Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

July 14, 2016 - The Ben Shapiro Show

01:03:00

Ep. 150 - President Uniter Meets With Race Riot Fans!

The Trump Convention gets set to go, Mike Pence is the VP choice (?), and the mailbag! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	After hijacking a memorial for police officers slain by an anti-white, anti-cop racist to push his race and gun agenda, all the while claiming to be a uniter, President Obama held a meeting on the police and race relations at the White House on Wednesday.
	One of his most important guests, race riot fan DeRay McKesson, who made a name for himself by stoking rage over the fully justified shooting of Michael Brown, then parlaying that into a career as a Black Lives Matter provocateur.
	McKesson has spoken about Black Lives Matter at Yale University, Where he approved of reading an article for the students titled, Which naturally means that he gets to come to the White House, directly after getting himself arrested in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, for the cameras.
	McKesson supposedly chastised Obama for not visiting Baton Rouge, Louisiana, where Alton Sterling was killed by police last week, after allegedly grabbing for his gun.
	Or Falcon Heights, Minnesota, where circumstances surrounding the police killing of Philando Castile are still unknown.
	McKesson even told Obama he should visit Ferguson, the site of riots championed by McKesson over a false racial narrative.
	Hands up, don't shoot.
	Obama, in turn, kowtowed to the race baiter, asking Louisiana police to give McKesson back his backpack.
	Here's how that conversation went.
	This is literally how the conversation went.
	Obama, quote, we should get to write his backpack back.
	I mean, I can get you a new book bag, but I have a feeling you want your book bag back, huh?
	McKesson.
	Yes, I would like that.
	Really, this happened.
	After the meeting with the race arsonist, Obama then appeared before the press and ripped into the cops.
	Quote, not only are there very real problems, but there are still deep divisions about how to solve these problems.
	There is no doubt that police departments still feel embattled and unjustly accused.
	And there is no doubt that minority communities, communities of color, still feel like it just takes too long to do what's right.
	He then predicted, is what he says, quote, I think it is fair to say we will see more tension between police and communities this month, next month, next year, for quite some time.
	Last I checked, he's the president.
	It's sort of his job to help stop that sort of thing.
	But he won't, because President Obama is a racial divider, by both ideology and for political gain.
	More black people will die thanks to these divisions, as police pull out of high-crime minority communities to avoid the wrath of the left.
	And more cops will die too, as the anti-police sentiment metastasizes.
	I'm Ben Shapiro.
	This is the Ben Shapiro Show.
	I tend to demonize people because they don't care about your feelings.
	Ah, so much to get to today here on the Ben Shapiro Show.
	Welcome to the Facebook Live.
	We're live with you for 15 minutes, but that means that you don't get to see the mailbag, because we do that at the end.
	So if you want to see that, you have to subscribe at dailywired.com.
	We are working on making the entire show live, so when you go over to dailywired.com, you can see that live.
	But you can still see the video of it when we post it after the show.
	You can also download it later from iTunes and SoundCloud after the show.
	A lot to get to, a lot of breaking news today.
	Apparently, Indiana Governor Mike Pence is Trump's VP pick for this upcoming election cycle.
	He's picking Indiana Governor Mike Pence.
	We know a few things about this.
	Number one, this means that Chris Christie is sitting alone in a room somewhere, crying, eating Cheetos, and weeping to himself while singing, all by myself.
	We also know that Newt Gingrich is somewhere planning how to build a pirate ship to the moon.
	So lots and lots of things happening.
	This is about the weirdest pick that Trump could have made in a couple of ways.
	One is that Trump said he was going to pick somebody high profile, somebody well known, somebody he called a household name.
	And somebody tweeted online, Pence is a household name.
	Three of the five people in his household know his name.
	No one knows who Mike Pence is.
	That's number one.
	Number two, Mike Pence does not shore up the conservative base because Mike Pence in the last couple of years has embraced Common Core.
	Mike Pence in the last couple of years has caved on Indiana's Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
	Remember, there was a big national controversy after Indiana passed a law basically saying if you're a Christian baker, you don't have to cater a gay wedding.
	The media went nuts.
	And Mike Pence promptly caved on it.
	So he lost a lot of credibility there.
	Mike Pence disagrees with Trump on amnesty.
	He's for what we call touchback amnesty, which Trump is now coming around to.
	This is the idea we deport people.
	They come back and, yay, we give them amnesty.
	He's also in favor of the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
	He's in favor of TPP, the Trans-Pacific Partnership treaty that Trump hates so much.
	So in a lot of ways, this pick doesn't make a lot of sense.
	There's only one way in which it makes some sense.
	The reason that it makes a little bit of sense is because There's this brewing rebellion over at the RNC, people trying to oust Trump, some of the Never Trump people, trying to unbind the delegates.
	And this is a way of sort of quieting them, saying, OK, well, I picked somebody who's steady.
	I guess that the closest thing you could come to is he's sort of It's not a great comparison.
	He's sort of like Indiana's John Kasich, is where Mike Pence is, and so it makes people feel a little bit more steady with Trump if he picks somebody like that.
	Trump, by the way, continues to run even with Hillary in the polls.
	Another poll out today shows, is from CBS and New York Times, it shows that they are tied at 40%.
	Now, remember what I said yesterday.
	Right?
	This isn't about Trump soaring.
	He's not surging.
	Nothing is happening with Trump that's making things significantly better.
	What's happening is that Hillary is collapsing.
	So if you look at the CBS poll, a month ago Hillary was at 50, then 47, then 43, then 40.
	So she's gone down 10 points, but Trump hasn't picked up 10 points.
	He hasn't picked up any points.
	He was at 40 in that first poll.
	He's still at 40.
	So where are the other 10 points going?
	Who knows?
	Maybe there was the rapture.
	Maybe people were just disappeared.
	Maybe the unions came and buried them in cement alongside Jimmy H- Who knows?
	They're just gone, right?
	So this is the problem with these polls right now, is that they're showing somewhere between 15 and 20% of the population just nowhere.
	Like, they don't know.
	What's going on?
	No one knows.
	So, I mean, that's because everybody hates these two candidates so much.
	Like, really hates the candidates.
	We also have the convention schedule, sort of, for Donald Trump now.
	And it leaves a little bit to be desired.
	There are a few things that are funny that are happening that are worth noting.
	He was asked about Sarah Palin coming to the convention.
	He said, well, Alaska's really far away.
	That's not a good answer.
	Obviously not the real reason Sarah Palin is not coming to the convention.
	I'd go with the crazy hands, but you know, probably a smart idea not to have Sarah Palin at the convention, although maybe he'll reveal her tomorrow as the pick for VP and it's all just a misdirection.
	It's all a big head fake.
	Could be.
	I mean, there's part of Trump that likes to surprise more than he cares about anything else, and I was hoping for an actual, as you know, rose ceremony at Trump Tower tomorrow, where Chris Christie is sitting there, like, with the puppy dog eyes, and Trump doesn't give him the rose.
	I was really hoping for a lot more dramatics with Chris Christie, I'll be honest with you.
	I was really hoping that tomorrow, Trump was supposed to announce the VP pick tomorrow, I was hoping that Trump would bring out Chris Christie and say, and now, the next, I want to introduce you to the next Vice President of the United States's introducer!
	And it would be Chris Christie, and then the door would open up underneath him and he would fall down, but there'd be a trampoline underneath and he'd just bounce up again.
	It'd be great.
	So, in any case, Trump is, he's revealed his convention schedule.
	There's some big names missing.
	The last two Republican nominees, the last two Republican presidents, most Republicans.
	There are lots of Trumps, lots and lots of Trumps.
	So there's six Trumps speaking.
	There's Donald who's speaking, Melania's speaking night one.
	Ivanka's introducing Trump, though.
	It's not Melania who's introducing Trump.
	Smart, because Ivanka's much more likable than Melania.
	So Melania's speaking night one, Ivanka's speaking the last night, and then Eric and Tiffany and Donald Jr.
	are all speaking somewhere in the middle.
	So lots and lots of Trump.
	I think there are only ten Republican elected officials speaking total, and there are six Trumps speaking at the convention.
	So there's that.
	There's a little bit of celebrity, but it's really kind of B-plus names and no real A-listers.
	So you've got Natalie Gulbis, who's like an LPGA tour golfer, who's good-looking.
	So there's that.
	I mean, she'll be eye candy, I guess.
	There's the UFC president, Dana White.
	All right.
	There's former underwear model Antonio Sabato Jr.
	I don't know what he's going to do.
	Is he going to do, like, a striptease?
	Like, what's going to happen?
	They say he's an actor and also a former underwear model.
	I haven't heard of him as an actor or as an underwear model, so it's weird.
	Also, honestly, if he was going to get an underwear model, wouldn't you have figured it would have been that crazy guy in New York who, like, climbed up to the top of the Broadway You know, there was the Broadway platform, like, naked, and started shouting about Trump.
	Like, wouldn't you get that?
	Okay, but there's no Tyson, there's no Don King, there's no Bobby Knight, there's no Tom Brady.
	So, it's—and Tim Tebow is the biggest name that he's got.
	And you have to think, Tim Tebow, not the smartest move, if you're looking at being a Republican officeholder, to come out at this particular convention, but okay, you know.
	So, he's got a little bit more glitz, a little bit more glamour, not as much as he wanted.
	Apparently, they asked if they could fire fireworks in the stadium, and people said, no, there's a roof here.
	And so they can't do the fireworks.
	Trump originally, apparently, wanted to come on the stage in a helicopter.
	This is true.
	He wanted to come on the stage in a helicopter.
	They said he can't do that either.
	I was really hoping that he would take a motorcycle, jump a bunch of cars, Evel Knievel style, into a helicopter, helicopter up.
	It gets eaten by a blimp.
	And then he comes down in a jetpack, but the jetpack runs out of fuel.
	And then he releases a parachute with a giant American flag on it and then lands on the stage.
	I thought that would have been great, but that's not happening either.
	I'm not going to be able to do All right, whatever.
	Paul Ryan's gonna speak.
	And the lineup is... And then there are some people who really should speak.
	There's some time dedicated to Benghazi.
	There's some time dedicated to illegal immigration.
	Marcus Luttrell, who's the lone survivor, former Navy SEAL, he's gonna speak.
	So it's not a terrible convention schedule by any stretch of the imagination, but it's not exactly the kind of glitz and glamour that we were promised.
	It's not the razzle-dazzle, totally.
	So, all that said, if you're buying and selling political stock, as I've said to people, if there were such stocks, Right now is when you would buy Trump stock and you'd sell Trump stock immediately after the convention because everybody gets that little convention bump and so the polls for the next week and a half are going to be very positive to Donald Trump and then Hillary will have her convention and she'll probably open up a little lead because she'll get a bump and then the media are going to try and push her all the way to the convention and She's already hit her biggest obstacle, right?
	Her biggest obstacle was the email server scandal, and that's now in her rearview mirror, so the media will now start pushing her extraordinarily hard.
	Okay, so that's the update on the presidential race.
	Now I want to get to things that actually matter, because the truth is that obviously, obviously, the presidential race matters, but What matters more to me is the underlying societal conflict that's sort of tearing the country apart.
	When I say sort of, I mean absolutely tearing the country apart.
	And it's very frightening in a lot of ways.
	So, I want to talk about the continuation of the race issue, and the continuation of the rebellion against police, and the anger against police, and this talk that the police are systemically racist.
	And I want to talk about real concerns about the police, and then fake concerns about the police.
	Like, the delusional concerns about the police, and then things that actually matter.
	And then things that actually matter about the cops.
	I'm going to save my commentary.
	I know some people were asking about commentary on the ESPYs last night.
	We will do the commentary on the ESPYs, but I'm saving that for stuff I hate at the end of the show.
	Because as you know, I hate the fact that my sporting time, when I watch TV, if I'm turning to ESPN, I don't want to be seeing President Obama.
	I don't want to be seeing rallies against the police.
	ESPN is so bad that ESPN is actually live broadcasting.
	Obama's doing a race town hall tonight on ABC.
	ESPN is live broadcasting it.
	ESPN.
	I didn't know that that had anything to do with playing games that involve balls.
	I didn't understand that, but apparently it does.
	So we'll get to that in a little while, but I want to start with D.L.
	Hewley.
	So D.L.
	Hewley was on Fox News last night, and he's an actor, black actor, comedian, and he's talking, I think this is with Megyn Kelly, he's talking about the problems with the police.
	This is the problem, okay?
	There's places where we can talk realistically about race and the police.
	Like, for example, it's true, it's probably true, so according to this new Harvard study, and as I said yesterday, I'm digging into the statistics now, so I'm trying to lock all of this down, but according to this Harvard study, what they say is that low-level uses of force on black people are more common, even if they're innocent, than low-level uses of force on white people.
	But when you get to the upper end, like shootings and beatings, it's actually more common with white people.
	So there are a couple theories as to why that happens.
	One is systemic racism.
	I don't think that's the case.
	The second is the Larry Elder theory, which is that the reason you have less shootings of black people is because of that escalation of race at the very beginning, and that escalation of force at the very beginning.
	In other words, you never hit the point where you have to shoot somebody because somebody's grabbing you really tight at the beginning, and you know who the alpha dog is, so you don't get into it with them.
	That's Larry Elder's theory.
	And then there's the third theory, Which is that there is some racial profiling going on, but that doesn't necessarily mean that racism is going on.
	Meaning that it's racial and behavioral profiling.
	So if Colin Powell is walking down the street, very unlikely that he's going to be racially profiled.
	But if a black kid is walking down the street wearing a hoodie, In the middle of the night, then that's going to be treated differently by police, right?
	That's sort of the third idea here.
	So, all that said, those are real concerns about race that we'll get to in a second.
	But then there is the Black Lives Matter movement, and the Black Lives Matter movement is utterly delusional.
	So instead of saying, we have concerns that low-level interactions between the police and black people are poisoning relations between the two because of the low-level amounts of force that are being used, Instead, what they're saying is the cops are randomly shooting people, it's a genocide, they're killing people, the cops are all evil and racist.
	So D.L.
	Hewley is talking about Michael Brown and listen to what he has to say.
	I'll tell you this.
	They found systemic racism, right?
	So it's unbelievable.
	They also found systemic racism.
	And we know that Darren Wilson left the department because it was so racist it had to be disbanded.
	And with the Ferguson, another department that is rife with racism.
	That's what Eric Holder's DOJ concluded.
	I HAVE NO PROBLEM.
	MICHAEL BROWN GRABBED THAT OFFICER'S GUN AND TRIED TO SHOOT HIM IN HIS PATROL CAR.
	NO ONE HAS PROVEN THAT.
	THAT'S WHEN ERIC HOLDER'S DOJ CONCLUDED. ERIC HOLDER'S DOJ CONCLUDED THAT THAT DEPARTMENT WAS SO RIFE WITH CORRUPTION.
	I already conceded that, D.L.
	We're talking about Michael Brown and the lie of Hands Up Your Shoe.
	I don't dodge at all.
	I'm here in Fox News.
	Then let's stay on it.
	Then let's stay on Michael Brown.
	Eric Holder's D.O.J.
	You're trying to get out of bounds on him.
	You are.
	Then don't dodge.
	Then let's stay in bounds.
	Eric Holder's D.O.J.
	found that Michael Brown... We were talking about the young man that just got murdered.
	And the rush to judgment and the assumption you know something when you don't actually know it.
	First off, what I'll tell you is this.
	It is not uncommon for you all to see one thing.
	The only place racism doesn't exist is Fox News and the police department.
	That's the only place.
	That's absolutely true.
	Okay, so this is the debate that is being had and it's the most useless debate in America, right?
	So you have Megyn Kelly saying more evidence.
	You know, Michael Brown was shot for good reason, and D.L.
	Hewley saying that everything is racist.
	There's no common ground there, because in this case, one side is right and one side is wrong.
	Megyn Kelly isn't saying there's no racism anywhere on the planet.
	She's saying that you actually have to show racism before you say something's racist.
	D.L.
	Hewley's saying, anytime I say something is racist, it's racist against the evidence.
	Against the evidence.
	This is how the race debate is going, and that's why these racial conflagrations that President Obama is creating, they're not going to alleviate anytime soon.
	He likes them.
	They're good for him politically.
	It's something that he wants.
	Unfortunately, there's tons more to get to, folks, and this is why you should go to dailywire.com right now and subscribe to The Ben Shapiro Show.
	You should go over and check.
	It's like eight bucks a month.
	Come on.
	I mean, that's like the price of a decent hamburger.
	So just get less fat and go to dailywire.com and subscribe there.
	You can also download the show later from SoundCloud.
	And iTunes as well.
	Okay, so, we're back.
	Okay, so, this, this is the delusional side of the race debate, and unfortunately this is what tends to take precedence, is the delusional side of the race debate.
	So, for example, another example, the editor of Ebony magazine, she's on TV, and says killing white people should not be considered a hate crime.
	How do you feel about the president defining this as a hate crime?
	You know, I have to say, I would not describe hate crime as the most comfortable word choice, considering these circumstances.
	There's so much that we do not know about what took place, what motivated this person.
	We only have the one account of law enforcement.
	We haven't had the opportunity to really look into his history in a meaningful way.
	When we use a phrase like hate crime, we're typically referring to crimes against people of color, people of various religious groups, LGBT people.
	People who have been historically attacked, abused, or disenfranchised on the basis of their identity to now extend that to the majority group and a group of people that has a history with African Americans that has been abusive and we can apply that to either police officers or to Caucasians.
	I think gets into very tricky territory.
	So I'd be curious to know if he was referring to this as a hate crime because he singled them out by race, or attempted to single them out by race, or because they were police officers.
	Okay, it's an amazing statement, right?
	There can't be a hate crime against anybody except black people.
	This is an extension of what we saw Marc Lamont Hill say a couple of days ago, black people are incapable of racism.
	You can't have a conversation with this.
	You can't.
	Because now you're suggesting that anytime a black person kills a white person on a racial basis, there's nothing there.
	We just have to pretend that nothing happened.
	You can't have a conversation about that.
	If you hate white cops, then it's not because you're a racist, it's just because you hate white cops.
	This is insanity.
	But this is the delusional conversation we have, and it's all over the TV.
	All over the TV.
	There's another TV host.
	This one, I think, is the former Miss Alabama.
	She actually, the other day, called the Dallas killer a martyr.
	So she had to come out yesterday and acknowledge that and apologize for it.
	I never said that I don't care about it.
	I never said anything negative about the officers.
	I always said that I'm struggling with my feelings.
	You also said, I don't feel sad.
	And you said that you viewed him as a martyr.
	So you've got to be able to understand why people are really angry at you, no?
	The word martyr is what the headlines said and what people have been holding on, and I understand that the use of that word really triggered people.
	Of course, you know, I was very emotional at the time, and I can't... I could have chosen a different word.
	I mean, that I definitely don't agree with, but you know, we're all human.
	I'm not perfect, and people say things and things are taken out of context all the time, so I keep explaining to people.
	That the word, um, I wish I had chosen another word.
	I just have to take responsibility for the word I used at that time.
	And I take responsibility for the use of that word.
	But the context in which I was thinking about martyr was for the definition.
	If you look it up, it says a person who dies for his belief.
	I keep telling people, Micah Johnson is not a hero.
	He's not a martyr to me.
	I don't believe in a cause that calls for the killing of individuals.
	So yeah, in hindsight, I look back and I could have used a different word, but I definitely didn't use that word to raise him up, glorify what he did, or condone any actions.
	Of course she meant to glorify and raise him up.
	And this is the problem, okay?
	Again, it's this delusional sense that you're talking now about a black guy who murders white cops for no reason.
	For no reason.
	They didn't do anything to him.
	For no reason.
	And he's being called a martyr.
	And again, this is common, folks.
	It's common.
	It's not a fringe thing.
	This is endemic in the roots of leftist ideology.
	Here's another one.
	An HLN guest comparing the Dallas cop shooter to a kid punching a bully.
	Oh, the kid's fighting back.
	Fighting back by murdering innocent people.
	I want to put this in terms that the youngest person in your audience can understand.
	Pretend like this is daycare or elementary school and there is a bully that is kicking your butt every single day that you go to class.
	And finally, after you get in your butt kicked so many times, somebody rushes in and knocks that bully down.
	Wow, Spirit, you're actually, wait, wait, Spirit, you realize what you just did, right?
	You're now comparing this guy who ambushed the police officers to someone who rescues from a bully?
	You're gonna end up, you're gonna end up like Kalen!
	I mean, come on!
	Listen to what I'm saying!
	Listen to what I'm saying!
	No, I'm not finished, Dan!
	You hear what I'm saying?
	We've heard what she has to say.
	I mean, that's what she has to say.
	And this is becoming a common view.
	And Obama sums it up, right?
	As I mentioned at the very outset, President Obama had DeRay McKesson to the White House.
	DeRay McKesson is a race-baiting, race-rioting fan.
	And Obama has him to the White House to discuss race relations.
	That's who Obama is.
	And then afterward, he releases this ridiculous statement.
	Not only are there very real problems, but there are still deep divisions about how to solve these problems.
	There's no doubt that police departments still feel embattled and unjustly accused.
	And there is no doubt that minority communities, communities of color, still feel like it just takes too long to do what's right.
	And the pace of change is going to feel too fast for some and too slow for others.
	And sadly, because this is a huge country that is very diverse, and we have a lot of police departments, I think it is fair to say that we will see more tension in police, between police and communities, This month?
	Next month?
	Next year?
	For quite some time.
	Yes, because of you.
	Yes, because of you.
	Okay, we can stop it there.
	Yes, because of you.
	Okay, look at the polling data.
	Look at the polling data.
	A huge percentage of Americans thought we were moving in the right direction on race.
	Black, white, Hispanic.
	We all thought, when he took office, we were moving in the right direction on race.
	That is now down below 30%.
	That's because of him.
	That's because he's going out there, and he's exacerbating tensions, suggesting that the police are out to get black kids, and that the police won't recognize the plight of black kids.
	That's why.
	That's why.
	Because he's creating this false perception, and he does it not just by saying the police need to stop hassling black kids so much when they see them on the street.
	You know, they could be nicer in their interactions.
	Not by saying that, which is at least arguable, but by saying the police are out there targeting and shooting black kids.
	You say that a group of people is out there to target and shoot you.
	Are you gonna be surprised when those people are out in the streets rioting and protesting?
	And getting violent?
	Is that really surprising?
	I mean, forget about whether he's responsible for them doing those things.
	Is it surprising that that happens?
	When you're ginning up those sorts of emotions in people?
	Of course not.
	Bill Maher says that he was surprised nobody had shot a cop sooner based on the amount of terrible things that are happening.
	Bill Maher.
	With Chris Matthews on MSNBC.
	What do you think, Bill Maher?
	You look like a Keebler dwarf.
	Come on, go for it, Bill.
	When it comes to the police, look, there's never any excuse for what happened.
	For shooting a policeman?
	Of course, we all condemn that.
	There's no and, ifs, or buts.
	I don't condone it, but I do understand it.
	We have seen it.
	You understand that guy?
	Well, I understand the motivation, yes.
	I mean, how many videos can you see?
	How many years can go by when this is going on, when black people are brutally assaulted?
	I mean, the last one, the guy was just right on the ground, and he put a slug in him.
	I'm surprised somebody did not fire back sooner.
	Okay, I'm surprised somebody did not fire back sooner.
	I missed it.
	When did these cops shoot at Micah Johnson?
	I missed that part.
	I missed the part where they were shooting at him and then he fired back, where they were assaulting him and then he fired back.
	I missed that part.
	I missed the part where Alton Sterling wasn't resisting arrest and didn't have a gun in his pocket illegally and probably reached for the gun.
	I missed that part.
	But again, this is the part where the left oversteps its boundaries.
	They're not making a case that's real.
	They're not making a case that's honest.
	And I do love the—the reason I laughed there is because I love the statement from Bill Maher where he says, And then he proceeds to give you why he understands why people are shooting cops.
	I mean, it really is amazing stuff.
	Okay, so that's the delusional side of this debate, and that's the debate that's being had, is with the delusional.
	The people who think that cops are out there, they get out there every morning looking to kill black kids.
	That's the part of the debate, and Obama's pushing that, right?
	Obama's not pushing the idea that low-level use of force against black people who are innocent is too prominent.
	That's not the case that he's making.
	Right?
	Even that would be a controversial case.
	But that's not the case he's making.
	He's making the case that there's a systemic racism that results in a disproportionate number of black people going to prison.
	False.
	And that, number two, a disproportionate number of black people are being shot by police.
	False.
	So he's saying two false things instead of one thing that may be quasi-true.
	Here's the thing that's quasi-true, okay?
	Tim Scott, black senator from South Carolina, right?
	And he gave a speech on the floor of the Senate yesterday in which he talked about his experience with racial profiling, with what he thinks is racial profiling.
	So here's the senator.
	I want to go to a time in my life when I was an elected official and share just a couple of stories as an elected official.
	But please remember that in the course of one year, I've been stopped seven times by law enforcement officers.
	Not four, not five, not six, but seven times in one year as an elected official.
	Was I speeding sometimes?
	Sure.
	But the vast majority of the time, I was pulled over for nothing more than driving a new car in the wrong neighborhood or some other reason just as trivial.
	Okay, and then he explains what those reasons are.
	So, there's a couple things to say here.
	Number one, you don't get to say, I like Tim Scott, but you don't get to say you were pulled over seven times and then say two of those were legit, right?
	So you're really pulled over five.
	If you were pulled over, like, I have been pulled over in the course of one year certainly five times.
	Like, really?
	I mean, for goodness sake, I've gotten more traffic tickets than anybody I know.
	It's been several years since I got a traffic ticket, because the last one that I got was I was caught going 113 on the I-5.
	They caught me at 113, which was good, because I was going 128 at one point.
	But in any case, that was the last time I sped, because I learned my lesson.
	But the point is that, number one, if he's going to say that he's being racially profiled, he acknowledges at least a couple of those times the pullover was legit.
	Then he talks about situations in which he was pulled over.
	He's a black guy driving a nice new car in a predominantly white community, and he was pulled over.
	Now, what he doesn't say is whether he was brutally assaulted in those circumstances.
	Like, they pulled him over.
	Okay, let's say that the pullover was they pulled him over for driving while black.
	Number one, the statistics show, forget anecdotal evidence, the statistics tend to show that Unfortunately, black drivers speed more than white drivers.
	They did this experiment in New Jersey, and they found that 25% of the people being pulled over, 23% sorry, were black.
	25% of all the speeders in New Jersey were black, so it was actually slightly underwhelming, right?
	So, they pulled him over.
	He doesn't explain what happened that was so terrible.
	He gives one example, I think, Tim Scott, of him coming to the Capitol building, and he has his Senator pin on, and the guard says, I want to see your ID.
	And he says, well, why?
	And he says, well, I recognize the pin, but I don't recognize you.
	He says, well, that's that's racist.
	Is that racist or is it because the guard legitimately doesn't know him?
	It's his first time at the Senate.
	Like, why?
	That seems, again, if you name the officer and you name what he did wrong, then we can actually fight officer racism.
	If you just name things where you are perceiving racism, where it may or may not exist, it makes it very difficult to fight it.
	Now, he could make a different argument.
	He could make the argument that was being made by this Harvard study, which is—I keep mentioning this Harvard study because I'm actually—I like statistics and I'm interested in actual academic studies.
	There's some flaws with this Harvard study.
	A lot of criminologists say that it's got some problems.
	The part of the study that's important to me, the part that I care about in this particular study, from this Harvard professor.
	It says this, quote, "The New York City stop and frisk data contains officer recorded information on the compliance of civilians during a stop.
	These variables include whether the civilians refuse to comply with officer direction, whether the civilian verbally threatened an officer, whether they were evasive in their response to questioning, or whether they changed direction at the site of an officer." If they didn't do any of these things, then the study calls them perfectly compliant.
	And then they say, when we take perfectly compliant individuals and we control for civilian officer encounter and location variables, black civilians are 21.1% more likely to have any force used against them compared to white civilians with the same reported compliance behavior.
	It's going a little deeper than the headlines.
	So what that means is when the officer turns you around and puts his hands on you, he's more likely to do that with a perfectly compliant black civilian than he is with a similar perfectly compliant white civilian.
	Now, when you escalate the force, those percentages go down.
	Instead of it being 21% more likely that a black civilian is going to have the hands put on, now it's 20% more likely that you're going to be shot if you're white than if you're black.
	So the theory of the authors is that there's still this systemic discrimination and that as the punishment increases for systemic discrimination, right, like based on shootings, then people will discriminate less.
	This ignores a couple of things.
	One, if you even- I mean, I know police officers in New York and LA, and I called both of them yesterday.
	And I said, okay, so aren't you punished if you just put your hands on an innocent suspect?
	Like, if you have no reason, you put your hands on them.
	Isn't that a problem?
	Like, won't your department- And they said, yes, there's a full investigation anytime somebody makes a complaint of that sort.
	So, if you think something racist happened to you, number one, make a complaint.
	Number two, it's also possible that these are not the only variables as far as compliance, because there are lots of things that make you non-compliant, right?
	If you're not just talking back to a verbally threatening an officer, what if they talk back to the officer, not just threaten, but say F you to the officer, which is pretty common, people saying F you to the officer, right?
	Bottom line is, if you say things to an officer that are, you know, That rubbed the officer the wrong way, it's more likely the officer is going to grab you and push you or do something to you.
	We don't know that.
	The information here isn't specific enough for all of that.
	I talked with Heather McDonald, the author of The War on Cops, yesterday about this exact part of the study, and one of the things that we talked about was, how exact can you be with this sort of data?
	How exact can you be?
	And she said she's not aware that there is any sort of exactitude with this sort of data.
	But let's assume that that's right.
	Let's assume that the reason that this is happening is because there's some sort of racial and behavioral profiling going on.
	Now we have to, as a society, make some decisions.
	Are we willing to... And these are real questions that require real answers.
	And you don't get to just end around it, right?
	Are we willing... It's the same question we ask about racial and ethnic profiling of people from the Middle East with regard to terrorism.
	Are you willing to sacrifice more lives and have more people die and have more crime committed because you don't want to be involved in so-called profiling?
	So, last night on CNN, there was one of these town hall events.
	And a former Chicago Police Department officer, who's black, got up and started talking.
	And it's really interesting because he's black, so he says he's experienced it on one end, but he's also experienced it from the other end.
	And I think this is the kind of conversation we need to be having.
	Here's the cop.
	As a law enforcement officer, I had to do some profiling to protect the citizens that I swore that I would do.
	Did you profile black men?
	I profiled all people.
	And here's why.
	Because it's an effective policing tool.
	But me having an appreciation and an understanding, having been on the negative side of profiling, I understand the negative connotations that it can bring.
	But I also understood how effective it can be to protect those members of the community.
	So it should be used.
	You think it's an important part of policing and should be used?
	Absolutely.
	But let me underscore the real point here.
	There's cultural differences here.
	There's community cultural differences and there are police cultural differences.
	And where we have a real opportunity here, Don, is to bridge that divide between the cultural differences.
	Because when you take a police officer out of the police academy and you give him some diversity, immersion, and effective training about the community that he is going to police in, he's going to handle those citizens much differently.
	Okay, so I think there's some truth to it, except I think when he talks about the diversity training and all that, that's been ineffective.
	In Baltimore, you have black cops policing black communities, and it hasn't changed the calculus.
	The only way you really change the calculus of excessive levels of low-level force being used disproportionately on black folks, for example, the only way you change that calculus is the same way that every other ethnic community in the United States has historically changed that calculus.
	And that is, you lower the crime rate.
	When Italians came to the United States and became Italian-Americans, their crime rate was really high.
	And it was really high because there was mafia involvement and because the police didn't go into those communities.
	And there were really, really bad relations.
	Look historically.
	Terrible relations between the cops and the Italian population.
	The same thing was true of the Hispanic population.
	The same thing was true, actually, of the early Eastern European Jewish population in the United States.
	It was considered a crime-ridden slum.
	And then what happened?
	The crime rates went down, relations with the cops get better.
	There is no such thing as a low crime community with bad relations with the cops.
	It doesn't exist.
	It doesn't exist.
	And the fact is, unfortunately, the only way that you're going to make this problem disappear is through one of two things.
	Either the community itself has to handle internally its crime problem, or you're gonna need more cops to handle the crime problem.
	Those are the only two ways to do this.
	And the left has made the first Impossible.
	They won't do it.
	They won't say to people, you need to raise your kids better, you need to cooperate with the cops, you need to fight crime, you need to have a father for your kid when the kid is growing up in the house.
	We can't do that, right?
	We saw yesterday people saying that, Whoopi Goldberg saying it's racist for Rudy Giuliani to say that it's worthwhile to have a father in the home.
	Is it racist for that black Dallas police chief to say the same thing?
	That's what you need to do in order to quash the crime problem.
	And what's happening, because we can't discuss the first issue, which is the level of the culture that creates crime in inner-city black communities, because we can't discuss that, we have to move to the second issue, which is, what do we do with the police to help fix this?
	And then it turns out we don't like what the police are doing in order to fix this.
	If you won't solve the first problem, you end up with the second problem.
	Bill Maher, you know, said something that I think is worthwhile and worthy of exploration.
	Last night, same broadcast, he says, without cops, the country would look like the Purge.
	Here's what he had to say.
	You know, well, what do you think these are motives?
	I think the motive differs in every case, but you're the guest tonight.
	What do you think causes all this?
	I see the common nature.
	White police officer kills black person, apparently without justification.
	What else is going on here?
	Is it prejudice?
	I interviewed a policeman once on my old show, and he said, when I worked in the black neighborhood, I hated all black people.
	When I worked in the Latino neighborhood, I hated all Latino people.
	And when I worked here in the San Fernando Valley, I hated the white people.
	And you do basically come up against not the good people.
	That's what you're dealing with.
	That's your job.
	That's so true.
	You're a policeman.
	You know, you deal with criminals.
	So there is some of that.
	There is also something very wrong with police culture.
	Now, once again, we're not indicting all the police.
	And certainly, without the police, this country would look like that movie The Purge every night.
	Okay, so a couple of things there.
	One, he says there's something wrong with police culture.
	If you go into what can only be—when you're dealing with criminals, it's quote-unquote enemy territory with criminals.
	Not with the rest of the community, but it's exactly like American soldiers in Iraq trying to distinguish civilians from criminals.
	Right?
	I mean, it's exactly like that.
	You have armed men in an area where they are charged with getting the bad guys.
	It doesn't mean that inner cities are Iraq.
	They aren't.
	The proportions are not the same between civilians and terrorists, obviously, or civilians and criminals.
	But the mentality is very similar, and this is why we tend to lump in, in our own heads, police people and people who are members of the military.
	That requires a certain amount of putting your humanity to the side.
	And cops do their best, they really do, to not do that.
	And it's a very difficult job, the same way it is for the military.
	We've got to appreciate that.
	That's number one.
	Number two, here's the problem.
	Marge says, without the cops, the country would look like the Purge.
	That's not true everywhere.
	It's actually not true everywhere, right?
	There are places in Texas where, if there were no cops, the country still would not look like the Purge because people know their neighbors.
	Because people all have guns, so if there were somebody who were doing something bad, they would shoot them.
	Right?
	I know that if you left my Jewish community to itself, just the Jewish community because it's the community I know, my religious community.
	If you left us to ourselves, it would not look like the Purge.
	Right?
	Because there are common ties that we share.
	And that common tie includes being law-abiding and helping each other out.
	When you don't work on the social fabric, that's when you need the cops, and then you're upset because the cops come in, and the cops are not perfect, and the cops do bad things, and the cops can get overzealous, and the cops can be brutal to people.
	One or the other has to happen.
	But we're not talking about solutions in this conversation.
	Instead, we're just blaming cops for things they don't do, suggesting that all cops are racist, and pretending that's the real problem.
	If you think that's the real problem, the solution is to get rid of the cops.
	But the problem right now is that Bill Maher is right.
	If you do get rid of the cops, in a lot of these communities, there is no social fabric, and so you will have mass killings.
	And that's exactly what's been happening throughout the United States in areas where the crime is rising, as the Ferguson effect takes place.
	Okay.
	I want to shift topic briefly.
	Hillary Clinton, as we mentioned before, she's absolutely sinking in the polls.
	She's having a really rough ride in the polls.
	And Hillary Clinton is having a rough ride in the polls because she's a terrible candidate.
	She's legitimately the worst candidate of my lifetime.
	She should be blowing Trump out.
	She's not, which I think is a good thing.
	But she's, you know, she is a terrible, terrible candidate.
	I'll give you an example.
	So, yesterday Hillary Clinton was talking about all the terrible things that Donald Trump is going to do as president.
	All the horrible things he's going to do as president.
	And here's what she said.
	Imagine if he had not just Twitter and cable news to go after his critics and opponents, but also the IRS.
	Or for that matter, our entire military.
	Given what we have seen and heard Do any of us think he'd be restrained?
	And he has shown contempt for and ignorance of our Constitution.
	Okay, so a couple of things there, Hillary.
	One, you say, wouldn't it be bad if the President of the United States used the IRS to target his political opponents?
	Hello!
	You were there.
	By the way, your own husband's IRS did some of the same stuff, but your boss did that.
	Right?
	Like, we here in this office know that because there are a bunch of people here who worked for the least secret secret organization in America, Friends of Abe, right?
	501c3, that was trying to get approved and failed, right?
	And failed because of Lois Lerner and the IRS.
	So this is the problem for Hillary.
	Every time she knocks Trump, she ends up knocking herself.
	She says, he doesn't care about the Constitution.
	I agree.
	I don't think Trump cares about the Constitution.
	Yesterday, Donald Trump came out and he was asked, this is an amazing thing, Donald Trump was asked yesterday about, do you care if the Republicans lose the Senate?
	And his reply was, yeah, I would like to retain the Senate, but actually I don't really mind that much because it would be fun to be a free agent.
	Okay, for all you people who think Donald Trump cares about the Supreme Court, you be stupid, gang.
	Okay, the fact is, Donald Trump doesn't care about the Supreme Court.
	If there's a Republican Senate, maybe he's pressured into making a conservative Supreme Court pick, but that's the whole point.
	He doesn't care whether there's a Republican Senate because he doesn't care about that issue.
	The only real issue in America that requires the Supreme Court is the SCOTUS pick, is the Supreme Court pick, and he doesn't care about it, right?
	He'd like to be a free agent.
	Which means he wants to cut deals with Democrats, which means you can kiss goodbye to that fantasy wall you're all building in your heads.
	But in any case, Hillary says that she doesn't care about the Constitution.
	I agree.
	She hates the Constitution.
	I mean, she would dip that Constitution in acid and then set it on fire, and then set it on fire again, and then put it out, and then dip it in acid again, and just continue doing that over and over.
	Every attack that she drops on him backfires on her.
	I mean, it's a third-grade election, right?
	No matter what you say, I'm rubber and you're glue.
	Everything you say bounces off me and sticks to you.
	And Trump should basically just say that.
	Hillary did the same thing.
	She says, the Trump campaign is pitting Americans against each other.
	His campaign is as divisive as any we have seen in our lifetimes.
	It is built on stoking mistrust and pitting American against American.
	It's there in everything he says and everything he promises to do as president.
	It's there in how he wants to ban Muslims from coming to the United States and toyed with creating a database to track Muslims in America.
	It's there in the way he demeans women In his promotion of an anti-Semitic image pushed by neo-Nazis.
	Yeah, we can stop it there.
	She's not saying anything about Trump that isn't true.
	But she just went on TV two days ago and said white Americans basically need to apologize to black Americans.
	Her top advisor, Sidney Blumenthal, has a son who says that Israel is a Nazi state.
	Hillary Clinton, everything that she's saying about disdain for women, my God, she attacks rape victims.
	This is why Hillary is failing, and no one trusts her, and the polls show that.
	So again, this isn't about Donald Trump getting stronger, it's about Hillary Clinton getting weaker.
	And, you know, she should continue to get weaker.
	I'm hoping that eventually, by the time of the election, only 2% of the American population votes, and the other 98% of us have moved somewhere else.
	You know, we've all moved to Texas, basically, and they're seceding, because that's the only solution here, because these two candidates are the worst, and Hillary is horrible.
	Okay.
	Time for things I like, things I hate, and then the mailbag, because time has no meaning here on The Ben Shapiro Show.
	So, we'll start with things I like.
	She's been doing surprise endings in movies.
	I don't think that I've done this movie before, but we've done 150 episodes, so if I forgot, then tough.
	You'll see it again.
	This movie, Unbreakable.
	M. Night Shyamalan.
	So M. Night Shyamalan starts off with The Sixth Sense, and everybody loves it.
	And I think it's okay.
	It's not my cup of tea.
	And then he does a couple more movies, and I think they're actually better than Sixth Sense.
	But everybody rips into them, and so now he just makes utter garbage.
	He just makes, like, the worst movies that you've ever seen, bar none.
	This was a good movie that has a real cult following.
	It didn't do well when it came out, but it's become kind of a cult hit now.
	The movie Unbreakable.
	So here is the basis of the movie is this guy, Bruce Willis, who is in a disaster and he survives.
	And the question is why he survives the disaster and everybody else died.
	You're in the emergency room in the Philadelphia City Hospital.
	I'm gonna ask you some questions.
	Where were you sitting on the train?
	Against the window.
	In the passenger car?
	Yes.
	You're certain you were in the passenger car?
	Yeah.
	Where are the other passengers?
	Your train derailed.
	Took a curve too fast.
	A second train collided with yours after it derailed.
	The debris spread over one mile.
	Why are you looking at me like that?
	There are two reasons why I'm looking at you like this.
	One, because it seems you aren't the only survivor of this train wreck.
	And two, You don't have a scratch on you.
	So it's a really, it's an interesting movie.
	I know what's going through your mind right now.
	So then Samuel L. Jackson.
	This is actually one of Samuel L. Jackson's decent performances.
	He's basically become a parody of himself, just shouting snakes on a plane over and over.
	But in this movie, he's actually good.
	And it's a really interesting film with a really interesting ending.
	So I debated actually which one of Shyamalan's films to put up here.
	And Sixth Sense wasn't even part of the equation.
	I also like The Village, which is actually a really underrated film.
	There's part of it that's dumb with Adrian Brody, but the rest of the movie is actually really good, and really interesting, and raises questions.
	But Unbreakable's a good movie.
	It's a little slow, but it builds suspense, and it's got this kind of cult following.
	People actually talked about them doing a sequel, but it never really happened.
	Okay, things that I hate.
	So, as I mentioned early on, ESPN has the ESPY Awards.
	I think the ESPY Awards are just dumb.
	Like, I don't know why we're having awards by athletes to other athletes.
	Why do I care?
	I don't.
	But, yesterday I'm working out, and they're doing the run-up to the ESPYs, and I said to my trainer, I said, look, I know, I know, this is gonna be all Black Lives Matter all the time, because ESPN is trying to draw a black audience, and so the way they think they're gonna do that is by politically pandering.
	Naturally, that's exactly what happened.
	So it started off at the beginning of the ESPYs with, I think it's Dwayne Wade and Chris Paul and LeBron James.
	And I'm trying to remember who the fourth guy is.
	And they're all standing there talking about Black Lives Matter.
	Open the ESPYs.
	Remember, this is a sports award show.
	And they open up by saying the police are evil, basically.
	Tonight is a celebration of sports.
	Celebrating our accomplishments and our victories.
	But, in this moment of celebration, we actually start the show tonight this way.
	The four of us talking to our fellow athletes with the country watching.
	Because we cannot ignore the realities of the current state of America.
	The events of the past week have put a spotlight on the injustice, distrust, and anger that plague so many of us.
	The system is broken.
	The problems are not new.
	The violence and the racial divide definitely is not new.
	But the urgency to create change is at an all-time high.
	We stand here tonight accepting our role in uniting communities to be the change we need to see.
	We stand before you as fathers, sons, husbands, brothers, uncles, and in my case, as an African-American man and the nephew of a police officer who is one of the hundreds of thousands of great officers serving this country.
	But, Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, Tamir Rice, Eric Garner, Laquan McDonald, Alton Sterling, Philando Castile.
	This is also our reality.
	Generations ago, legends like Jesse Owens... It goes on like this.
	It goes on like this.
	Number one, it's a sports show.
	I didn't tune in for this.
	But, people say, well, can't they have their opinions?
	Sure, they can have their opinions, and I can have mine, and I think this is idiotic.
	If I want to watch sports, I want to watch sports.
	If I want to watch a movie, I want to watch a movie.
	I don't want to turn on ESPN and be watching MSNBC with footballs.
	That's just my opinion.
	I'm allowed to have it.
	They're allowed to say what they want.
	I don't have to like it.
	Number two, what he's saying is bull.
	Okay, when he lists off those names, there's only one name there that we know for sure was a bad shoot, and that's Laquan McDonald.
	Every other name there is the very least controversial.
	Trayvon Martin punched George Zimmerman in the face and then pounded his head on the pavement and was found innocent by a jury, George Zimmerman.
	He was acquitted by a jury.
	And the Eric Holder Department of Justice couldn't find evidence that it was a racist killing.
	They couldn't bring a federal hate crime investigation or any federal investigation.
	In the case of Eric Garner in New York, he didn't die because they choked him out.
	He died because they put him in a submission hold.
	Right?
	A submission hold is not a chokehold.
	They are two different things.
	One crushes your windpipe, one cuts off the blood to your brain, and it's supposed to restore afterward.
	He was a very overweight man, and he died in the ambulance after not complying with police.
	Right?
	When you talk about Michael Brown, obviously that was a good shoot.
	When you're talking about Alton Sterling, Alton Sterling is very possibly a good shoot, and Philando Castile we don't even know anything about yet.
	But it doesn't matter, they go on national TV and they start promoting this propaganda.
	And then if that weren't enough, if that weren't enough, Obama has to make an appearance at the ESPYs.
	Because he has to be everywhere, Obama.
	Zavion gave his life to save someone else's.
	What's our excuse for not acting?
	Not one more!
	We have to ask ourselves, is this the world we want our kids to grow up in?
	Are we just gonna accept these tragedies at the price for our freedom and move on?
	It's up to all of us to build a country that's worthy of Xavion's promise.
	That's what we owe him.
	That's what we owe all of our kids.
	Okay, and so he starts pushing for gun control.
	Again.
	Again.
	He's pushing for gun control on a sports program.
	All I wanna do is watch the sports.
	That's not too much to ask, is it?
	I don't understand.
	And I don't wanna hear, oh well, everyone has a social responsibility to speak out.
	Okay.
	Do it on your own time.
	Do it on your own time.
	But I was under the impression that ESPN was supposed to be a non-political sports channel.
	That was my impression.
	If I wanted to watch politics, I'd move over to Fox News or MSNBC or CNN.
	I do politics for a living.
	Can we have any area of American life that's left free from politics for just a second?
	Or does everything have to be... And the truth is that all of this is about the media celebrating themselves.
	Look how courageous we are for taking our sports stars and putting them at career risk.
	It's not a career risk for these guys to do that, come on.
	These guys are not risking anything to say this kind of stuff.
	It makes them popular.
	The media are cheering for them.
	It's not controversial, and it's not a career risk if nobody is going to punish you if you say it.
	Instead, you get plaudits for being a real stand-up person for doing this sort of routine.
	Joe Biden, by the way, came by the ESPYs.
	Here's the Vice President of the United States, Joe Biden, showing up at the ESPYs, too.
	Everyone shows up.
	Thank you.
	Thank you so much.
	Like Jimmy V, my son, Bo, never let cancer touch his heart or his soul.
	To the end, my Bo worried about his family more than himself.
	He lived his entire life.
	He's giving an award to Craig Sager over cancer.
	Lots of people in the United States have had cancer.
	Lots of them.
	Lots of athletes have had cancer.
	What the hell is Joe Biden doing there?
	All this is is propaganda for the Obama-Biden administration.
	That's all this is.
	It's an in-kind donation to the Obama-Biden administration.
	But, you know, this is how it goes now.
	This is how controlled the media are by the left.
	It's really disappointing and disheartening.
	By the way, there was a guy who sang All Lives Matter, and he added it to the Canadian national anthem, right?
	Nobody gave him plaudits.
	He ended up being fired.
	So only one type of politics inserted in sports is okay.
	Okay, time for a few entries from the mailbag because, hey, again, time has no meaning.
	John writes, Dear Ben, my greatest fear is that the intolerance and thuggery of the left and their agenda will do far greater harm than just increasing our social divides and stymieing our economic growth.
	They are on a mission to pervert the Constitution and undermine the structure of the Union.
	Looking across the globe, do you think America is headed toward revolutionary fire?
	And what will fuel the fire or will be a simultaneous push from both forces that sever our Union?
	So I think the two forces he's talking about are the intolerance and thuggery of the left And then the other is the apparent, I guess, the mission to pervert the Constitution.
	I mean, both.
	Both.
	I mean, it's all part of the same agenda.
	The bottom line is that what they're looking to do is destroy the state of the country so they can build a new country, and that means destroying the foundations of the country.
	Daniel writes, Ben, you dislike Pokemon Go.
	Do you also hate puppies and kittens?
	I am genuinely interested.
	Regards, Daniel.
	Okay, so I don't...
	I hate Pokemon Go.
	I don't care that much about Pokemon Go.
	I just think the people who are making a big deal out of Pokemon Go and are adults need to actually do something more with their lives.
	Do I hate puppies and kittens?
	I do not hate puppies and kittens unless they pee on me, scratch me, or bother me in any way, but I don't have puppies and kittens.
	I have children.
	What I do hate is a society that values puppies and kittens more than children, which is actually what's happening now.
	I mean, you actually see people who are pro-abortion, but also pro-puppies and kittens.
	It's like anti-baby, pro-puppies and kittens.
	There's something wrong with you on a moral level.
	No, I don't hate puppies and kittens.
	I like dogs better than I like cats.
	I don't own animals.
	I'm not an animal person.
	It's just not my thing.
	Maybe at some point I'll be forced to get a dog for political reasons.
	You know that?
	Nathan writes, What do you think is the true endgame of the Black Lives Matter and civil rights movements, not to compare the two?
	Is the objective to desensitize the nation in terms of race, or is there intent to keep racial identity but simply be treated equally, or is there even an endgame?
	Well, the endgame is not to be treated equally.
	The endgame is that morality doesn't apply to you based on race, which is why BLM is racist.
	The whole idea, and I explained this the other day, the whole idea behind Black Lives Matter is that they are taking America, segmenting it off, creating conflict, and then saying that that conflict is inherent to the DNA of the system, as President Obama says, so we have to tear down the entire system.
	It's inherent in our property-based, capitalist, selfish society, and if we weren't so property-based and capitalistic and selfish, then we would just embrace a socialist identity under Bernie Sanders.
	See, the BLM people and Bernie Sanders have the same goals.
	They do.
	The only difference is that Bernie Sanders thinks that that's a transracial goal, and the BLM people think that that's a black goal.
	There's a reason BLM does not include right-wing people, even though you would think, I mean, if you're anti-police, presumably there's a libertarian contingent, but there really isn't.
	Brett writes, if Hillary Clinton threw flaming kittens into a pagan altar as an animal sacrifice on live TV, would she still get votes?
	Yes.
	Yes, she would.
	Because she openly celebrates an organization that murders one million babies a year.
	So yeah.
	Yeah, it turns out.
	There are 300,000 babies a year.
	There's a million babies that die every year in the United States, and she loves each and every one of them.
	I mean, forget about flaming kittens.
	I mean, this is sacrifice on the altar of Molech, so I'm not, you know... None of that shocks me.
	Chris writes, What I hate about the left is they think their opinions are facts, but facts are opinions.
	They think that if they have an opinion, like America is systemically racist, that's a fact.
	But if I say, here's all the reasons why that's not true, including profiling information, percentage of crime, what percentage of people resist police, percentage of murders, right?
	They say, oh, that's racist.
	No, that's not an opinion, that's a fact.
	A fact can't be racist.
	A fact is just a fact.
	Your opinion can be racist, and we saw that a lot today.
	Andrew writes, hey Ben, I'm 18, I don't remember much about the Bush administration.
	I know the reasons libs hated Bush, but what did true conservatives not like about his two terms in office?
	Blowing out the spending, mishandling the beginning of the war in Iraq before fixing it with the surge, not really having a clear strategy in Afghanistan, the idea of democratization of regions that have had no history of democracy.
	And a non-interest in constitutional issues, including free speech, which is why he signed into law campaign finance reform.
	Those would be the big issues with George W. Bush.
	Keith writes, Hi, Ben.
	I found out recently my sister is pregnant.
	Although they live in a nice house, I guess his sister and her boyfriend, they have good stable jobs.
	They're not married.
	My sister has been wanting to get married for a few years, but now her boyfriend seems reluctant, mainly due to financial technicalities because he owns his own business.
	That's bullcrap.
	That's absolute bullcrap.
	The reason he's reluctant to get married is because he doesn't want to get married.
	Okay, marriage is not a decision that you make because you're financially stable.
	The fact is that marriage is a decision you make because you have a moral compunction to make it.
	Because there's something inside you that says, I have to get married now.
	This is why, you know, old Harvard Law story, I was there and they had this Meaning of Life Dinner, what they called the Meaning of Life Dinner at the Harvard Hillel.
	And there's all these people sitting around being idiots and eating Chinese food.
	And they had kosher food, so I went.
	So they did this routine at the very end of the night where you're supposed to go around and read whatever was in your fortune cookie.
	When they got to me, I said, no one buys the cow if they can get the milk for free.
	Which of course was not written in my fortune cookie, I just felt like saying it.
	It's true, okay?
	This is why ladies, ladies, just a piece of advice for you.
	You can do what you want, you can have sex, that's your business.
	On a moral level, I think what you're doing is foolish.
	On a practical level, I think it's double foolish.
	On a practical level, if you're having sex with a guy before marriage, hoping that this is going to entice him to marry you, It ain't.
	Okay, just a little hint.
	It ain't.
	And I'm speaking as someone who remained a virgin until marriage, and my wife remained a virgin until marriage, so I speak from the experience of having done that.
	We've now been happily married for eight years.
	So.
	And we got married when we were young, right?
	I was 24, she was 20.
	Anyway, he says, could you comment on why you think young men are increasingly wary of getting married?
	Also, is there any advice I could give her?
	Well, I mean, now that she's pregnant, it's a really difficult situation.
	I mean, before she was pregnant, I would have said she puts an ultimatum to him, he'd get married or I'm out.
	I mean, that's what I would have said before.
	Now that she's pregnant, it's very difficult because kids need a father.
	So, you know, I don't know what leverage she can exert over him.
	I mean, he obviously doesn't care enough about the fact that she's pregnant to marry her, which would be the honorable thing.
	He sounds like not a particularly good guy.
	As far as why men are wary of getting married, because what benefit is there to getting married?
	Like, what's the actual benefits of getting married?
	One, if you're not religious and you don't believe in the morality of getting married, what benefit is there?
	It used to be the benefit was, this is why virginity until marriage mattered in the secular community.
	Forget the religious community.
	It mattered in the secular community because you weren't going to have sex unless you got married.
	Right now you can get sex anywhere you want, so what's the point of getting married?
	Because the truth is that men are looking mainly, evolutionarily speaking, for sex.
	Marriage was a great deal for women, but it wasn't necessarily that great a deal for men over the course of their lifetimes.
	I mean, you're married to one woman.
	You can't have sex with lots of women.
	Women get older.
	You get older.
	I mean, so it's... This is the problem with a society that doesn't value religious morality, a value that doesn't really value women.
	I mean, really, it doesn't value women, because if you value a woman, you marry her, right?
	If you're in love with her, you treat her like a decent human being.
	You treat her with the respect to marry her.
	You don't treat her like a piece of garbage.
	And look, if women consent to being part of that, then that means that that's a woman's choice.
	But that doesn't mean that the man isn't doing the wrong thing.
	Justin says, "Most people enjoy some form of entertainment they acknowledge is stupid or silly.
	Your wife likes The Bachelorette.
	Milo likes Digimon.
	Well, Milo also likes white supremacist literature.
	Do you have any guilty pleasures?" Let me think about that one.
	So, I mean, I've mentioned, I mean, everyday I come here and I mention all the entertainment stuff that I watch.
	I'm trying to think of something that's really dumb that I like.
	Um...
	For a while it was the movie Tommy Boy.
	I thought that movie was hysterically funny.
	I thought it was a really funny movie and I showed it to my father one time and he looked at me like I was an insane person.
	So that's probably number one on the list.
	I also have a bizarre fixation whenever my wife is watching these kind of cooking shows Like, Chopped or Hell's Kitchen or something?
	I find them fascinating, which makes no sense.
	I don't even understand why I like those shows, given I can't... Like, the food's pretty, but I can't taste it.
	And they're making, like, pig's feet, and I can't eat that crap.
	And then I go, wow, these are amazing.
	Look at the talent of these people.
	I don't know, maybe it tastes like garbage, but it's... Okay, so, final question.
	Gabriel writes, Dear Ben, I have a question regarding your views on abortion.
	I fully agree with you that toying with the definition of a human life at will is fundamentally evil.
	My question is whether you think that in the case of a rape of a small girl, ending the life of the fetus is still categorically immoral.
	If, heaven forbid, you had a daughter who was raped and conceived at 12 or 13, what would you do?
	I understand your argument human rights are absolute and should never be violated.
	In this instance, however, could the existence of the child be considered to be causing such great emotional trauma for the girl so as to be considered an externality from which the girl has the right to be defended?
	Okay, so as I've said, my view on abortion is pretty simple.
	It's when the mother's life is in danger, abortion is appropriate.
	So, one of the aspects of mother's life being in danger is if you have a 12-year-old, 13-year-old girl, and she's literally going to kill herself because she's now carrying a rapist's child, and I can certainly see that happening.
	That wouldn't be a referendum on her mental health or stability.
	I can see why any woman would be in that position if she were raped and now she's carrying a child.
	You know, that's... It's unthinkable.
	It's unthinkable.
	Which is why we should find racists and we should kill them.
	That's why we should find rapists and we should castrate them.
	Not put them in prison like leftists want and then let them out after three years out of mercy to the criminal.
	But...
	The answer is, that's my standard.
	That's my standard.
	Because it really, again, comes down to the value of life.
	You can't value one life, the babies, over the life of the mother, right?
	You can't value those two things differently.
	They're valued the same, right?
	Two human beings are worth the same amount, no matter what age.
	Doesn't matter whether you're talking about a baby in utero or whether you're talking about the woman carrying that baby.
	So, that's my answer to that particular question.
	Sorry, one more, okay.
	Tucker says, Ben, would you rather debate Hillary or Obama?
	Um, I would be happy to debate either one of them.
	I don't think that it would be a particularly hard thing to debate either one of them, actually.
	I think that...
	Obama is a bit smoother on his feet.
	Bernie Sanders was beating Hillary in debate, Obama beat Hillary in debate, so it would be easier probably to defeat Hillary than Obama, but that's why I would probably pick Obama to debate, because I think it would be fun to actually ask him about some of the horrible and terrible things that he's done.
	Okay, so we've reached the end of the week.
	Over the weekend, if you could not ruin things.
	I know it's the Clavin-less weekend, and this is when things tend to get ruined, and if you don't listen to Clavin's show, you should go listen to it, because it's great.
	But please don't ruin things in my absence.
	It might not be Mike Pence, apparently.
	This is the breaking news that Donald Trump may be changing his mind.
	Shocker.
	So we'll find out if that's true or not, and we'll be back on Monday to comment on it.
	Plus, the convention begins on Monday, so so much to talk about, always in Evergreen.
	So we'll see you, have a great weekend, and we'll see you back here on Monday.
	And if you don't come back, Then we'll come to your house.
	I mean, that's basically the way this works.
	I mean, now that we have your subscription information.
	Be there, be square.
	I'm Ben Shapiro.

▲