Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

June 29, 2016 - The Ben Shapiro Show

57:48

Ep. 142 - When The Left Says Science They Really Mean 'Shut Up'

Ben talks Benghazi, Trumponomics, and ‘The Bachelorette'! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	On Monday, science advocate Neil deGrasse Tyson took to Twitter to issue another of his myriad idiotic thought-vomit missives.
	It said, This, of course, is typical stuff from Tyson, who considers himself a genius, but also tweets things like this.
	line constitution.
	All policy shall be based on the weight of evidence.
	This, of course, is typical stuff from Tyson, who considers himself a genius, but also tweets things like this.
	He says, if Batman wants so badly to be a bat, he might be more intriguing if, like Marvel's Daredevil, he were also blind like a bat.
	Bats are not blind.
	He also tweeted, people who are anti-Trump are actually anti-Trump supporters.
	They oppose free citizens voting for the real Donald Trump.
	What?
	But his main point in this tweet is the same as that of most bureaucratic leftists.
	There's an intellectual oligarchy capable of determining scientific truth and ruling accordingly.
	So all you peons should bow before the great and powerful vested Oz.
	Now, there are some issues on which scientific truth can be ascertained, but those issues pretty much never have anything to do with public policy.
	So we all agree that gravity exists.
	That doesn't determine whether we ought to build a machine to defy gravity and shoot it to the moon, for example.
	More broadly, public policy should, of course, be evidence-based, but we have a problem of judgment.
	What evidence counts?
	How heavily should we weigh certain evidence against other evidence?
	How do we weigh risks?
	What makes an astrophysicist from Colombia more capable of weighing risk to my life than anybody else?
	Why shouldn't we all get a say?
	There is no evidence to suggest that one big, special astrophysicist man knows better than the aggregated knowledge of billions of people.
	In fact, precisely the opposite is true.
	Let's take, for example, one of Neil deGrasse Tyson's favorite issues, global warming.
	Let's accept Tyson's incorrect premise that global warming is nearly entirely man-made.
	Presumably, Tyson would then say, we have to shut down vast swaths of industry across the world.
	But how are we supposed to determine the risks from global warming when all the predictions contain high levels of uncertainty?
	How do we determine whether a given measure actually stops global warming and whether the risk of destroying the living standards of billions of people is worth the cost?
	Most importantly, what gives Neil deGrasse Tyson or anybody else the moral wherewithal to prize his own priorities, you know, flooding a hundred years from now, more than the poor person who loses his job and has his life shortened by decades to fulfill Neil deGrasse Tyson's priorities?
	Here's the thing.
	There are no easy answers here, even where scientists presumably have a higher capacity for analyzing the evidence.
	Values in the end still determine risk assessment.
	The people still have a right to a say in their own lives.
	So, take another issue.
	Look at crime, or abortion, or taxes.
	We can have all the same evidence on the table and still disagree.
	What magic reason king would be able to invariably determine the proper measures based on a proper calculation of the evidence?
	And why do I get the peculiar feeling that this magical reason king in Neil deGrasse Tyson's mind looks exactly like Neil deGrasse Tyson?
	The purpose of a republic is to avoid the divine right of kings or the divine right of bureaucrats.
	Rationalia, from Tyson's country, doesn't exist, not because rationality doesn't exist, but because only intellectually bigoted people think rationality isn't impacted by the value premises that you choose.
	Rationalia, in practice, ends up looking like tyranny.
	The Soviet Union thought it was rational, so did Nazi Germany, so does North Korea.
	No dictator has ever thought that he was irrational.
	Maybe Neil deGrasse Tyson would be a benevolent dictator.
	Maybe he would be.
	But historically, tyranny based on self-proclaimed rationality hasn't been.
	Maybe if Tyson actually cared about that evidence, he'd stop promoting his own personal utopia.
	I'm Ben Shapiro.
	This is the Ben Shapiro Show. - You tend to demonize people because they don't care about your feelings. - So first of all folks, welcome, welcome to our next Facebook Live podcast.
	We're very excited that you're here with us live to the thousands of people who are watching us simultaneously.
	We're very excited to have you.
	If you want to see the rest of the show after we do this about 15 minutes and then we're going for another three hours.
	No, it's really like another 40 minutes, but it's a lot more.
	There's a lot more where that came from.
	You go to dailywire.com if you just want to download the audio.
	You go to SoundCloud or iTunes, and you can get it on your phone.
	But you should go to dailywire.com so you can continue to see me in this beautiful punim after we stop for the day on Facebook Live.
	Okay, so we begin today with fallout from Hillary and Trump.
	So there's some new polling data, and I think that it's worthwhile going through this polling data.
	If you look at the headline on Drudge right now, it's shock poll.
	Clinton and Trump in dead heat.
	And there is a poll from Quinnipiac today that shows that Clinton is leading Trump 42-40.
	Now, that's not... I mean, statistically it's a tie because it's within the margin of error, but it's just another poll where Hillary is a little bit ahead.
	And people are going nuts over this.
	Look at how close this is.
	This is so close.
	And if you put in third-party candidates, then it becomes a 39-Clinton, 37-Trump race, which demonstrates that, like, a third of the public just wants to kill themselves rather than vote, basically.
	But, you know, this is presumably good news for the Trump campaign.
	This is presumably good news for the Trump campaign.
	There's another problem, though, and that is that there's a new poll out from the battleground states, and this battleground state poll basically shows that It's not that close.
	This battleground state poll shows that Hillary is destroying Trump in virtually every battleground state.
	So right now, she's beating him 51-37 in Florida, 45-41 in Iowa, 50-33 in Michigan, 48-38 in North Carolina, 46-37 in Ohio, 49-35 in Pennsylvania, and 45-38 in Virginia.
	Now, the people who love Trump and think he's going to win, they've started to do the unskew the polls, don't trust the polls routine.
	Nate Silver came out today.
	He says there's about a 79% shot that, as things currently stand, Trump loses to Hillary Clinton.
	That could change, obviously.
	That's how forecasting works.
	You forecast based on the material in front of you right now.
	He's not predicting what's gonna happen tomorrow.
	Maybe Hillary drops dead of a heart attack, right?
	But he is predicting, based on current conditions, how would this go.
	People are very upset with Nate Silver.
	For saying this, and they're upset because they say, well, Nate Silver got Trump wrong in the beginning.
	The reason Nate Silver got Trump wrong is because, and he's admitted this, like an idiot, he ignored his own polling data.
	He thought he was smarter than the polls.
	Here he's saying, here's what the polls say, right?
	If you look at 538, which I follow closely, if you look at 538, they always have two measures.
	One is called the Polls Measure, and one is the Polls Plus Measure.
	The Polls Measure is more accurate than the Polls Plus Measure.
	Polls Plus is sort of his opinion mixed in.
	With the polls, and that was less accurate.
	The polls themselves actually are pretty accurate.
	The bottom line here is this, people are saying this is a close race, it's getting closer.
	The reason it's getting closer is not, is not because Trump is getting more popular.
	The reason this race is getting closer is because Hillary is an utter crap show.
	It's because Hillary is a turd tornado.
	Hillary Clinton is so unlikable on every level that she is making this into an extraordinarily close race.
	And the evidence of this is that in the last 20 polls, in the last 20 polls, there is one poll, one, where Donald Trump polls above 41%.
	One.
	Hillary's all over the place.
	By the way, she leads in all 20 of these polls, but In these polls, her level of support ranges from 42%, 40%, all the way up to 51%.
	So basically, the American public is trying to convince themselves, Oh God, are we really going to vote for this person?
	I can't believe we're going to vote for this person.
	And then she says something, they go, fine, I'm not going to even vote.
	I'm not going to bother.
	I'm just going to go to a barbecue and stick my head in the oven.
	You know, that's, that's, that's sort of the calculation that's going on.
	So the volatility in this race is not about Trump.
	Trump's not volatile.
	He's not going anywhere.
	The volatility is about Hillary.
	Will Hillary make herself- Hillary's running against Hillary now.
	Will Hillary make herself so unpopular that she loses to Trump?
	Because Trump isn't gonna make himself more popular.
	He's not.
	He's been stagnant in these polls for literally months.
	Right?
	Hillary's just going up and down like a yo-yo.
	So, the reason that she keeps going up and down is because she's awful.
	She's an awful person.
	She's a terrible, terrible person.
	She's a vile, corrupt heretic with a history of defending her rapist husband and a history of lying in order to get ahead.
	She's awful in every possible way.
	And more evidence of that came out yesterday, obviously, with regard to Benghazi.
	So, the mother of one of the Benghazi victims was on Megyn Kelly's show last night.
	My heart goes out to you as a mother.
	I know how difficult it must have been for you, and you were not able to stay throughout the whole movie.
	I left as soon as Sean came on screen, or the person that portrayed him.
	by like virtually everything else Hillary says, here's the mother of one of the Benghazi victims. - My heart goes out to you as a mother.
	I know how difficult it must have been for you and you were not able to stay throughout the whole movie.
	- I left as soon as Sean came on screen, or the person that portrayed him, I couldn't handle it.
	Hillary's a liar.
	I know what she told me!
	Oh, Pat.
	I know it must be so hard.
	So many people want to put this behind them and say Hillary sat there and she testified.
	She testified for her own 13 hours and they say it's done.
	They say there's no story about Benghazi and that she did everything she could do through the fog of war and she came right out and said she is not lying.
	Suggesting you are the one who's lying about what happened at that Air Force base.
	Bull feathers!
	That's just plain old bull.
	I know what she said, and not only did she say it, but Obama said the same thing to me, and Panetta, and Biden, and Susan Rice.
	I went up to all of them, begging them to tell me what happened.
	And they all said that it was the video.
	Okay, so, this obviously is true.
	I mean, what she's saying is true.
	Hillary's a liar and Hillary's a terrible person.
	And this image, which we all remember of Hillary standing in front of the coffins, jabbering about YouTube videos offending Muslims.
	It's devastating that this woman is a candidate for high office.
	It really is.
	She's awful in every way.
	Even Chris Matthews over at MSNBC!
	Chris Matthews!
	Even he says, it's unbelievable!
	I mean, look at this report!
	Can you even believe it?
	First I come here and I comb my hair with a shoe?
	And I sit in front of a camera and I talk?
	That's okay!
	I love Hillary Clinton.
	I mean, I would whack Hillary Clinton's cankles if I could, but let me tell you, even I'm disturbed by all this.
	What say you, Michael Isikoff?
	Go!
	If you had somebody or any other American out there in the third world, in a tricky situation, there's a revolutionary country, and you heard they were just under attack, and there may be some people still alive there, wouldn't you do everything you could?
	Isn't that part of our culture, to go back and try to save?
	Our people leave nobody behind?
	It's an old Marine rule?
	And shouldn't we really make an effort?
	What do you think happened in that three-hour meeting in the White House?
	They were dithering around.
	You know, I think it's useful information myself.
	I want to know when there's a screw-up, a snafu here, this portent, because those other two guys were killed later.
	Maybe we could have saved him.
	He's right, of course.
	When you lose Chris Matthews, then you've lost your own base.
	And it's clear.
	Everyone knows Hillary's terrible.
	Like Hillary is going around going, I don't know why everyone thinks I'm terrible.
	And the truth is, she knows, just doesn't want to acknowledge it.
	She's corrupt and she's awful in every way.
	And again, as I've said before, the only candidate in the race who can make Hillary Clinton look palatable is Donald Trump.
	And the only candidate in the race who can make Donald Trump look palatable is Hillary Clinton.
	This Benghazi report comes out yesterday, and the material in it really is quite devastating.
	And the media keeps playing this game, the media keep playing this game where we're supposed to pretend there's nothing new, there's no narrative here, it's old news, just put it behind us.
	Let's talk about all the new things about Hillary Clinton.
	There are no new things about Hillary Clinton.
	The last thing that was new about Hillary Clinton happened in like 1973.
	I mean, there's nothing new about Hillary Clinton.
	Jim Jordan, who's a congressman from Ohio, he says that, he's talking about the report, he says that Benghazi was basically a suicide mission.
	So this was so big, this was such a part of their legacy, that they, you know, she's on the same side as the goddess of history, for goodness sake.
	And so they were committed to staying there, even though the security situation was so bad, so bad that one diplomatic security agent said, Benghazi is a suicide mission, everybody there is going to die.
	That's how bad it was.
	But they were committed to staying there.
	And then, of course, we get a terrorist attack on September 11, 2012, and they're 56 days And of course, that's true.
	Trey Gowdy, who is out there playing lawyer in his hair, changes radically day to day.
	But Trey Gowdy, who is from South Carolina, is a prosecutor, and he leads the House Select Committee on Benghazi.
	He was smacking the CIA for their cover-up.
	They apparently were unwilling to answer questions.
	About exactly how the embassy was evacuated, because it was evacuated, it turns out, not by Hillary Clinton's friends, the Libyan people.
	It was evacuated by all the people who used to work with Muammar Gaddafi, the guy who she sat there and chortled about having had killed in a coup.
	So here's Trey Gowdy talking about it.
	We were led to believe that it was friendly Libyan militias that helped defend the annex during the night and came to our rescue after Ty and Glenn were killed.
	That is not what the witnesses told us.
	One in particular, and I hasten the ad, CIA did not want us talking to this witness.
	They made it very difficult for us to talk to this witness, but we found him.
	And what this witness told us is he worked the phone trying to find someone to come save them.
	And he wound up calling a group that none of the other committees identified, none of the other committees knew about it, and it was comprised of former military officials under Qaddafi.
	And they came, and not only did they evacuate our guys, Andrea, they saved other lives.
	We had people, not just the four killed, there were people severely wounded.
	So time is of the essence.
	- Stop it there.
	Bottom line is this report is filled with material that people didn't know before, including as I mentioned yesterday, the fact that there were Marines on the tarmac in Spain who were being told to take on and off their uniforms, like some sort of Benny Hill sketch.
	And it's because we were afraid of sending them in 'cause it would look like we were starting a war with Libya, even though we'd already gone to war with Libya in the first place.
	So there's a lot more to get to folks, and we're drawing near the end of our Facebook Live segment here.
	So if you want to join us for that, then go to dailywire.com.
	We have so much more coming up that you're going to want to join us to see, including Good Trump and Bad Trump.
	You're going to want to see all of that.
	So we'll get to that in just a moment.
	Plus, I'm going to rip on The Bachelorette.
	So if you want any of that, then you're going to go to SoundCloud or iTunes for the free download audio.
	But if you want to actually see it in all of its masterful glory, then subscribe at dailywire.com.
	Okay, so that being said, now let's move on to Donald Trump.
	Okay, good Trump, bad Trump.
	So we know Hillary Clinton is an absolute disaster area.
	We know that she's a manipulative, terrible person.
	The worst person in American politics.
	And she honestly, as a human being, she makes Barack Obama look like a piker.
	She's a terrible human being.
	And Hillary Clinton Because of that, people are struggling with, okay, I don't like Trump, but I also don't like Hillary Clinton, so Hillary's numbers are bouncing up and down.
	They're bouncing up and down.
	Trump's numbers continue to stall.
	They're just exactly where they were, and so whenever people say that this is a dead heat, that's almost solely reliant on whether Hillary makes a mistake.
	Trump making a mistake dumps him between 33 and 40 percent.
	Hillary making a mistake dumps her between 49 and 40 percent.
	So on Trump's best day, on his best day and Hillary's worst day, they might be tied.
	On Trump's best day and her best day, she kills him.
	On his worst day and her best day, it's a disaster area all the way across.
	Trump, there's good Trump and there's bad Trump.
	As we know, we like to play good Trump, bad Trump here on The Ben Shapiro Show.
	So today we will start as always with good Trump because we don't want to be unfair to the Republican nominee.
	So it's time for a little bit of good Trump.
	So Trump was talking about terrorism.
	There's a major attack in Turkey yesterday.
	Lots of people, 50 people killed in Turkey, another 250 injured, three suicide bombers blew themselves up simultaneously at the Turkish airport.
	And let me just say this as far as ISIS policy, as far as how to defeat ISIS, it's important to recognize something.
	The reason that ISIS continues to carry out these terror attacks is because There's a group of people who believe that they are establishing a caliphate.
	If you destroy the caliphate, if you destroy ISIS land, this area in Syria and Iraq that no longer exists, if they are just utterly wiped out, there is no state, there's nothing, then they just turn back into kind of a normal terrorist group.
	The reason they're succeeding, you remember a few months back, here on the Ben Shapiro Show, we actually went through a long piece of ISIS propaganda, and the entire thing centered around We've built this massive caliphate that now controls five times the territory of Great Britain, kind of thing.
	You get rid of that, it makes it very difficult for them to recruit, very difficult for them to make the case they're going to be a success.
	The problem is, nobody in the region actually has a full interest in getting rid of ISIS.
	Turkey doesn't have a full interest in getting rid of ISIS because ISIS is a bulwark against Iran.
	Iran doesn't have a full interest in getting rid of ISIS because they're saying to the world, you need us to stop ISIS.
	So if ISIS goes away, maybe they turn against Iran again.
	Syria doesn't want to get rid of ISIS because Bashar Assad is using his attacks on ISIS as cover to kill all of the dissidents who want to get him out of power.
	Saudi Arabia hates Iran, so they don't like ISIS and they're scared of ISIS, but they also know that ISIS is fighting Iran right now.
	So nobody really has an interest in getting rid of Iran except for us.
	and maybe some of the Western European countries.
	That's pretty much it.
	And none of them have the guts to do anything about it.
	All that said, here's Donald Trump talking yesterday about his policies on terror.
	And this is legitimate good Trump.
	Here is Donald Trump on waterboarding. - Can't do waterboarding, which is, it's not the nicest thing, but it's peanuts compared to many alternatives, right?
	So we can't do waterboarding, but they can do chopping off heads, drowning people in steel cages, they can do whatever they want to do.
	Okay, so what he's saying here is, of course, right on a moral level, but at the same time, it doesn't go quite far enough, meaning that you should make the case that waterboarding actually helps us gain intelligence.
	It's not a revenge measure.
	It's not like we capture a terrorist and waterboard him for fun.
	It's not you chopped off a guy's head, hey, now we've got you here, let's waterboard you.
	It's you capture the guy, you want information from him, but this is at least not bad Trump.
	If this is not fully good Trump, this is at least not bad Trump.
	Here's some actual good Trump, I think.
	Here's Donald Trump talking about how, with regard to the terror war, you have to fight fire with fire.
	They probably think we're weak, we're stupid, we don't know what we're doing, we have no leadership.
	You know, you have to fight fire with fire.
	We have people out there.
	Okay, so we have to fight for...
	And that, of course, is true.
	He doesn't define it, but that's true.
	But this is where Trump is better, right?
	And it shows in polls, in this Quinnipiac poll, more Americans trust Trump to handle ISIS than trust Hillary to handle ISIS.
	And that's because he uses this sort of language.
	That's good, Trump.
	Now, unfortunately, it's time for bad Trump.
	So bad Trump is Trump did a speech on jobs yesterday.
	And it's awful.
	It's full-scale awful.
	I mean, it's Bernie Sanders-level awful.
	Basically, Donald Trump's big plan to bring jobs back to America is to shut down global trade.
	That's basically his plan.
	He says it's about enforcing trade agreements, but he's using that as an excuse to just destroy trade agreements.
	He doesn't like free trade.
	He thinks that free trade results in lost American jobs.
	So before we start on analyzing Trump's speech itself, I want to show you a couple of graphics just so you know how stupid this is.
	In terms of what does free trade do for global wealth, what does it do for people who are living all across the world?
	And then I'll get to what it does to America, because that's really what Trump cares about.
	Which is okay!
	Here's what it does to global wealth.
	This is chart, this is gonna be chart 21.
	Okay, here's what it does to global wealth.
	From 1981 to 2015, this is the percentage of people across the world who are living on less than a buck ninety a day.
	In 1980, in 1981, 44.3% of all people on planet Earth, nearly half the people on planet Earth, were living in abject poverty.
	Like the worst sort of poverty.
	Less than $2 a day they were living on.
	Now, today, that percentage is 9.6%.
	You understand?
	We took the poverty rate across the globe, and we sliced it by a factor of four-fifths, basically.
	By 80% we sliced it.
	That's an amazing achievement.
	That's an incredible achievement.
	And that is because we are trading with other countries.
	They're providing us their labor.
	We're paying them for that labor.
	We're buying their products.
	They're buying our products because now they have money to buy our products because their labor is worth something.
	Free trade made this happen.
	1981 is when communism still ruled.
	One-third of the globe.
	Communism falls, free trade begins to become the way of the world, and you can see there's a straight line down, a straight line down as free trade begins to predominate across the Western world.
	So that's what's happened.
	So don't give me the, it's bad for people all over the world, free trade.
	No, it's very good for people all over the world, free trade.
	Second chart.
	Okay, so what's it done to the United States?
	So one of the great lies that we've been told, this is chart 20.
	One of the great lies that we've been told is that the middle class is disappearing, right?
	We keep hearing this from, we've heard it now from Obama, and from Hillary, and from Trump.
	The middle class is disappearing, we're getting crushed, the 1% is gaining, and everybody else is losing.
	Okay, here's what this chart shows, if you can't see it, folks.
	Basically, this is a chart that is broken down into five separate segments.
	It's a bar chart, and it's broken down into five separate segments.
	From 1980 to 2014, I think it's 2015, it shows the rich, the upper middle class, the middle class, the lower middle class, and the poor and the near poor.
	Right?
	And so it shows what percentage of the American population each of those categories comprises.
	Yes, you see, at the very top, there's that little yellow line.
	That's the rich people, and that group is getting bigger.
	That group is getting bigger.
	And it looks like the middle class is getting a little bit narrower, right?
	It looks like the middle class is getting slightly narrower from 1980 to 2015.
	But where is the big gain?
	The big gain is not in the lower middle class and the poor and near poor.
	Both of those categories have also shrunk dramatically.
	What's happening?
	Look at the massive growth in that green.
	Look how green goes from like one-tenth of that chart to well over 25% of the chart.
	Look at that massive growth in the upper middle class.
	In other words, everybody got richer.
	Everybody got richer.
	And they're saying that global trade, that free trade, made Americans poorer.
	It's not true.
	That it wiped out the middle class.
	It's not true.
	It's not true.
	It's from the Urban Institute and the Wall Street Journal, by the way.
	So statistically, it's just not true.
	So when Trump says things like, the middle class is getting wiped out, it's getting destroyed...
	Because we follow the news, and the news tends to cover all the bad things that happen across the world, and this is a point that Andrew Klavan is fond of making, because the news only covers the bad crap that happens all across the world, everybody always thinks crime is getting worse, everybody always thinks that wealth is getting worse, and then they go back to their own lives and they realize, hey, I've sort of had it better than I ever have.
	Like, I mean, look at all the nice stuff I have in my house.
	I have a flat screen TV.
	I mean, I'm old enough to remember when our TV still had, like, a bubble.
	Right?
	And it was super heavy.
	When my wife and I first got married, we got a TV from Craigslist.
	We couldn't afford a flat screen when we first got married eight years ago.
	We went to Craigslist for like a hundred bucks.
	We bought a TV that had to weigh at least 150 pounds.
	Like, really, it was a massive- it was a big TV, and so it weighed a- I mean, like, it broke.
	We put it on one of those TV tables, and it actually bent the TV table, like, almost in half, right?
	Because it weighed so much.
	Now you have flat screens.
	The fact is that global trade makes your life better.
	It makes everybody's life better.
	In terms of consumption, there are some people who lose their jobs to global trade because they're in industries that are not competitive.
	So, Donald Trump is now using this.
	He's saying protectionism is the way.
	And he's reaching out to the people who have lost their jobs because those jobs have been lost.
	By the way, most jobs that are lost are not lost to free trade.
	They're due to technological change, right?
	They're new machines that are created.
	Nobody makes rotary telephones anymore, so all the rotary telephone makers are out of business.
	Nobody is putting up freestanding phone booths on the street anymore because nobody needs a phone booth, right?
	We all have cell phones.
	So, Trump thinks that those people have been hurt by free trade.
	They've really been hurt by technology, and also by the fact that it's much easier to transport goods from foreign countries here, not because of free trade, but because transportation itself has become a lot cheaper.
	It's a lot easier to fly things.
	It's a lot easier to ship things in boats.
	There are more ports.
	So all of this means it's easier to have a global competition that makes your life better in terms of consumption, but there's a small group of people who lose their jobs and then can't find new jobs because they were in businesses that were phased out or that have been moved overseas because it requires less skill.
	That's just the way that economics works.
	And that's unfortunate for those people, but what's more unfortunate is penalizing 99% of the population on behalf of the 1%.
	You want to talk about the real 1%?
	How about the 1% of people, it's really not 1%, but it's kind of close, like the several percent of people who are saying that we all, everyone, should have to pay a higher tax on the goods they buy in order to pay for this manufacturing to stay in Ohio, for example.
	That's what a tariff is.
	Understand what a tariff is.
	A tariff is not, a tariff is not China's shipping a good here and we just penalize them.
	What a tariff is, to boil this down to its simplest aspect, let's say that there's a company in America And it makes steel.
	And I'm gonna use numbers that don't really have any relation to reality, but it's just simple math.
	So let's say that we have a company in America, and it makes steel.
	And it sells steel for $10 a ton.
	Or $20 a ton.
	And let's say that it's inefficient.
	Let's say that there's a Chinese firm that sells steel for $10 a ton.
	So what the tariff does is it says to the Chinese firm, we're going to tax you $15 a ton, so now when you sell it on the American market, you're selling it for $25 a ton.
	It's more expensive than the American company, and that forces people to buy American.
	Sounds great, right?
	Now look at that.
	The Chinese company's not doing as well as the American company.
	You know who's doing worse?
	The car company that has to buy the steel.
	Right?
	The American car company that's now spending more than twice as much as it would have had to for steel, is going to have to make more expensive cars, and then they're going to sell you the car, and the car is more expensive to you.
	So instead of you getting a cheaper, better car, now you're getting a crappier, more expensive car.
	This is what tariffs do to consumers.
	It's a tax on you.
	It's a tax on you.
	The Chinese, yeah, it hurts their manufacturing, but it hurts the consumer here more.
	Okay, so with all that as background, Donald Trump has decided the worst thing in life is free trade.
	Free trade is killing us.
	He said yesterday it's raping us, as we'll see.
	Donald Trump gave the speech in Pittsburgh.
	Now, the irony of giving the speech in Pittsburgh is that Pittsburgh used to be the steel center of the United States, and Trump talked a lot about this.
	Wasn't it great when Pittsburgh was a steel center of the United States?
	Wasn't it just terrific when all they used to make was steel in Pittsburgh?
	Right?
	So, let's just explain something right now.
	The unemployment rate in Pittsburgh is 4.6%.
	That's the unemployment rate in Pittsburgh.
	Okay?
	That's not a real high unemployment rate.
	And that's been true for a long time.
	The unemployment rate in Pittsburgh in like 2007, before the crash, was 3.8%.
	So Pittsburgh doesn't have a high unemployment rate.
	And it used to be, if you think Pittsburgh, most people when they think Pittsburgh, they think the Pittsburgh Steelers, right?
	You think about steel.
	Or you think about the deer hunter.
	Right, the movie from the 70s about them making steel and people going into these grim factories where they're pouring hot iron into vessels and getting all burnt up and the sky is black with soot.
	Right?
	Look at Pittsburgh now.
	Pittsburgh's a beautiful city now.
	Because it's a high-tech city.
	Most of the jobs in Pittsburgh are now high-tech and healthcare-related.
	They've shifted industries.
	But Trump says this is bad.
	So Trump goes to an industrial facility in Pittsburgh, and he stands literally in front of a wall of garbage.
	He's in Oscar the Grouch's basement, delivering this speech.
	He's standing in front of a wall of garbage in order to promote his garbage Trumponomics.
	So here's Donald Trump talking about this, talking about how the workers of America have been betrayed.
	But our workers' loyalty was repaid, you know it better than anybody, with total betrayal.
	Our politicians have aggressively pursued a policy of globalization, moving our jobs, our wealth, and our factories to Mexico and overseas.
	Globalization has made the financial elite who donate to politicians Very, very wealthy.
	But it's left millions of our workers with nothing but poverty and heartache.
	Okay, we can stop it there, obviously.
	So he says that this has been a disaster area for all of us.
	We're all in trouble.
	The middle class has been wiped out.
	You've lost your job.
	If you think that the jobs in Mexico are the jobs that we need, I urge you to visit Mexico.
	I mean, really, this is this idea that we shift jobs overseas to, like, Bangladesh.
	If those are the jobs that are gonna keep America alive, we are so screwed, folks.
	We are beyond screwed.
	But Trump continues along these lines, and I'll explain to you in a second why all this isn't just wrong, it's dangerous.
	It's actually dangerous for the economy and dangerous for Americans.
	He continues by saying that the politicians do nothing.
	They do nothing.
	But I'm gonna do for you, right?
	Here's Trump.
	When subsidized foreign steel is dumped into our markets, threatening our factories, the politicians have proven, folks, have proven, they do nothing.
	Skilled craftsmen and tradespeople and factory workers have seen the jobs they love shipped thousands and thousands of miles away.
	Okay, so they've had their jobs shifted.
	First of all, it's not their job, it's a job somebody's gonna fill for pay.
	Let's imagine for a second, he says, oh, what about countries that come and they dump their cheap steel, their subsidized steel on our market?
	That's them being stupid, gang.
	Right, that's them being real dumb.
	Because that means they're not gonna make as much money as they would if they were actually just competitive.
	Because now they're doing what Trump is talking about doing, right?
	They're actually doing what Trump is talking about doing.
	Taking money from some of their industries, paying their steel industry to subsidize it, To make it cheap, and then dumping it on our market.
	Trump wants us to do the same thing, right?
	He wants us to take money from the consumer, give it to our steel manufacturers, so presumably then we can dump it on the open market.
	Here's the reality.
	If they dump cheap steel on our open market, think back to my analogy for a second.
	What do you think the car makers do?
	They're happy, right?
	I mean, they just pick up the steel, and guess what?
	Your car just got cheaper.
	If they feel like being inefficient in the way they allocate their economic resources, and therefore decide to undercut us by subsidizing their industry, and shipping cheap crap over here, good for me!
	I get cheap crap.
	I don't care.
	If I go to the grocery store, and there's one company that is taking a loss, trying to undercut another company by selling cheaper orange juice, I don't sit there going, oh my god, I can't believe these people trying to undercut this other company by selling cheaper orange juice.
	That's crazy.
	How could they?
	I buy the orange juice, it's cheaper.
	And the reason for that is because I have my family's priorities.
	Okay, it's amazing.
	Trump talks as though there's this global elite out to screw you.
	When I want to buy something, it is my business from whom I buy.
	When I want to sell something, it is my business to whom I sell.
	The only global elite who are trying to stop me are people like Trump, who wants to put restrictions on what I can buy and sell.
	That's my responsibility, what I can buy and sell.
	Freedom is what you want to buy and what you want to sell.
	Where do you choose to trade your labor?
	Trump wants to get in the way of that in order to help some people.
	That's redistributionism and that's leftism.
	That's leftism.
	Tariffs are leftism.
	They are government involvement.
	And we can talk about the history of tariffs briefly, because Trump does this routine where he tries to say the Founding Fathers were in favor of tariffs, and here's the reality about the Founding Fathers in favor of tariffs.
	The only reason the Founding Fathers used tariffs at the beginning of the Republic, and they were relatively low, is because they had no other method of raising revenue.
	There was no income tax, it was unconstitutional.
	And they tried to collect taxes from the states, and the states said no.
	They said, fine, we'll tariff foreign products that are coming in, it's the only thing we can control.
	When they actually did establish a massive tariff in 1828, it was called the Tariff of Abominations.
	That's really what it was called.
	It was called the Tariff of Abominations because it benefited Northern manufacturing.
	We create all these tariffs so manufactured goods couldn't get into the North.
	But it hurt Southerners because Southerners were shipping out raw materials like cotton, and other people set up their trade barriers.
	And now the Southerners couldn't sell their cotton, but the Northerners could sell their heavy machinery.
	And so the South, actually, the first nullification crisis in American history happened because of a tariff.
	The state of South Carolina said to the president, then John Quincy Adams, said to John Quincy Adams, screw you!
	You don't have the capacity.
	We're going to ship out our cotton the way we please to ship out our cotton.
	And we're going to buy how we please to buy.
	Remember something.
	America was established, at least partially, in order to fight against tariffs.
	What do you think the Stamp Act was?
	The Stamp Act was a tariff.
	What do you think the Tea Act was?
	The Tea Act was a tax.
	These were tariffs.
	These were taxes on trade.
	Right?
	It says in the Declaration of Independence, one of the crimes that we accused King George of, that we accused the Crown of, is restricting our trade.
	Okay, so the Founding Fathers were not in favor of tariffs.
	They were not.
	And tariffs are invariably become a tool of the elite.
	You want to know the most ironic thing?
	The Republican Party used to really support tariffs.
	Basically from the Civil War all the way through like 1930, the Republican Party supported tariffs to their massive detriment.
	In 1890, it was so unpopular that the Republicans lost the presidency.
	But the great irony is that in 1912, We passed the 16th Amendment to the Constitution.
	It was signed in 1913 by Wilson.
	But in 1912 it really passed.
	That's when the heavy work was done.
	The president was William Howard Taft, who was a Republican.
	The reason that the Republican pushed the income tax, which he was against, why did he do that?
	Because he was trying to get Democrats to say yes to tariffs.
	Worst economic trade of all time.
	So in order to preserve tariffs, we gave the federal government the income tax.
	By the way, tariffs also helped lead to the Great Depression.
	They destroyed our economy for 10 years.
	Tariffs are absolute foolishness.
	Donald Trump continues nonetheless along these lines.
	He says globalization wiped out the middle class.
	Remember that chart I showed you?
	Remember that chart that I showed you about the middle class?
	How the upper middle class has gained and the middle class is shrinking?
	But so are the poor.
	So everybody at the upper end is going- the upper end itself is getting larger.
	Not everybody at the upper end is gaining.
	The upper end itself is getting larger.
	It now encompasses a broader swath of people.
	Here's Trump just denying that.
	It never happened.
	This wave of globalization has wiped out totally, totally our middle class.
	It doesn't have to be this way.
	We can turn it around, and we can turn it around fast.
	Okay, that is absolute crap.
	It is based on zero statistical evidence whatsoever.
	It has not wiped out our middle class.
	What is wiping out our middle class are terrible regulations that prevent middle class people from starting businesses.
	That's hurting our middle class.
	That's keeping poor people poor.
	But it certainly is not the capacity of a poor person in the United States to buy a microwave for one-fifth the price it used to cost.
	That's asinine.
	What allows the middle class to live like the middle class- By the way, you ever wonder- He talks about the middle class being wiped out.
	Why is it that a middle class person now lives better than a rich person did in 1950?
	Why?
	Back in 1950, only a rich guy had central air.
	They didn't even have central air.
	They had unit air conditioners.
	Why is it that everyone now has central air?
	Why does everybody have a fridge?
	Why does everybody have two TVs?
	Why does everybody have a car?
	Why does- Even the poorest person you know probably has an iPhone.
	Why?
	That's because of free trade.
	That's because of free trade.
	This stuff is so stupid.
	It's so stupid.
	It's so ignorant.
	But the reason it's politically popular is because any government, and this is leftism, any government program, any government program that benefits a select few, but penalizes a wide variety of people, will tend to succeed politically.
	Because the wide variety of people, maybe it hurts me when I go to the grocery store by a factor of 10 bucks, I may not even notice it.
	But it saved that guy's job, right?
	So that guy, he feels good about himself, and I don't even notice it, or if I do notice it, it's a mild annoyance.
	This is why the government can continue raising taxes for welfare and food stamps and redistributionism.
	They find a select group of people who want benefits, and then they get those people their benefits at the expense of everybody else, and it's politically popular.
	Okay, so Trump continues along these lines, and now he's openly channeling Bernie Sanders.
	The right, when it comes to, the far-right Papu Cannon trade group is actually on Bernie Sanders' side when it comes to economics.
	But if we're going to deliver real change, we're going to have to reject the campaign of fear and intimidation being pursued by powerful corporations, media elites, and political dynasties.
	The people who rigged the system for their benefit will do anything and say anything to keep things exactly the way they are.
	He's part of that political elite.
	He is that guy, right?
	I mean, he's the one who's paying off politicians by his own admission.
	And here he's saying that I'm paying off a politician if I just want politicians the hell out of my way so I can trade with the people that I want to trade with?
	And this is nonsensical.
	One of the arguments he also trotted out was the old trade deficit argument.
	Oh, we're getting schlonged by China.
	China's just, they're making so much money off of us.
	You, today, you.
	I'm talking to you.
	You have a personal trade deficit with your grocery store.
	You do.
	You give them more money than they give you.
	You have a trade deficit with your grocery store.
	Is that because they're screwing you?
	Or is that because they're offering you a product and you are buying it?
	Okay, here's the reality.
	Trade deficits don't make you poor.
	You know a country that has a trade surplus?
	A trade surplus?
	More people are buying stuff from them than they're buying from other places?
	You know what country that is?
	Venezuela.
	You know why?
	Nobody in Venezuela has any money.
	Sudan probably has a trade surplus.
	Because nobody there has the capacity to buy anything.
	Right?
	The fact is, poor countries, very often, have trade surpluses.
	Russia has a trade surplus.
	They're collapsing.
	Right?
	Trade surpluses don't mean anything.
	What matters, what matters in terms of, the only thing that matters in terms of trade, are voluntary transactions that happen between individuals.
	That's all.
	That's the only thing that matters.
	We're not talking, when they talk trade deficit, the stupidest thing about this, we're not talking about the government getting screwed by another government, we're talking about if I buy a product from China, I now have a personal trade deficit from China.
	I'm sure, by the way, I do have a personal trade deficit from China.
	I don't know how many subscribers I have in China to this podcast, I'm gonna go with zero, because China probably doesn't allow it, right?
	But, I'm sure I buy Chinese products sometimes.
	Do I feel like China is screwing me?
	Or I feel like, great, I got a cheaper product from China.
	This stuff is so dumb, gang.
	It's so dumb.
	Trump continues, he says that we allowed foreign countries to cheat us in every single way.
	We allowed foreign countries to subsidize their goods, devalue their currencies, violate their agreements, and cheat in every way imaginable.
	And our politicians did nothing about it.
	Trillions of our dollars and millions of our jobs float overseas as a result.
	Okay, it's just ridiculous.
	It's just ridiculous.
	Okay, so he continues along these lines, and finally, he concludes, we can skip to clip 12 here, this is a speech later that night after he exits, after he exits Oscar the Grouch's living room, he goes and he speaks, this is later in Ohio, and he says that TPP, which is the Trans-Pacific Partnership, This is a trade deal that involves a lot of Asian countries, not including China, and there are problems with TPP.
	There are.
	There are problems with TPP and fast-track authority, and we can talk about why it is that I, for example, thought TPP was a problem.
	I thought it was a problem because I like trade agreements to be approved by Congress.
	I don't want the president just negotiating trade agreements on his own.
	I think Congress should sign off on trade agreements.
	Trump doesn't like TPP because it's a trade deal.
	That's why he doesn't like TPP.
	So here's Trump railing against TPP.
	Pacific Partnership is another disaster done and pushed by special interests who want to rape our country, just a continuing rape of our country.
	That's what it is, too.
	It's a harsh word.
	It's a rape of our country.
	Okay, so rape of our country, and he doesn't just say it once, he says it over and over and over, it's rape.
	By the way, this is a guy who thinks that Mike Tyson is not a rapist.
	I mean, it's just, it's just worst candidate ever.
	I mean, it's just, it's just terrible.
	I mean, this is true bad Trump.
	It's true bad Trump.
	Naturally, the left loved this, by the way.
	Because he's talking like a trade unionist, Marxist, from 1933.
	And so here's Dana Bash on CNN, saying this is, this is, this is good Trump.
	See, when the left thinks it's good Trump, gang, it might be a hint, this is bad Trump.
	Here's Dana Bash talking about good Trump.
	And Chief Political Correspondent Dana Bash, it was interesting how Trump framed Hillary Clinton as running a campaign of fear.
	That seems like a relatively new tactic.
	It does, but I think broadly, Pamela, I'm in the Capitol right now, and you could almost hear Republicans here exhaling.
	As they listen to the speech, not necessarily because all Republicans agree with him on trade.
	This is an issue that scrambles the Republican Party just like it does the Democratic Party.
	They really split on whether free trade is a good idea, as George W. Bush did, or whether the more populist I love the fact that Corey Lewandowski, who is Trump's former campaign manager, who has a non-disclosure, non-disparagement agreement with Donald Trump, is paid by CNN to be a contributor.
	By the way, after this, they played Hollywood Squares.
	By the way, Chris Matthews did the same thing.
	Because he is a leftist, and so is Trump, on trade, Chris Matthews comes out of the show, and he talks about how great this trade stuff was, being like, I don't know how trade works, really.
	All I know is that when I go to the hair salon, they tell me they can't sell me anything because there's nothing I can do for my hair, and then they direct me to Payless Shoes so I can find something to do with my hair.
	All I know is that I have a personal trade deficit with Payless Shoes.
	I don't like it.
	I don't like it.
	Do I do it anyway?
	Yeah.
	I mean, kids are expensive.
	Got to comb my hair somehow, though.
	Go.
	You know, Michael, I haven't talked about you.
	You were inside that campaign.
	Do they understand?
	Does Mr. Trump understand what he's appealing to here?
	Oh, absolutely.
	And he's understood for quite some time, even before he was going to run for president.
	When he was considering running for governor of New York, he was talking about how the Buffalo, where I'm from, where I'm flying after the show... A classic example.
	Absolutely.
	Hollowed out by trade deals and the NAFTA.
	What's left?
	In Buffalo, a lot of corporate welfare.
	I look at Michigan City and places like that across the country and I think what's left used to be a Blockbuster's video store.
	That's gone.
	There may be a diner.
	Not always a diner left.
	There's nothing.
	Can we pause it for a second?
	Can we pause it for a second?
	Does anyone give a crap that Blockbuster no longer exists?
	Like really, but this is the logic of the anti-trade folks, right?
	Blockbuster no longer exists.
	Does he really think that was because of NAFTA?
	Because of a trade deal?
	Netflix is an American company.
	So is Amazon.
	Right?
	They offer me awesome stuff every day.
	My life is so much better now that I don't have to go down to Blockbuster and sift through their misfiled videotapes that have been played too many times and glitch in the middle, and then I have to bring it back to Blockbuster and see if they have a replacement tape, but they don't.
	Now I have to wait three days, but if I get my tape back two days late, then they charge me five times the price of the video.
	You know what was better?
	When I went last night on Amazon, and I hit one button, and it went to my TV, and now I can watch it whenever I want.
	That's awesome.
	But this is always the pitch, right?
	Trump will say, oh, well, I went up to Rochester, New York, and there used to be a Kodak factory there.
	You know why there's not a Kodak factory there anymore, gang?
	Because nobody uses film anymore.
	Because everything is digital.
	You want to go back to the days where you had to worry about overexposing your film every time you brought it in to be developed?
	What's stupidity?
	What utter economic idiocy and stupidity?
	And it kills jobs and it destroys economies.
	If you want to look like Venezuela, all we have to do is continue following our hearts when it comes to economics as opposed to recognizing basic truths.
	Okay, time for some stuff I like and then a plentiful cornucopia of things that I hate today.
	So, the stuff I like.
	So, we're doing pre-Hays Code films.
	So, the Hays Code, as I've mentioned the last couple of days, It was a code voluntarily adopted by Hollywood from 1933 to about 1960, and it was a code that basically said that there shouldn't be extraneous violence on screen, no extraneous sex, the bad guys should lose at the end of the movie, there should be morality reflected on screen.
	Hollywood adopted it because that was a time when Americans cared about such things like morality and values.
	But before that, between 1920 and 1933, a lot of movies came out that were very gritty, that looked like 1990s films.
	So here's one.
	This one's very famous.
	It's Jimmy Cagney.
	You can look to see how young Jimmy Cagney is here.
	I mean, Jimmy Cagney's a kid when he does this.
	Jimmy Cagney, who was the gangster on film.
	He was always the gangster.
	He was always this guy.
	Real tough guy.
	Brawler.
	Nasty.
	Talks like Trump, right?
	The most famous scene from this particular movie isn't this one.
	The most famous scene from this movie is when he grabs a grapefruit and smashes it in a girl's face, right?
	He has his mall, right?
	And she pisses him off.
	So he grabs a grapefruit and just...
	smashes it in her face.
	The movie itself is really good.
	It's a really intense film.
	It's about 80 minutes long, and it's very tight.
	A lot of these older movies, very tight, a lot tighter than now.
	Now every film, in order to justify its $10, $15, $25 ticket, has to be eight hours long.
	But back then, they would actually make a movie that was like 90 minutes long and super tight.
	Public Enemy is one of those.
	Here's a little bit from Public Enemy.
	It's not possible.
	OK, steamer, it's all set.
	Jimmy Cagney's watching all these people go into the restaurant.
	And he is up to no good.
	We don't have to watch the whole scene, but it's intense.
	Bad things are about to happen.
	We'll stop it there and leave it suspenseful.
	But the movie's really good and really tight.
	And Jimmy Cagney would go on to do a lot of these kinds of movies.
	All the way up to White Heat.
	He also ended up kind of broadening out later in his career and doing some comedy.
	But really underrated actor, Jimmy Cagney.
	Okay.
	Time for some things that I hate.
	So.
	Yesterday.
	I walk into my house.
	My wife is on maternity leave with the baby for a few weeks.
	And I walk into the house, and she's exhausted, so I forgive her partially for this.
	I walk into our room, and on the TV is playing The Bachelorette.
	And I haven't seen much of The Bachelorette.
	I haven't really seen a lot of The Bachelorette.
	All I've seen is kind of just the ads for it.
	And I watched two minutes of this.
	This show... I can't believe I didn't know this, but this show marks the end of Western civilization.
	Okay, this is the death of manhood, this is the death of womanhood, this is the death of Western civilization, this show.
	So here's a clip from this season's show.
	Okay, and this is a dude crying because some chick, some idiot chick, who's out looking for love by dating 15 guys simultaneously, which where I come from used to be called promiscuity, but now apparently it's called a TV show.
	You know, she's looking for love by making out with 87 guys.
	Like my wife, seriously, my wife is watching this and she makes out with like eight guys in the span of two days.
	Now, number one, kind of ho-ish.
	Okay, just putting that out there, and I'd say the same thing for a dude.
	Kind of ho-ish, right?
	I mean, like, you make it out with lots of dudes at one time, kind of gross.
	But the part that's amazing is, number one, they think that this is a route to love, which it isn't.
	It turns out there's never any discussion of values.
	It's always discussion of feelings.
	The entire show, from what I can see, is a discussion of feelings.
	Like, her prodding them, do you love me yet?
	Well, I'm having a hard time expressing my feelings, but yeah, I love you because I really want that rose.
	I really want that rose.
	I want to stay on here and I want to up my name profile a little bit and not shave for two days so I have a little bit of stubble.
	I want that rest.
	So I love you.
	I'm having my deep love for you.
	Based on what?
	Based on what?
	Based on you went on a walk in the park with a string quartet following you?
	That's what love is based on now?
	Like the base of a lasting relationship?
	I don't know what the stats are, but I do wonder, how many of these couples ever actually get married?
	And stay married?
	Is it maybe like two?
	In the entire history of The Bachelor and The Bachelorette, maybe two?
	So that's problem number one.
	So problem number one is with her, this needy, weeviling girl going, Do you love me yet?
	I have feelings for you, but do you love me yet?
	Shut.
	Up!
	You don't even know each other well enough to love each other.
	And if you love each one of these guys and they all love you, why are you making out with everybody?
	I remember when I was dating my wife.
	My wife was living in a dorm at UCLA called the Bayit, which is a Jewish cooperative living facility.
	And there was a guy there who was clearly hitting on her, like, all the time.
	My wife happens to be super hot.
	And there was a guy there who was hitting on her, like, all the time.
	And she, because women are oblivious when they want to be oblivious, she was just oblivious.
	And she thought, oh, she's being a nice guy.
	Like, all guys are nodding, right?
	You're all nodding.
	You've had this experience.
	Everyone has had this experience with their girlfriend or their wife, where the wife, where the girl, doesn't understand the guy's hitting on her because girls are innocent.
	They don't understand that all guys want to do is have sex.
	So they said there's this.
	So she's like, oh, no, he's just being nice.
	He just wants to help me with my science homework.
	Yeah, right.
	So so right.
	So I told her, so I told my wife at the time, I want you to stop talking to him because if you don't, I'm going to have to murder him.
	And if you don't want me to go to jail, then I would prefer that you not talk to him anymore.
	And she said, why?
	And I said, well, because he's hitting on you, and I don't think that's appropriate.
	I'm not hitting on other girls.
	I don't think that it's appropriate that this guy's hitting on you.
	I think he's kind of a douchebag.
	Right?
	And so that's, and, and, and so later on, later, and she, she didn't, right?
	She, oh, no, no, it's nothing.
	It's nothing.
	Two weeks later, he comes to her and he, and he says, are you really sure that you're with Ben?
	And she goes, oh, not the last time I was right in my marriage.
	So in any case, that's on the lady's side.
	If a woman is looking for love by dating a bunch of guys simultaneously, you're doing it wrong.
	You're doing it wrong.
	OK, number two, the guys.
	What in the hell is wrong with these dudes?
	OK, they're sitting around talking with each other after having passed this girl around like they're sharing a beer.
	Right?
	Every one of them makes out with her in the course of a single episode.
	And they're all sitting around like, oh, I don't know, is she gonna pick me?
	Is she gonna pick you?
	I don't know, what do we do?
	I feel like it's a competition, but I love her so much, but do you also love her?
	What?
	Who stole your testicles and put them in a jar, dude?
	Like, what happened here?
	It's the saddest thing.
	I mean, like, what happened to American masculinity?
	What happened to, if you fall in love with a girl, and then you make clear that you are not going to tolerate other dudes going after her?
	I thought that this was one of the halcyons of masculinity, was not only protect your woman, but protect your woman.
	Like, this is...
	What?
	And it's so ridiculous.
	And I know all the feminists right now are going crazy.
	Oh, how dare he says the woman has to be protected from other men?
	No, the woman gets to choose, right?
	She can reject the guy, that's fine.
	But I don't understand why the guy is cool with this.
	If my girlfriend were making out with five other guys, she would not be my girlfriend for any amount of time whatsoever.
	There would be zero minutes where she was my girlfriend.
	Right, so but these guys do that and then she breaks up with them by not giving them a rose and it's oh so emotional and we're gonna play music and we're gonna and oh my god there's a scene I can go on like this for an hour there's a scene where there's a scene in this episode of The Bachelorette where they create like this it's like they go to some like art nouveau
	Bull crap place where it's like new art and the art involves like a screen that has water on it and all these women are like crawling around on the screen and then he gets in there with a bathing suit and she gets in there with a bathing suit and he's like, oh, should I kiss her?
	Should I not?
	Should I kiss her?
	Should I not?
	And then they and then and then and finally he kisses her.
	He's all manipulated.
	And finally he kisses her and she goes, yeah, we did it.
	And then she throws him off the show five seconds later and she tosses him.
	Then yeah, this is a real search for love.
	So anyway, there's one of the guys, he gets tossed from the show, and he's weeping, so sad, this girl who's hooking up with every other dude on the show, everyone within a 37 mile radius, the entire USC marching band.
	Oh my god, she rejected me, my life is over.
	No, your life was over when you signed up for this show, dude.
	Alright, so here's the guy weeping about it.
	Did you use the word entitlement?
	I said very intently that Jordan acted like he was the end-all of be-alls.
	Right there.
	So you used the word entitlement?
	And maybe entitlement.
	Possibly.
	Let me just ask you this one question.
	How does one act entitled when stating that the rules of a game are such?
	How does my character get called into question when I am playing a poker game?
	It was one thing and we, you know, whatever.
	It's just pathetic when someone needs to bring up stuff like that.
	Okay, and the whole show is just this drama.
	This is girl talk.
	This is The View.
	These guys sitting around talking about this.
	And we've got a bunch of guys in this room.
	Lindsay, ignore this for a second.
	Guys, how often do we sit around talking about our feelings in our relationships?
	chips.
	Never.
	Zero time.
	Ever.
	Will never happen.
	Will never happen in the future.
	Will never happen in the past.
	Has never happened in human history except on this stupid crappy TV show.
	So yes, this is the end of masculinity.
	Men who are willing to talk with other men about whether they're going to get the same girl.
	Girls who are willing to make out with like ten dudes at once to figure out which guy they want to be with but really not kind of because at the end it doesn't matter at the end of the show.
	Just gross.
	And women who think this is actual romance, that's the thing.
	Women who think this is actual romance.
	Actual romance is not this.
	It's not dudes making out with you and that feeling of the thrill.
	That's called lust, right?
	Actual romance is not a set-up, fully nonsense scenario where you're all made up and somebody did your hair for you in a multi-million dollar company.
	And they have you dancing with some random dude who they cast from a list of pictures.
	It turns out romance, actually, is based on shared values.
	And if it's not based on shared values, you're not the one who ends up with the Rose Gang.
	Okay, so, that's the thing that I hate.
	I do have to do one more thing that I hate because otherwise Mathis will murder me because I had him cut this clip.
	So there was the Black Entertainment Television Awards.
	There's a guy, this is a couple days old.
	There's a fellow, what's his name?
	Jeremiah Williams?
	I can't remember this person's name from BET Awards.
	Jesse, Jesse Williams, that's his name.
	And I guess he's on Grey's Anatomy, another show that I will never watch.
	And Jesse Williams gives a speech at the BET Awards in which he basically says America's a racist, terrible place.
	And it's awful.
	Here we go.
	Struggling parents, the families, the teachers, the students that are realizing that a system built to divide and impoverish and destroy us cannot stand if we do.
	Alright?
	Okay, we can stop it right there for one second.
	The idea that America is built to impoverish and destroy black people is absolute crap, it's utter nonsense, it's despicable, and it's wrong.
	And he goes on, I mean, was it built to impoverish and destroy him?
	By the way, was it the white people who did it?
	Because his mom is white.
	So that's kind of awkward.
	This whole thing, yeah, clearly America is set up to destroy black people when the President of the United States is black, the Attorney General of the United States is black.
	Yeah, clearly we're set up to destroy black people when black people in America have it better than in any other country on planet Earth.
	Legitimately any other country on the planet.
	Yeah, we're set up for that.
	That's really the big problem, is that America's set up that way.
	He continues along these lines because he has an IQ that's smaller than his shoe size.
	It's kind of basic mathematics.
	The more we learn about who we are and how we got here, the more we will mobilize.
	Now, this is also in particular for the black women, in particular, who have spent their lifetimes dedicated to nurturing everyone before themselves.
	We can and we'll do better for you.
	Okay, question.
	Who's the we here?
	Who's the we?
	Pause for one second.
	When he says we will do better for you, does he mean the government?
	The government will do better?
	Because it seems to me that the government has been father here.
	It seems to me that the government is handing over enormous amounts of cash to women who get pregnant out of wedlock.
	If he would say, you know, we need to do better by you, and what he meant was black men who are knocking you up need to do better by you, which is disproportionately what's happening, then that would be something worthwhile.
	But I have a feeling that's not what he's talking about.
	I have a feeling what he's talking about is that I, who have a wife and children, a wife that I stand by and protect and defend and provide for, and children that I protect, defend, and provide for, somehow it's my responsibility to take care of women who get pregnant voluntarily out of wedlock and the guy ditches them.
	Now it's my job.
	And we will continue this for five more seconds and then we'll be done with this this idiot.
	We've been doing is looking at the data and we know that police somehow managed to de-escalate, disarm, and not kill white people every day.
	So what's gonna happen is we are gonna have equal rights and justice in our own country or we will restructure their function and ours.
	Okay, we're gonna restructure civil rights, okay?
	He's ripping on the police for shooting black people randomly.
	Statistically untrue.
	False, false, false.
	All of this is false.
	It's just a string of lies and what's important about this is listen to that applause.
	Listen to the audience at the Black Entertainment Television Awards.
	All these rich people sitting in the audience, virtually all of whom are black, complaining about how terrible America is.
	America's brutal and evil.
	By the way, sitting there protected by cops who are ringing the entire situation.
	Just gross all the way around, but it's this sort of polarization.
	Hillary Clinton said today that she thinks that Americans don't have to consider themselves victims.
	That's her entire campaign.
	That's what Democrats care about, is people considering themselves victims.
	This dude's a victim.
	He's standing up there winning an award after making millions of dollars, reading somebody else's lines on a TV show, having a white mother, but he's victimized by the evil white American patriarchy or some such crap.
	All right, well, tomorrow is the mailbag.
	Tomorrow is the mailbag, so if you want to subscribe, subscribe now at dailywire.com, and you too can be part of the vaunted Ben Shapiro Show mailbag, the greatest mailbag in the history of mailbags.
	By the way, thank you.
	I want to thank you for making us the number one conservative podcast in America, which is really exciting.
	So we are very excited about that, and we will see you tomorrow.
	I'm Ben Shapiro.

▲