, boys look for connection.

What can schools do to keep boys from turning to Nick Fuentes? Stop ignoring them. Bring back male teachers. Use instructional methods that recognize the strengths of both boys and girls. Pair boys with strong adult male mentors who teach them to channel their strengths, not suppress them. And when inviting guest speakers, bring in men who model discipline, purpose, and genuine success.

Boys aren’t broken. They’re ignored. Fix that, and the red-pill internet — and Nick Fuentes — lose their grip.

CEO of world’s biggest bank issues harrowing warning: Stockpile THIS, not THAT



Last weekend at the Reagan National Economic Forum in California, JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon issued a chilling warning about a crisis on the horizon.

“It wasn't about coming interest rates, not about inflation curves or crypto adoption,” says Glenn Beck.

It was about survival.

“We shouldn’t be stockpiling Bitcoin. We should be stockpiling guns, bullets, tanks, planes, drones, rare earths. We know what we need to do. It’s not a mystery,” Dimon said, adding that military personnel have warned that “if there's a war in the South China Sea, we have missiles for seven days.”

“Jamie Dimon is not a guy that usually deals in hyperbole; he's not a man who chases the headlines; his words, and he knows this, move global markets,” says Glenn, and yet, “nobody will pay attention to him because nobody is interested in telling you the truth on how dire our situation actually is.”

To ignore Dimon, who is typically silent on such matters, would be an egregious mistake with enormous consequences, says Glenn. He’s reminded of what just happened last weekend when Ukraine — a country practically “in third-world status” — destroyed “one-third of Russia's nuclear strategic air command” with a fleet of drones.

Considering “what could be done here [in the U.S.] with open borders and enemies like China and Iran” should make us heed Dimon’s warning and get ready for this “new era of scarcity” that’s practically knocking on our door.

But how do we do that?

We can start by investing in things that matter and will always matter, says Glenn.

“In a time of instability, Bitcoin becomes an abstraction. It has no mass, it has no utility,” and it “depends on electricity and the internet and a collective belief,” he explains. Compare that to “bullets, fuel, and food,” which “are not ideas” but “lifelines.”

“[Dimon] is not saying abandon innovation; he's saying don't bet your future on intangibles,” says Glenn.

Dimon also acknowledged in his talk that “family, God, [and] country” were of utmost importance and encouraged the nation to see its shortcomings without denouncing the country as a whole.

“Celebrate our virtues — freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of enterprise, equal opportunity. ... You can acknowledge the flaws that we have, which are extraordinary – what we did to the black population for years” — but “don't denigrate the great things of this country,” he said.

“Understand your rights not because you just want to use them but because you know someday you may have to use them,” says Glenn. “Ignore what’s happening today at your own peril.”

To see the footage of Dimon’s warning and hear more of Glenn’s commentary, watch the clip above.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Neoliberalism implodes in a crisis of truth and trust



Since the Enlightenment, liberalism has aimed to remove politics from the political. Given that human history is largely defined by clashing worldviews and violent conflict, the impulse to tame this dynamic is understandable. Liberalism, grounded in secular neutrality and rule of law, sought to suppress the passions that drive men to war. Its answer was to distribute power widely enough so that no single leader’s rage or charisma could lead a nation into chaos.

This project has reached its apex in today’s managerial neoliberal regime, where secular humanism serves as the ruling creed and experts, housed in supposedly impartial institutions, are tasked with determining truth. But the cracks in this foundation began forming long ago.

In the liberal order, the collapse of institutional credibility marks a crisis of truth. And so far, the only answer from the ruling class has been to scream, 'Shut up!'

Our ruling class members have willingly torched the credibility of the very institutions they rely on for legitimacy — all in pursuit of temporary political advantage. That destruction has accelerated a collapse that now feels inevitable. Liberalism faced an epistemological crisis and failed to meet the challenge. Like every tradition that cannot defend its intellectual ground, it is watching its authority erode into dust.

Neutral governance comes with clear benefits. It claims to free society from bitter conflicts over religion and identity. It promises a greater scale of cooperation by stripping away regional particularities — traditions, customs, prejudices — that make governing diverse populations difficult.

Even technical differences tied to nationhood, like currency, units of measurement, or contract law, obstruct trade. But by creating institutions that claim neutrality in matters of faith, culture, and commerce, liberalism increased the scale of possible coordination. It built what amounts to a “minimum viable morality,” a lowest common denominator that allowed incompatible systems to function together.

The problem? That same minimum morality now appears insufficient to hold anything together.

Instead of serving specific peoples with particular needs, modern institutions — staffed by credentialed experts — aim to impose rational, universal standards on everyone. The promise is simple: equal treatment under a neutral system. The administrators of this system are chosen not for their biases, but for their supposed objectivity.

These institutions soon become more than arbiters — they become the final authority on truth. In the liberal order, they are the only legitimate source of knowledge. If it isn’t institutional, it isn’t real.

The economic benefits of this arrangement are obvious. Large-scale cooperation yields immense material gains. Yes, traditions and religious customs may erode in the process, but who can argue with abundance? Prosperity silences most dissent.

As long as the ruling class preserves the credibility of the institutions, the system works. Managerial liberalism turned experts into a new priestly caste — with one crucial difference: This priesthood could actually make it rain. As long as the economy grew and the promises were kept, no one questioned the myth of neutral expertise. All the boats were rising. Why complain?

Unfortunately for the liberal order, human beings are predictably flawed. The institutions were never truly neutral, and the experts were never infallible. Over time, the ruling class got greedy. They stretched their credibility to justify wars and push social engineering — even when it clearly wasn’t in the public interest.

As their grip on power tightened, they grew bolder. Those who ran the system began treating institutional trust as a political currency to be spent. They traded legitimacy for short-term advantage, eroding the very foundation that kept their authority intact.

This trend hit its apex during the global COVID-19 pandemic. Across the board — from the World Health Organization to local physicians — experts promoted obvious falsehoods to maintain power. The betrayal was staggering.

After watching that coordinated institutional collapse, the public started asking uncomfortable questions. If medical professionals — the most trusted experts in life-and-death matters — could lie, what else has the system lied about? Elections? Wars? Economics? History? Suddenly, everything is up for re-examination.

This moment terrifies the ruling class. Its members' entire strategy relied on institutional consensus to shape truth and steer public opinion. This is why disillusioned liberal voices like Sam Harris or Douglas Murray, once celebrated for challenging orthodoxy, now beg the public to get back in the box and stop asking questions.

Epistemology is the branch of philosophy concerned with how we know what we know. Under managerial neoliberalism, experts — and the institutions they populate — became the foundation of knowledge itself. Truth was whatever the expert consensus declared it to be.

Philosopher Alasdair MacIntyre (no relation) argued that the survival of any tradition depends on its ability to confront and resolve an epistemological crisis. In the liberal order, the collapse of institutional credibility marks just such a crisis. And so far, the only answer from the ruling class has been to scream, “Shut up!”

MacIntyre also insisted that resolving a crisis requires more than adopting a new framework. It demands understanding why the old one failed. But the current elite show no capacity for that kind of reflection. Instead of humility, we get hysteria — mockery, censorship, and cancellation from experts who should be asking how they got it so wrong.

The global neoliberal order has hit an epistemological wall, and its expert class members lack the wisdom or self-awareness to break through it. They will continue screeching and lashing out in defense of a collapsing worldview. But the truth is unavoidable: The era of rule by experts is ending.

This crisis brings danger, yes — but also opportunity. A new paradigm is emerging. And whatever comes next, it will not be governed by the priests of consensus.

Democrats Who Exacerbated California Blazes Give Angelenos A Giant Middle Finger

[rebelmouse-proxy-image https://thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/Screenshot-2025-01-09-at-10.41.51 AM-e1736441189183-1200x675.png crop_info="%7B%22image%22%3A%20%22https%3A//thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/Screenshot-2025-01-09-at-10.41.51%5Cu202fAM-e1736441189183-1200x675.png%22%7D" expand=1]At every turn, national and state politicians have failed to do their duty to the taxpayers and feign even an ounce of sympathy.
Immigration Policies: A Life Lost in Texas
play icon

Immigration Policies: A Life Lost in Texas

Biden White House considering declaration of a 'national climate emergency' in order to grant itself special powers



The Biden White House is once again entertaining the possibility of conferring itself unprecedented powers to hobble American energy producers and win over leftists, all in the name of changing weather patterns.

Forbes Media chairman Steve Forbes characterized the proposed declaration as a "cowardly way to try to win this election."

Emergency powers then and now

The National Emergencies Act enables the president to activate special powers during a crisis. Since the law went into effect in 1976, it has been invoked scores of times.

When former President Donald Trump was in office, the Brennan Center for Justice, a leftist public policy institute, raised the alarm about the "vast array of obscure presidential powers" the NEA affords presidents in the face of a supposed emergency.

The Brennan Center noted that the emergency powers "cover almost every imaginable subject area, including the military, land use, public health, trade, federal pay schedules, agriculture, transportation, communications, and criminal law."

One statute unlocked following an NEA declaration would enable the president to "suspend a law that prohibits the testing of chemical and biological weapons on unwitting human subjects." Another would allow the president to commandeer radio stations.

Elizabeth Goitein, senior director and expert on presidential emergency powers at the Brennan Center, noted in the Atlantic that "the president is free to use any of them; the National Emergencies Act doesn't require that the powers invoked relate to the nature of the emergency. Even if the crisis at hand is, say, a nationwide crop blight, the president may activate the law that allows the secretary of transportation to requisition any privately owned vessel at sea."

The New York Times noted in 2019 that when it comes to an NEA declaration, it likely doesn't matter if "there is no true emergency" and that as a "matter of legal procedure, facts may be irrelevant."

While leftists, future Biden boosters, and Fox News hosts complained when Trump declared a national emergency to curb illegal immigration and secure the border, some appear less resistant now to an emergency declaration that affords fellow travelers more power.

Fake crisis, real power

In 2022, Biden faced significant pressure from Democratic lawmakers and other radicals to declare a national climate emergency as a means to unilaterally kill federal oil drilling and ramp up so-called clean energy projects.

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said in July 2022, "The climate emergency is not going to happen tomorrow, but we still have it on the table."

The option is evidently still on the table.

Citing people "familiar with the matter," Bloomberg reported last week that White House officials have renewed discussions about declaring a national climate emergency.

Biden's top advisers would be able to cut back exports of American crude oil just as Iran's oil exports hit a 6-year high and altogether throttle the supply of oil and gas; limit the movement of trains and ships; kill offshore drilling; limit Americans' greenhouse gas emissions; and more.

The Times previously indicated that the regime could also compel domestic industries to produce more renewable energy and transportation technologies and free up taxpayer funds for the Federal Emergency Management Agency to fritter away on supposedly green causes.

Advisers apparently figure the unilateral measure would resonate with "climate-minded voters."

Wrecking the economy

Steve Forbes told Fox Business' "The Evening Edit" Thursday that "you're going to pay for it with an even more troubled economy."

The declaration would "give him the power to stop drilling offshore, stop export of crude, ... delay pipelines and the like — just throttle the whole fossil fuel industry even more than they're doing," said Forbes. "What that only does is wreck the economy. It means higher energy prices."

"Just look at Europe. Germany has two to three times the electricity costs times the electricity costs of the U.S. because of the kind of stuff the Biden administration is doing now. They've learned a hard lesson," continued Forbes. "This administration's throwing it all away, all sensible policies away, as a cheap way, a cowardly way to try to win this election."

Forbes appeared somewhat optimistic, suggesting that most young people "will see through it" and understand the declaration would do them harm as well.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!