All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 6, 2016 - The Ben Shapiro Show
48:36
Ep. 50 - Hillary Schlonged by Trump

Ben talks Hillary's fear of Trump, the rise of Doomsday conservatism, and the left destroying Shakespeare Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
And here we are.
It is Wednesday.
You've made it halfway through the first work week of 2016, and Hillary is working it with Chris Matthews.
His tangle has now extended all the way up his leg, past his thigh, and into regions that we can't discuss here.
We'll talk about all of that.
Plus, are you a doomsday conservative?
You might be, and you don't even know it.
I'm Ben Shapiro.
This is the Benchmark.
You tend to demonize people who don't care about your feelings.
So in the aftermath of President Obama's big weepy fest yesterday, there was a lot of commentary, we did some of it, about whether it was genuine or not.
The more I think about it, the less genuine it feels.
I just don't buy the idea of any major politician breaking down in tears at their first big press conference of the year.
He comes back, every camera's on him, it's going to be the most watched press conference probably he's had all year, or at least until some Big world disaster happens that's his fault and he goes back on camera.
But he comes back and it's a planned routine and halfway through he breaks down.
And as we showed yesterday, he doesn't just break down.
He waits for the cameras to click for a solid five to ten seconds, and then he sort of wipes away the tears, brushes them away, and continues going.
This is an old actor trick.
This is nothing new, and forgive me for being a little bit cynical, but this is the way that the media play this game.
The way the media play this game is Obama, he says that he's gonna- he cries so that he can condemn you as callous, because you're not crying and he is.
That means he's more sensitive than you.
Right, he's playing the same trick that my wife sometimes plays when we're in a fight, which is, he starts to cry, and then, because he's crying, that means you lose the argument.
That's really President Obama's routine, because obviously he hurts more than you do, which means you're a worse person than he is.
And then, if you say, well, I don't really buy this whole routine, like, Captain, you know, Spock over here, Captain Logic, Captain Rational, No Drama Obama breaks down in tears at his first press conference, I don't buy it.
You say that?
And then the media says, well now you're for sure callous!
Because you don't even buy that people have feelings!
You don't even buy that he has feelings!
He has feelings!
Okay.
I know he has feelings.
I just don't think that those were the feelings, okay?
I think that he has feelings of hatred for Republicans, and I think that he is fighting mad over gun owners, but I don't think that President Obama walks around every day crying about the kids of Sandy Hook.
Forgive me, I don't think that's what he does, because if he did that, he would be in the throes of an actual clinical depression.
I don't think that people go about their business every day thinking about all the tragedies that happen all over the world and randomly break down in tears.
That's a sign of mental deterioration and non-health.
I don't think Obama is mentally unhealthy, at least in that way.
So, we'll start with that.
President Obama, yeah, he does his crying routine.
And then, just coincidentally, He has a big town hall that is going to take place tomorrow on CNN, where he and Anderson Cooper will have a testosterone fest.
And they'll have a testosterone fest about gun control.
And then Hillary Clinton had her big interview with Chris Matthews.
Now, when Hillary Clinton wants to trot out any sort of real proposal, when she wants to boost her image among folks on the left, she goes over to Chris Matthews, MSNBC!
Chris Matthews, the guy who rolls out of bed and he's got his hair all askew and his suit is all must and there's sort of charm to that because he looks like a homeless guy from the 1950s, right?
Not a homeless guy now, like a homeless guy from the 50s when everyone tried to dress up and look cool.
He looks like a homeless guy who kind of rolled in off the wanted ads and they stuck him in the middle of the set and just said, okay, film is showing.
Okay, I'm here now!
There goes the alcohol.
Any alcohol at all?
Yeah.
I don't know that he's a drinker.
He might be a teetotaler for all I know.
That's just my description of how he comes off.
And you'll see it.
And here, he is drunk with love for Hillary Clinton.
He's just drunk with love for her.
And they do this ridiculous interview.
And there are two things that are ridiculous about this interview.
The first is that Hillary answers precisely zero questions.
The second is that Chris Matthews then forgives her for answering precisely zero of his questions.
He asks a question, she avoids the question, and they say, well I know why you're not answering the question!
You're not answering the question because you're too beautiful!
That's pretty much how the interview goes.
So here is Chris Matthews asking Hillary Clinton to describe the difference between the Democratic Party and socialism.
Now, there is an answer to this, right?
There are two types of socialism in the world, really.
There's socialism as in like the pure Karl Marx version taken to its extreme, government ownership of the means of production, because that's the only way you can compel people to work.
That's the only way that you can forcibly redistribute all the wealth.
And then there's democratic socialism of Europe, which is we live on the back of capitalism, but we throw this 800-pound gorilla on its back called government regulation in order to make things more fair.
And democratic socialism, the way that it works in Europe, that's what Democrats in the United States are.
They are a European-style party, they are a Democratic-Socialist party, and they have been for 70 or 80 years.
Really, going all the way back to Woodrow Wilson, they've been that kind of party.
So, Hillary can't explain any of that because, after all, she doesn't want to alienate her far-left base, so Chris Matthews asks her, and Hillary Clinton just refuses to answer.
Here it is.
What's the difference between a Socialist and a Democrat?
Is that a question you want to answer or do you rather not?
Well, you know, you'd have to ask... Well, see, I'm asking you.
You're a Democrat, he's a Socialist.
Would you like somebody to call you a Socialist?
I wouldn't like somebody calling me a Socialist.
But I'm not one.
Okay, well what's the difference between a Socialist and a Democrat?
Well, I can tell you what I am.
I am a progressive Democrat.
I'm a progressive Democrat who likes to get things done and who believes that we are better off in this country when we're trying to solve problems together, getting people to work together.
There will always be strong feelings, and I respect that, from the far right, the far left, libertarians, whoever it might be.
We need to get people working together.
We've got to get the economy fixed.
Okay, there's nothing going on there in her head.
I mean, it's amazing.
He asks her that question.
She says, we have to work together.
And he's like, what are you talking about?
And then what's funny is the clip cuts off there, but then he explains what he thinks the difference is and why she won't answer the question.
So he both asks the question and then he also answers the question, which begs the question as to why Hillary even is there, right?
He might as well have a cardboard cutout of Hillary Clinton.
But I think really the reason that she's there is to sit in front of a fire truck.
Maybe she likes fire trucks.
And also because, as Lindsay said, she's got the... Lindsay says that there's something about Mary Hare going in that particular clip.
And there'd be truth to that except that for Hillary Clinton that would probably be physically impossible.
So Hillary Clinton is sitting there with the crazy hair and the crazy expressions and the crazy eyes.
By the way, you remember how Democrats made a big deal out of Michelle Bachmann's eyes?
Remember Michelle Bachmann and Sarah Palin?
They had the crazy eyes.
You remember this?
I challenge you to watch any clip of Hillary Clinton longer than 15 seconds and not get the impression that she is high.
I mean, that's how it feels.
She's got the googly eyes going.
In any case, we don't have to rip on Hillary Clinton's physical appearance.
The camera does that all on its own.
But she continued to do this routine and she's got nothing.
This is really where Hillary is vulnerable.
She has nothing.
Nothing.
She is sort of the Republicans... She's the Democrats' Mitt Romney.
Romney was an empty suit that we figured we would run against Barack Obama, and then people hated Obama so much they would vote for Mitt Romney.
It didn't work because there's a subset of the population that desperately loves President Obama and wants to have his babies.
Hillary Clinton is sort of the Democrat version of Romney.
She's a suit, she's a hack, and she's really got nothing going for her.
Even Bill looks tired and terrible.
He was out there in New Hampshire campaigning for her, and he looks like he's had a couple of shots of Valium.
He looks like that prostate's finally going to get out after wild overuse.
I mean, Bill Clinton's prostate is like the Toyota that you've gotten to 300,000 miles, and you're desperately trying to nurse it to 400.
But Bill Clinton, he looks tired.
Hillary Clinton looks tired.
But the idea is you hate Republicans so much that you will vote for Hillary Clinton, which means that what Republicans need to do is Republicans need to put someone out there who actually is not a milquetoast.
They need to put someone out there who is capable of driving passion, which is – we'll get to this.
But this is one of the reasons I think that Donald Trump, who's not someone I back, at least he drives passion.
Ted Cruz drives passion.
I'm not sure that Marco Rubio does, and I think that's a problem for Marco Rubio.
Anyway, Hillary Clinton was asked by Chris Matthews in this googly-eyed, crazy-haired interview about President Obama's executive action on guns, which, as we discussed yesterday, was really quite minor in scope.
But President Obama blew it up into, I'm taking all of your guns, and I'm the greatest president who ever was.
And so here is Hillary Clinton explaining her perspective.
If you can, again, folks, if you subscribe to the video, you can actually see the visuals, so you will know with what accuracy I speak, but you could actually see the crazy hair that Hillary Clinton is sporting In this particular interview, as she sits in front of a fire truck, across from the rumpled guy who rolled out of his cot at 3 in the morning to do this interview.
Here we go.
I just can't remain silent, and I think we are at a turning point.
And what I said to the man here is, you know, there needs to be a rival organization to the NRA of responsible gun owners who... that they're hunting rights... Moms demand action!
They're collecting rights.
All of that is not going to be affected.
So I'm going to keep beating the drum, and I'm delighted that the president announced the actions he did today.
Boy, Hillary Clinton, again, when I say she's an empty suit, have you ever seen a major sports figure do a post-game interview?
Do you watch—Lindsey watches sports.
I know Jonathan is not as big a sports fan.
But if you watch the post-game interviews with sports stars, athletes, very often they give—they're asked a question like, What did you think of the game today?
You know, do you wish you played better?
I'm just taking it one game at a time, man.
Just taking it one game at a time.
One play at a time.
Don't try to think about next week.
They'll say, which opponents do you prefer?
Well, you know, everybody's tough.
Everybody's out there trying their best.
Just gonna practice.
Stick to our game plan.
Everything's gonna be good.
Hillary Clinton is that, right?
Every question that she's asked is just a string of platitudes.
I'm just going to keep talking about gun control.
Well, that wasn't the question, and also whoop-dee-doo.
But she says that, and we're supposed to just, wow, what courage she has.
Also, when she calls for a rival organization to the National Rifle Association, it's called the federal government.
Right?
It's actually, it's called the Democratic Party.
There are rival organizations to the NRA, we just don't like them.
I mean, the best thing that ever happened to the NRA is Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.
I know, I personally know at least half a dozen friends who have joined the NRA specifically because they fear Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.
Finally, here's, and here's the proof that Hillary is just an empty suit, more than anything else.
Hillary, this happened a couple of days ago, she was asked in a different interview, about Donald Trump and Donald Trump ripping her and her and her disgusting, lewd piece of garbage husband.
And Hillary was asked about this.
And here was Hillary Clinton's answer about Donald Trump.
This is obviously at a town hall in I believe it's in New Hampshire.
I'm interested in your response to the Donald's comment that you and President Obama created ISIS.
I've adopted a New Year's resolution.
I'm going to let him live in his alternative reality, and I'm not going to respond. - And she opens her mouth and cackles.
By the way, she only wears colors that can be found in my child's crayon box.
That is her.
That is a rule.
By the way, Donald Trump is right.
She and Obama did create ISIS.
ISIS did not exist until Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton sprang onto the scene, and they certainly were not a power in the Middle East until Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton sprang onto the scene.
Well, the reason that Hillary is really taking this perspective, that she's not going to fight Donald Trump, is because she tried to, and Donald Trump clocked her.
Into next week.
Okay?
Figuratively speaking, for all of you idiot feminists out there who think I'm talking about hitting a woman, although I've never understood exactly why it is.
Feminists say that women and men are exactly the same.
I've never understood then why it's bad to hit a woman.
If women and men are exactly the same, I think it's bad to hit a woman.
I think it's terrible to hit a woman.
I think that anybody who hits a woman should be severely punished and put in jail.
I think that rapists should be castrated.
I think that anybody who touches a woman in a way she doesn't want to be touched should be punished to the full extent of the law.
I don't think the same thing about men.
Feminists, for some reason, say that women and men are exactly the same, but if a man touches a woman then it's worse, which is a weird perspective.
In any case, Trump knocks Hillary into next week because Hillary, in the last debate, she called Trump a sexist.
And then Trump took out the kitchen sink and hit her with it.
I mean, Trump, it was like a Warner Brothers cartoon.
Hillary was walking down the street and then a piano just fell on her.
And it wasn't the Acme piano, it was the Trump piano.
It was like an Acme anvil, but it was a Trump piano.
And it squished her.
And what it was, was, your husband rapes people.
Basically is what Trump said.
You don't get to talk about sexism when your husband rapes people.
And Trump says that.
He says, you know, the reason that Hillary is ignoring me is because she doesn't want to fight with me.
And Trump is basically right.
He was asked about this on MSNBC by another person with crazy—two people with crazy hair, actually.
I mean, this looks like something—this show, by the way, is sponsored by the Hunger Games.
Apparently, everybody's got the Hunger Games hairdo.
But Joe Scarborough, who's gradually turning into John Kerry with glasses, and Mika Brzezinski, who's starting to look a lot like the hairdo lady from the Hunger Games.
Well, who plays that Elizabeth Banks?
She looks like Elizabeth Banks from the Hunger Games in this clip.
Effie Trinket.
Yeah, Effie Trinket, thank you.
And they're interviewing Donald Trump about Hillary Clinton and here is what it sounds like.
I was attacked nine times during the debate.
Hillary called me sexist.
That I had an inclination.
What does she know about me?
I had an inclination.
When she said that, I said, well, your husband's now campaigning.
It's open season.
Now, if he wasn't campaigning, maybe it would be different.
And if he weren't a past president, it would be totally different.
It would be, you know, I'd leave the spouse out of it.
But he's now campaigning for it.
So all I did was, you know, recite history.
Don't forget.
Don't forget.
He lost his law license.
He wasn't allowed.
He was impeached.
He wasn't allowed to practice law.
He settled for a tremendous amount of money.
I mean, you know, there's a lot of things going on there.
And she calls me sexist.
But haven't they backed down?
Hillary won't even respond.
I don't call it that.
Because tomorrow they can start it up.
I'm just saying this.
It's fair game.
When they attack me, I'm going to attack them.
Now, if they don't, I would leave that off the table.
You're saying today you're only going to bring up Bill Clinton's past history as a possible sexual harasser if she accuses you Of being sexist.
Sure, that's what it's all about.
That was what it was.
Right.
Had nothing to do with ISIS.
Now, with ISIS, she lied.
Because she said, ISIS did a video.
And that was a long time ago.
I just want to clear this up, because the press is having a field day here, and they're not getting it right.
I haven't noticed that.
So, if you... You're having a field day.
I haven't noticed that.
No, no, no.
In all fairness to the press, maybe the first time in my life...
So suddenly you like the press.
I don't understand that.
They're starting to like me.
They're starting to get it.
They're actually starting to get it.
So what I'm saying is, I just want to be very clear, and a lot of people want to hear this.
So if Hillary Clinton attacks you on economics, or on foreign policy, then Bill Clinton's not fair game in that realm.
It's only if she accuses you of being sexist.
Now, he would be fair game if he did something or said something having to do with foreign policy and other things that I would have disagreed with.
But you wouldn't attack him on personal grounds.
No, I wouldn't need to.
There's so many things I can attack them on.
Okay, and he's right.
There are so many things that he can attack them on.
Now, the truth is that I think that he should just make this his mantra.
I think it should be, Trump 2016, at least I don't rape people.
Right?
I think that'd be fine.
I mean, politics is blood sport, and if Hillary Clinton says that Donald Trump, he's mean to Mexicans, and he says, yeah, well, your husband rapes people, I'm fine with that.
I have no problem with that.
You know, the Democrats have been doing this for years.
In 2012, they ran a campaign ad accusing Mitt Romney of murdering a woman.
Literally murdering a woman, right?
The Soptic ad.
You remember this?
If you remember all the way back to 2012, there was a super PAC that worked with Barack Obama, and its aim was, it was Priorities USA, I believe, and they ran an ad that was specifically from a guy named Joe Soptic, who'd been picked out by the Obama campaign, and Joe Soptic said, I used to work for a company owned by Bain Capital, I was fired, I lost my health insurance, my wife died of cancer, that's Mitt Romney's fault.
Mitt Romney killed my wife of cancer using his magical Mormon underwear, right?
That was basically the commercial.
And So, I don't care if Donald Trump hits Hillary with the rape thing.
In fact, I think Donald Trump should hit Hillary with the rape thing.
I think he should hit her with it as often as possible because it's true.
Because it's true and because she is an enabler.
And this isn't one of those things that gets left off the table.
There's been public knowledge for years.
And somehow, the Clintons have gotten away with it.
And good for Trump!
And by the way, Trump is... Trump's a fibber, right?
Because the truth is that Trump... What makes Trump a fun candidate to follow and what makes him dangerous to Hillary is, as I've said before, if you are in middle school, there's always the one guy you don't want to fight.
And the one guy you don't want to fight isn't necessarily the buffest guy in the class.
The one guy that you don't want to fight is the guy who is out of his damn mind.
Right, that guy is the one who you don't want to fight, because he might be the littlest guy in the class.
It's usually a little wiry guy, right, with ADD.
That's the guy in the class that you don't want to fight, because it's possible that he brought a pocket knife to school that day, and he's gonna stab you in the gut.
Well, that's Donald Trump, and you can see it.
Donald Trump, he was interviewed yesterday, and he was still on the Bill Clinton thing, and he says something that is exactly right.
Here's Donald Trump being exactly right.
I just wanted to ask you, you know the big headlines last week about Bill Cosby.
Is there a difference between Bill Cosby and Bill Clinton?
Well, the whole Cosby thing is a weird deal and he's got himself some big problems and you almost have to ask Bill Clinton that question.
It would be a very interesting question to somebody to ask him.
He certainly has a lot of very strong charges against him and that's pretty Pretty bad stuff, and it only got brought up because she said I have sexist tendencies, and I respect women so much, and I'll protect women, and I'll protect them, and I'll protect the whole country.
And by the way, one of the things he does that's smart here is he says that everything he does is defensive, right?
He says, I didn't launch this attack, I was attacked, and then I responded in kind.
Well, you know, whether or not that's true, would he have brought this up sooner or later?
Probably.
But it's good stuff.
And by the way, he's right.
Bill Clinton and Bill Cosby are The same.
They are the same.
Okay?
And I will prove to you that they are the same.
Here, by the way, is there some audio that just broke of Bill Clinton mocking Paula Jones, right?
Paula Jones, for those of you who don't remember, Paula Jones was sexually harassed by Bill Clinton.
Paula Jones was brought up to his office when he was the governor, and he took out his penis and said to her that he wanted her to kiss it.
And then he had his troopers basically escort her back to her job and then she got threats from her bosses that if she said anything about it, she would be fired.
That's the Paula Jones story.
And it was the Paula Jones sexual harassment lawsuit against Bill Clinton that led to the discovery of the Monica Lewinsky material.
So everybody tried to turn that story into Monica Lewinsky.
Everyone forgets about the part.
where Bill Clinton sent his Arkansas state troopers, who apparently had done this before, to bring Paula Jones to Bill Clinton so that he could proposition her sexually.
Everybody seems to just forget about this.
Here is Bill Clinton mocking Paula Jones as a floozy.
She's a floozy because she wouldn't kiss it.
So here is the audio that was discovered of Bill Clinton doing this.
And he said, in his view, political money had been going into it all along.
So they had now changed Paula Jones' hairstyle and made her look less like a floozy.
And she didn't seem to have any visible income, but was always driving a new car.
He said, I didn't have anything to do with it.
I know nobody around had anything to do with her getting audited by the IRS, but he said independently it stands to some reason.
Since she doesn't have any visible means of support and is always traveling around and driving a new car, no job, and so forth.
And he said basically from her point of view, since there's no possibility that any lawyer, he said including these political lawyers, are going to tell her there's not much likelihood that she will get any money out of this.
That it's just about being somebody because if she settles the case, Okay, so in case you couldn't hear that, basically what Bill Clinton is saying there is that they did up, he's talking about why the IRS audited Paula Jones in the middle of the sex scandal.
And the answer is they audited her in the middle of the sex scandal because they wanted to throw mud on her skirt.
That's the real reason.
What he says is, well, they were seeing her driving around in new cars and she didn't have any visible income.
The Clintons have not had any visible income for a very long time, and they haven't been audited by the IRS.
But Bill Clinton is saying that there was no likelihood she was going to prevail.
Okay, Bill Clinton paid her $850,000 to go away, lest people forget.
He paid her nearly a million dollars in not a sexual assault suit, in a sexual harassment suit.
That's a lot of money to settle to make somebody go away.
And here's the real proof, okay, that Bill Clinton and Bill Cosby are the same.
I'm going to read to you two quotes.
One from an alleged victim of Bill Clinton, and one from an alleged victim of Bill Cosby.
I'm not going to tell you which is which.
If you know the stories, you'll probably get it.
But you tell me which one of these is worse.
Here's one quote, and one of these was said on national television on 60 Minutes.
I was told there was going to be a dinner.
When I got there, no one ever arrived.
He asked me if I wanted a glass of wine.
I took a few sips.
It had a horrible taste.
And I started not feeling well.
He helped me up by my underarms with both hands.
He walked me into the next room where there was a mirror on the wall and he told me to look at myself.
Something was wrong with me.
And then he took my right hand and he put it behind my back.
I remember seeing semen on the floor and I felt some liquid on my hand.
That's when I knew something sexual was going on.
Okay, that is alleged victim number one.
Here's alleged victim number two.
Then he tries to kiss me, and the second time he tries to kiss me he starts biting my lip.
He starts to bite on my top lip, and I tried to pull away from him, and then he forces me down on the bed.
And I was just very frightened, and I tried to get away from him, and I told him no, that I didn't want this to happen, but he wouldn't listen to me.
It was a real panicky, panicky situation.
I was even to the point where I was getting very noisy, you know, yelling to please stop.
And that's when he pressed down on my right shoulder and he would bite my lip.
When everything was over with, he got up and straightened himself and I was crying at the moment.
And he walks to the door and calmly puts on his sunglasses.
And before he goes out the door, he says, you better get some ice on that.
And he turned and went out the door.
Okay, which one of those is worse?
They're both really, really bad.
Which one of those is worse?
Unclear to me which one of those is worse.
In one case, you're actually drugging a woman to have sexual relations with her.
And in the other, you're taking a fully conscious woman and raping her.
Right?
That's the allegation.
One of those people was Juanita Broderick talking.
One was a victim of Bill Cosby.
You tell me.
That one of those people, the perpetrator, the alleged perpetrator, you tell me one of those people should be an icon in American politics, an admired man, and somebody whose wife should defend him on the campaign trail and pretend that she is a spokesperson for women everywhere.
Yeah, it's a bunch of crap.
It's a bunch of crap.
And so hitting Bill Clinton on this stuff is fair game.
Bill Clinton was asked yesterday, by the way, if his sex history was fair game, and he gave a very uncomfortable, awkward answer.
He sort of said yes, sort of said no.
There's no good answer for him.
Of course it's fair game.
Of course it's fair game.
Are you kidding?
Are you kidding?
If a Republican... Let's say, for example, Carly Fiorina's husband had gone around allegedly raping people, and Carly Fiorina had threatened those people.
How soon do you think she'd be out of the race?
Would it take 30 seconds?
10 seconds?
5 seconds?
Negative seconds?
It's ridiculous.
Anyway, so, that's one issue I wanted to talk about, is the Trump versus the Hillary issue, because one thing is clear to me, and that is that Hillary's vulnerability relies on nobody hitting her hard.
People tend to think that undefined candidates are strong.
People tend to think that the candidates where we, where they're milquetoast candidates, they're kind of, they're empty screen candidates upon which you can project an image that those are strong candidates.
Obama tried to portray himself that way in 2008, it wasn't true.
I think that they're weak candidates if you have somebody who's willing to go on the attack and at least you will say of Trump that Trump is willing to go on the attack and he's willing to play dirty and he's willing to say things that other people are not willing to say.
By the way, it isn't playing dirty to bring up Bill's sexual history.
That is absolutely fair game.
All right, the other thing that I want to talk about here is This is Trump versus the rest of the GOP, or Trump and Cruz versus the rest of the GOP.
Right now in the polls, Trump and Cruz are leading by a wide margin.
Trump is attacking Cruz, saying that Cruz is not a natural-born citizen and may not be eligible for the presidency.
This is nonsense.
It's not true.
According to virtually all constitutional lawyers, Cruz is eligible for the presidency.
Basically, here's the way it works.
To be a natural-born citizen in the United States under the Constitution, It has never been super clarified by the Supreme Court, but in 1790, there was a Natural Born Citizen Act, and it said, if you have a parent from the United States, if you have a parent who's an American, and that person has a kid abroad, the kid's a Natural Born Citizen, and that's the actual language that they used.
That's pretty much as close to the Constitution as you can get, because it was contemporaneous in time.
So it gives you an idea of what that phrase, Natural Born Citizen, means.
But essentially, Natural Born Citizen breaks down into two categories.
One is that you were born in the United States, and the other is that you have a parent who was a citizen, and Cruz, his mom is from Delaware, his dad's from Cuba, he was born in Calgary, he's a citizen.
Trump is going after him anyway, because Trump is a little bit fearful of him, but no matter, Trump and Cruz are clearly kind of separating from the rest of the field at this point, at least in the early polling.
And Donald Trump is summing up something, I think, that is the rationale for why Republicans and many conservatives are siding around either Trump or Cruz as opposed to any of the other candidates.
Here's Donald Trump explaining that the Republican Party hasn't done enough to stop President Obama.
He didn't have the authority or the power to do it, but he did it anyway.
The Republicans didn't stop him.
That's right.
Did that embolden him now to pretty much decide, write laws on his own through executive action, violating the Constitution and the rule of law?
Is that how you see it?
The Republicans did not stop him.
He's getting away with murder.
This recent budget situation, which basically gave Obama every single thing he wanted, having to do with the Syrian refugees coming into our country, having to do with borders and weak borders and all of the things that he wanted, he just got in this new budget.
I've never seen a budget pass so fast.
It looks like it got done in a day.
And I'm just saying, where is Ryan and where are all these people to, you know, to do something, to negotiate or to do something?
He got everything he wanted.
We got nothing.
I mean, we got nothing.
And all we're doing is increasing our budget now, our deficit.
You know, if you look, we're at $19 trillion.
Now we're going to be at about $21 trillion very soon.
Who's there to negotiate these budgets?
I've never seen anything get passed so quickly.
And the Democrats got everything they wanted.
Okay, so that's one take, right?
So Donald Trump is saying the Republican Party does nothing to stop Obama.
Here's Paul Ryan.
You hear him call out Paul Ryan, the Speaker of the House, by name.
Beardy McWisdom has lost the beard.
So he had been growing that beard for the last couple of weeks.
His beard is gone and he's back to looking like Eddie Munster.
And Paul Ryan, who is, I think, a conservative guy on some things and not a conservative on others.
I'm actually, the truth is, I'm really not that big a fan of saying that somebody is conservative.
I will say that somebody holds a conservative position.
Just as I'm not a huge fan of saying that somebody is either a good person or a bad person, I'm more fond of saying that they do a good thing or a bad thing.
But in any case, here is Paul Ryan talking about stopping President Obama's agenda.
You heard Trump saying that he's done nothing.
Here's Ryan responding.
Conservative as well.
So number one, I'm hitting the reset button.
We're going to do things differently around here in the house.
Number two, I'm decentralizing power.
So every conservative, every member of Congress has a greater ability to participate in the process so that we can really have this place work the way the founders intended it to work.
But number three, We have to use every tool at our disposal to keep this executive branch honest.
To keep oversight over them.
So let's take the executive amnesty.
We went the court route and we've been successful.
We're going after the president in court on Obamacare issues as well.
We're succeeding in court there.
We've used the power of the purse with riders on a whole host of things.
Pro-life riders, Internal Revenue Service riders, EPA riders.
And at the end of the day, Sean, what really matters though It's winning an election.
We have to have a conservative in the White House.
We have to have a conservative in the White House that isn't trashing the Constitution, that isn't going with the phone-in-the-pen routine.
And that is why, and the reason I took this job, the reason I took this job, and my colleagues know this, is we have to go on offense in 2016, and we have to offer a bold agenda to the country.
So that the people of this country who do not like the direction America is heading, which we don't, that we owe them an alternative.
We have to give them a bold conservative agenda so that the men and women in this country can decide which way the nation goes in 2016.
So that if we win that election, we want to mandate election.
If we win that election, Then we have the mandate.
Then we have the wherewithal.
Then we have the Republican president and the Republican Congress with a conservative agenda to put in place in 2017.
That is why I'm doing this job in the first place.
Okay, what he's saying here, and this is a real divide among conservatives.
Trump is saying they're doing nothing.
They have the power of the purse and they've done nothing.
That's correct.
Paul Ryan is saying, well, we're, you know, trimming around the edges.
We've added some riders here.
We've added some riders there.
By the way, we haven't defunded Planned Parenthood.
By the way, we haven't stopped Obama's slashes to the military.
By the way, we haven't really done much of anything.
We've let him go through with his executive amnesty using the power of the purse.
We've filed some lawsuits, but pretty much, you know, individual Congress members can file a lawsuit.
Like, okay.
So Trump says we're not doing anything, and Paul Ryan says, well, we have to win elections.
So this is the great divide inside the Republican Party right now.
And it is a serious divide.
Jim Garrity, who's a good columnist for National Review, a guy whose writing I enjoy, he wrote a piece that's being widely praised by the establishment side of the party called The Rise of the Doomsday Conservatives.
And what he says is, quote, the American right is divided between those who think our country has serious problems I think that's right.
I think there are people in the Republican Party who think we have problems, and then there are people who say, we're five minutes from the end, or at least fundamental transformation is taking place, and we've got to stop everything dead in its tracks.
I think that there's a crisis mentality for some, and there's a non-crisis mentality for others.
In fact, I think that Andrew Klavan and I, who are good friends, you know, I think that we actually signify this debate.
I think that Andrew thinks things are basically going to be okay, that, you know, we'll be able to roll back some of this stuff.
It's not the end of the world.
The Paul Ryan omnibus isn't the end of the world.
And there's people like me who think, okay, well, it may not be the end of the world, but every step toward the end of the world is one step closer to the abyss, and the abyss is a lot closer than we think, right?
The world isn't going to end because of Paul Ryan, but every time Republicans, every time Republicans surrender to President Obama, an angel loses his wings, right?
So I think that the Republican Party, this is a serious problem because if there are people like me who really believe that we're, you know, this close to the edge, and then we look at other people who are saying, well, you know, you're saying we're this close to the edge, but really this close to the edge.
So if we give away this much, we're okay.
We look at them and we say, well, you're the ones who are going to push us over the edge, right?
You're the ones who are going to allow us to fly over the edge.
I think that the conservatives need to be a doomsday party because the truth is that Every good conservative is a little bit of a doomsayer.
Every good conservative believes that liberty is at risk.
Every good conservative believes that freedom is on the edge.
And I'm not just talking about, you know, the people in the establishment are fond of trying to quote Ronald Reagan at the doomsday conservatives, but it was Ronald Reagan who said that freedom is never more than one generation from extinction.
Right?
How many establishment Republicans do you know who believe that freedom in the United States is one generation away from extinction?
Not very many, I would imagine.
Most people who are Bush fans, Jeb Bush fans, John Kasich fans, they think that freedom is maybe a hundred years away from extinction.
They don't think it's five, ten, twenty.
A generation's twenty years.
They don't think it's twenty years away from extinction.
If you don't think like that, even if you're wrong, if you don't think like that, you're not going to defend liberty with the sort of gut anger and resolve necessary in order to defend it.
I mean it does take a rage on behalf of liberty in order to defend it.
I'm not going to sit here and say the people who are angry about the violations of our Constitution that those people are being foolish or that they're dunderheads.
Not only do I fully understand it, I'm one of them.
Do I think that's the only motivating feeling?
No, I think the anger has to turn into a focused determination.
I don't think that sort of vague anger at the world Donald Trump style is the best solution, but the anger is useful and it has to be channeled toward determination to do something now and to stop Obama in his tracks.
And until the Republican Party acknowledges that the doomsday conservatives, as Jim Garrity calls them, actually have a point, Then we do have a problem, because we see them as people who are sticking their heads in the sand.
We see these people as the ostriches who brought us Bill Clinton, and told us Bill Clinton was fine, and then brought us Barack Obama, and have been saying, well, Obama's really, really, really bad, but he's not the end of the country or anything.
And they'll bring us Hillary Clinton.
These are the same people who are sanguine about Hillary Clinton.
She won't be as bad as Obama.
These are the same people who say that every surrender to Obama isn't the end of the world.
Look, nothing is the end of the world until it's the end of the world, and that's sort of the point.
And you don't know which straw is gonna break the camel's back, but if you don't treat any of the straws as capable of breaking the camel's back, that camel's gonna be carrying an awful lot of straw before long, and that's the problem inside the Republican Party.
Okay.
So, we're a little bit late, but we're going to talk things I like and things that I hate.
So, I have a lot of great things for the Things I Hate segment today, so I'm particularly excited about this.
But, things that I like, I don't think I've mentioned this book before, but there's a really great book that most people haven't heard of.
It's called Every Man Dies Alone.
It's by a guy named Hans Falada, and it's really a terrific book.
My dad actually discovered it in a New York bookstore.
He's walking around browsing, and they brought out a new edition.
It was written by a guy who was held captive by the Nazis, and the book is the story of a husband and wife, an older husband and wife whose son is a brown shirt and is killed in World War II, and they decide that they're going to resist Hitler.
And this was written contemporaneously with World War II.
I think he actually wrote part of this in jail.
And it's just a beautiful, beautiful book.
It really is.
Because it's all about how their relationship, which is fragmented, starts to come back together around resistance to Hitler.
And doing little things.
Not big things like organizing terrorist attacks or anything.
But little things.
It's really quite a beautiful book.
So check it out.
Every Man Dies Alone by Hans Falata.
They're making a movie out of it.
I think it comes out next year.
And it's supposed to... Hopefully they'll stay true to the book.
Now, the only thing Hollywood can do right these days is still call Nazis villains, although even that is on the line, right?
I mean, if you watch the first Captain America movie, even then, the Nazis couldn't even be the full bad guys.
They had to have a breakaway group from the Nazis, right?
Hitler wasn't bad enough.
Red Skull was a breakaway from the Nazis.
He was too extreme for Hitler.
That Hitler was immoderate.
So, okay.
Anyway, now to things I hate, which of course is the more amusing part of the show.
A couple of things that I hate.
Let's start with Jennifer Lawrence.
I'm not sure I can ever watch a Jennifer Lawrence film again.
Between Jennifer Lawrence doing her routine about how she is underpaid after making millions and millions and millions of dollars for crying in front of a camera.
Okay, that's bad enough.
But now, she has done an interview where she talks about how Planned Parenthood is the greatest thing that ever was.
Planned Parenthood made her the success that she is today.
And here is what she said.
She said, quote, My mom was really religious with me when I was young.
She's not so much anymore.
And I wouldn't have been able to get birth control if it weren't for Planned Parenthood.
I wouldn't have been able to get condoms and birth control and all these things I needed as a normal teenager who was growing up in a Jesus house.
And now I am a successful woman who has not had a pregnancy.
So, it turns out the only way to prevent pregnancy is to go to Planned Parenthood, and avoid your Jesus-loving mom, and go to Planned Parenthood, and get some condoms.
That's the only way to avoid pregnancy, because who knows, you could be walking around, you might slip and fall on a penis, you need a condom available at all times, you need birth control available at all times, because obviously it's impossible for teenagers to exercise any form of self-control, or for that matter, to go down to the local pharmacy and buy a box of condoms for five bucks.
That's too much.
The taxpayer has to sponsor it.
If it weren't for Planned Parenthood, Jennifer Lawrence wouldn't be the great success we know, and some other actress would have made hundreds of millions of dollars doing what it is that Jennifer Lawrence does.
And what a tragedy that would be, right?
That would be the end of the world.
If Jennifer Lawrence had gotten pregnant and had to marry the dad, what an end-of-the-world scenario that would have been for all of the rest of us, and I'm so happy for Jennifer Lawrence She never got pregnant because we all sponsored her birth control pills from Planned Parenthood.
Thank you, Planned Parenthood.
Without you, there would be no Winter's Bone.
Or there would be, but it just wouldn't have Jennifer Lawrence in it.
So, okay.
Hollywood actresses talking about...
How Jesus homes are creepy and terrible and all these religious parents with their crazy religious strictures and their whole don't have sex with people before you're married routine.
It's people like this who drive people to make decisions that actually end with pregnancy and end with non-marriage.
There's a great book by By Charles Murray I was called coming apart and and the Charles Murray book is is all about he wrote one book about Differences in IQ between it was called the bell curve between various races and got himself in all sorts of trouble because facts are troublesome things and and he had social science research and It didn't support liberal perceptions, and so this was obviously a problem.
So he said, the next time I do this, I'm not going to write about black people at all, I'm just going to write about white people.
So he wrote a book about the differences between upper-class white people and lower-class white people, and what he found is the messages being preached by upper-class white people were being imbibed by lower-class white people, but upper-class white people weren't living that way.
So people like Jennifer Lawrence, she's not going to have a baby before she gets married, and if she does, she has millions of dollars in the bank.
And she's probably, in all likelihood, just statistically speaking, people who make the kind of money Jennifer Lawrence makes, they get married.
People who are upper- even upper-class liberals tend to get married and have kids inside the confines of marriage still.
The vast, vast, vast majority.
Lower-class whites, they'll look at Jennifer Lawrence and they go, oh, well, let's act like her.
People who don't make as much money.
They tend to look at the celebrity culture and they think it's OK.
So Tina Fey has a couple of kids out of wedlock and they figure, OK, well, you know, I can do that, too.
Well, no, you can't.
Tina Fey makes millions of dollars and you're working down at the local Walmart.
So probably that's a bad idea.
But the Hollywood clique pushes a morality that most of even they don't live because it's considered tolerant and diverse and wonderful for them to do all of this.
So even though an increasing percentage of these people do do the things they preach, it isn't even close to what the rest of the country does, and that's a major problem.
And by the way, Jennifer, you could have afforded condoms then.
You can certainly afford condoms now.
And if you want to give all your money to Planned Parenthood to buy some poor Jesus home girl in Oklahoma or Kansas or whatever a box of condoms – I'm sure that you can make that happen.
It's not my responsibility Okay, that's one thing.
I hate here's another thing.
I hate even more so oh yeah by the way Cecile Richards tweeted out this this picture of Jennifer Lawrence Cecile Richards the head of Planned Parenthood tweeted this out with the the clapping hands emoticon and and the I love you gif of Jennifer Lawrence because they love her now they love her so much I love that by the way the Jennifer Lawrence Completely ignores the fact that Planned Parenthood aborts hundreds of thousands of babies a year.
She just kind of skips right over that part.
And I like how she took the... What's really fascinating is even she knows it would be a step too far to say that she loves abortion.
Because she says in that interview, and here I am as a proud single woman who's never been pregnant, Right?
She's not somebody who says, here I am as a proud single woman who's had three abortions from Planned Parenthood.
Because she knows that everybody would then look at her and go, no one's going to your movie ever again.
We find you despicable.
So that's it for Jennifer Lawrence.
Okay.
Shakespeare is one of my favorite things in life.
Shakespeare is beautiful.
Nobody needs to talk up Shakespeare.
No words are sufficient for describing the power of his language, the beauty of his language.
And by the way, the strength of his plots.
Everybody always focuses in And Shakespeare having this wonderful command of language, which of course he does, and inventing characters, which he was probably the first person to ever invent the modern notion of the character.
But people forget about the fact that he's great at plot.
I mean, Hamlet has a fantastic plot.
Such a good plot that they hijacked it for The Lion King, right?
And used it for The Lion King.
But, I mean, how many Shakespeare plays have been hijacked for other purposes?
West Side Story is Romeo and Juliet.
The Lion King is Hamlet.
And his plays are being remade now.
You know, there's a movie which I really want to see with Michael Fassbender doing Macbeth now.
Okay, so Shakespeare wrote for the Globe Theatre, the old Globe Theatre in London.
And now, the Globe Theatre in London has a brand new director.
A brand new artistic director.
The first female artistic director.
Which is fine, right?
No, I don't care.
I mean, if she's good at it, she's good at it.
There's only one problem.
She's gonna suck at it.
Her name is Emma Rice.
And Emma Rice is the new Artistic Director of the Globe Theatre.
So, her inaugural season will see one play, Cymbeline, change title to Imogen, reclaiming the play for the central female character to put her center stage.
She's also going to do A Midsummer Night's Dream.
Here's the problem.
She was speaking at the 2016 Wonder Season at Shakespeare's Globe.
She said that she was keen to prove actresses' careers had just as much longevity as men's, even after children.
And so what is she going to do?
She wants to cast male characters as females now.
She wants to cast male characters as females.
And we have some past productions from the old globe that show this.
This is The Taming of the Shrew.
With the shrew on the left and the male character on the right.
By the way, another play that was remade is Kiss Me Kate, right?
As the Cole Porter musical.
Okay.
To make the taming of the shrew with two women completely defeats the purpose of the play.
Right?
The play is all about a man who's a chauvinist marrying a woman who's a shrew for her money.
Right?
That's what the play is about.
And he tames her and she simultaneously tames him.
That is the purpose of the taming of the shrew.
It's about the divide between the sexes.
It's not about a butch lesbian trying to turn another butch lesbian into a lipstick lesbian.
Right?
That is not what the play is about.
And it doesn't work if that's what the play is about because it's a bizarre setup in the first place.
And, and two, that's just not, it's not an important enough human relationship to write a full play about because the fact is that the battle between the sexes is the thing that has animated human relations for all of human existence.
The battle between women and other women has not animated human existence.
It's the differences that divide us and bring us together, that define relationships between the two most important parts of human beings, the male and the female, and that produce the next generation of children.
I'm sorry, lesbian relationships are not as important to society as male-female relationships by virtually any standard, particularly to society, not to the individual.
The individual might be fine, great, whatever.
It's your life, your business.
But to society, not as important.
And when you're depicting something in art, there has to be a sense of importance to society in order for the art to be compelling.
This is not compelling in any way.
In fact, it's stupid.
And if I were to watch this, I would walk out because...
I'm not interested in watching a woman tame another woman.
It's ridiculous and it's stupid and it makes no sense.
They did this... It's bad with Taming of the Shrew, which is they play specifically, specifically about the differences between the sexes.
It doesn't make any sense to have her... to have this one being a promiscuous chauvinist, right?
Which is what the main character of Taming of the Shrew is, right?
And then to have the female just be like a normal...
It's not real-to-life.
Shakespeare was the first guy who tried to write characters real-to-life.
This is not real-to-life.
But it gets worse.
They're now trying to play plays like Richard III with female characters.
So this is, I believe, is this Richard III?
This is a picture from Richard II.
With Katherine Hunter, who you just saw playing, I think, the same actress, playing the female in Taming of the Shrew, right?
And now she is, or the wife in Taming of the Shrew, Katherine, in Taming of the Shrew, she's now playing King Richard II, or sorry, King Richard III.
So the hunchbacked king is now a little old lady.
Which makes, again, no sense, because Richard III's entire character is built around the fact that he has a thwarted masculinity.
That is his entire character.
The entire character of Richard III is that he is thwarted by his hunch from being able to seduce women.
And so he builds his entire regime around trying to bully a woman into loving him.
That is what Richard III is about.
It makes no sense with a female character like this.
It's just, it's idiotic, and it's ridiculous.
So...
So what's amazing about this lady who's doing all of this stuff now, and these are old productions so she's not responsible for these, but proving that feminism is out to ruin pretty much everything that there is in life.
Here is the lady who has now been chosen for her vast qualifications in Shakespeare.
She doesn't know Shakespeare.
Right?
She doesn't know Shakespeare at all.
She says, on the language of Shakespeare, Rice said she was, quote, very respectful but not reverent, having only directed one Shakespeare play in the past and sometimes struggling to understand the texts herself.
Okay, so she doesn't even know how to put up a Shakespeare play, and she doesn't even know what they say.
But don't worry!
She knows enough about them to know that you can interchangeably switch the characters.
Right?
You can have the Duke of Gloucester be a woman.
This is what she said.
She wants the Duke of Gloucester to be a woman in King Lear.
Right?
Why shouldn't it be Queen Lear?
Because it's idiotic.
That's why.
Because women are not as possessive in the same way that King Lear would be as a man.
There are differences between men and women, and pretending they are interchangeable is stupid and doesn't play an art.
No one is going to see these plays and think, wow, what a great perception of humanity.
And it undermines Shakespeare.
It's disrespectful to the author.
It's disrespectful to the author.
I mean, it's one thing that they've been doing these all-male plays, right, where they have males playing the female parts, because that's what Shakespeare apparently did.
Apparently there are some plays where they had males play the female parts.
It's one thing if you're trying to be historically accurate.
But for me, I would prefer, I think that Shakespeare would have preferred, if women were regularly on stage, that a woman play the woman's part.
Okay?
I don't think Shakespeare would have preferred that a woman play Richard III.
It's asinine.
And not only is it asinine, it's disrespectful to the author, and it's disrespectful to reality, but the left has to remake art as they wish reality to be in the hope that this will then convince people that art is reality as it is.
They take an image in their head, they project it onto art, and then they say to people, art is a reflection of real reality, not the reality in my head, and so you end up with stupidities like this.
And it just, to ruin Shakespeare is such a crime against humanity.
I mean, you really have to go out of your way to ruin Shakespeare, and that's what she's doing.
She's going out of her way to ruin Shakespeare, all in the name of female empowerment.
Because clearly in London, the chief threat to female empowerment is that you might have a Shakespeare play with a male in the male part, not the mass rape in Rotterdam of women by Muslim men.
Now that's not, which the authorities have been ignoring for years.
That's not a big deal.
That we should ignore.
We should ignore the fact that men are bullying their wives and daughters into wearing hijab all over the world.
That we should ignore, but what we should really focus on is the fact that Richard III has historically been played by a man.
That's really where it is.
Because if someone with a vagina can't play Richard III, we're not an equal society.
So, welcome to the world in which the left has completely... The left systematically goes through life and destroys every part of it.
Everything they can possibly destroy, they destroy.
They destroy sports, they destroy art, they destroy movies, they destroy literature, they destroy politics, they destroy freedom.
It's what they do, because they have to tear everything, everything has to be torn down to build their crystal castle in the sky.
Like Doctor Manhattan in Watchmen.
They have to go to a distant planet and build their crystal castles, but they don't merely do it on a distant planet, they have to do it right here.
And in order to do that, they first have to turn the Earth into Mars, meaning they have to level everything.
▲
Export Selection