All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 6, 2018 - The Ben Shapiro Show
50:51
Remembering HW | Ep. 674
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Washington, D.C.
gathers to mourn George H.W.
Bush 41.
We explore Bush 41's political legacy.
And the radical left gains more esteem among the democratic intelligentsia.
I'm Ben Shapiro.
This is The Ben Shapiro Show.
Okay, so I do want to get to everything Bush-related.
I also want to get to Elizabeth Warren, who even the New York Times is now acknowledging sort of blew herself up at the behest of President Trump.
But we begin today by talking a little bit about why you should probably be diversifying.
Have you seen the stock market this week?
It is not great.
The stock market in the last few days has dumped about 1,500 points.
So things are not going awesome in the stock market world.
And that's because things are pretty volatile right now.
There's a lot of worry about trade wars.
There's a lot of worry about the national debt.
And that's why you should at least be diversified.
You should have some of your money in precious metals.
Can you afford another hit to your retirement like the last downturn when the S&P dropped 50%?
Probably not, which is why you should at least have some of your money in precious metals.
Trust the folks over at Birch Gold Group.
They have thousands of satisfied customers, countless five-star reviews, and an A-plus rating with the Better Business Bureau.
It's the holidays, you get gifts for everyone, so get yourself a free gift, the gift of understanding how to diversify by going over to birchgold.com.
You get a free information kit on physical precious metals.
See if diversifying into gold and silver makes some sense for you.
Go check them out right now.
It's a comprehensive 16-page kit showing how gold and silver can protect your savings and how you can legally move that IRA or 401k out of stocks and bonds and into a precious metals IRA if that is something that you are into.
To get that no-cost, no-obligation kit, go to birchgold.com slash ben.
That is birchgold.com slash ben.
Go check them out right now.
birchgold.com slash ben.
Okay, yesterday...
It was supposedly a moment of unity in Washington, D.C.
We had all of the living ex-presidents at the National Cathedral to do a memorial service for George H.W.
Bush.
And it really was moving, particularly when people who were close to George H.W.
Bush spoke.
So when George W. Bush spoke, for example, it was incredibly moving.
That, however, was not the main headline that came out because that was never going to be the main headline that came out.
Whenever there's a political gathering, let's face it, Okay, when there's a memorial like this, we all get together for five minutes and we pretend that we still have something in common.
And it's just like a family reunion at Christmas or at Hanukkah or at Thanksgiving.
You all get together and go, oh, remember we're all family.
And by halfway through the meal, everybody's throwing food at each other and trying to club each other with the empty bottle of Martinelli's.
And that's basically how things are.
Yesterday at the National Cathedral, the good part was everything that genuine friends and family of George H. W. Bush had to say.
Here was George W. Bush talking about his father.
Ed taught us that public service is noble and necessary, that one can serve with integrity and hold true to the important values like faith and family.
He strongly believed that it was important to give back to the community and country in which one lived.
He recognized that serving others enriched the giver's soul.
To us, his was the brightest of a thousand points of light.
And George W. Bush talked movingly about his own relationship with his father, all of which was good and decent.
And then John Meacham, who's a historian, got up and talked about how George H.W.
Bush was a 20th century founding father, and here's what he had to say.
George Herbert Walker Bush was America's last great soldier statesman.
A 20th century founding father.
He governed with virtues that most closely resemble those of Washington and of Adams, of TR and of FDR, of Truman and of Eisenhower, of men who believed in causes larger than themselves.
Okay, well, the truth is that George H.W.
Bush was not a visionary, right?
He lacked what they called the vision thing, and in 1992 it came back to bite him.
He was much more of a technocrat, as we talked about yesterday on the program.
He was much more of a guy who sort of handled his business.
And if he'd been president between 1924 and 1928, for example, I think he would have made a fine president.
His presidency between 1988 and 1992 was, to put it mildly, rather lackluster.
But the fact that we see him as a unifying figure I think says more about where we are as a country than it does about George H.W.
Bush.
The reality is that when John Meacham says he was the last soldier statesman, remember John McCain ran for the presidency in 2008 on a similar war heroism record, on a similarly moderate record as a legislator, and he lost to Barack Obama, a wild leftist.
In 2012, a classy, middle-of-the-road guy who probably in temperament most resembled George H.W.
Bush lost, again, to Barack Obama.
In 1992, George H.W.
Bush, that soldier statesman, lost to a probable rapist.
So George H.W., the American people decided they weren't interested in the soldier-statesman model, and perhaps that's because we actually have had a breakdown in the social fabric.
When you think about what George H.W.
Bush represented, there's been a lot of talk about him representing higher ideals, but the truth is I think what he mostly represented is he reflected the fact that we used to have a commonality of interest.
And look at the institutions to which George H. W. Bush belonged.
He was a belonger to the military, obviously.
He was a military hero.
That was a unifying institution in American life.
He was somebody who belonged to the upper crust of the Ivy League establishment.
This was an institution in American life where a lot of people had common interests and common values.
He was a member of a church.
He was a church-going man.
That was a unifying factor in his life.
All of the sort of soft things in the background, all of these soft things in the background that allow us to be a country together, those are what have faded.
And that's what we're really mourning when we mourn George H.W.
Bush's legacy and his passing, is what exactly happened to that background?
What happened to the social fabric that was always the background for the tapestry that was going to be the American story?
That's what's missing.
And the reason I say that's what's missing is when Meacham says that George H.W.
Bush reminds us of George Washington, I think that's because George H.W.
Bush reminds us of a time when Americans had a lot more in common than they do now.
Now, what's weird about that is that we should have more in common now than we did then.
Obviously, racial conflict in the United States is, thank God, on a downward spiral and has been for decades.
Prosperity in the United States continues to rise.
There are a lot of reasons why we should be unified, but we are not, in fact, unified.
And this goes back all the way to George Washington's farewell address.
He wrote a 32-page address to the people of America in which he warned against the spirit of faction.
He said that that spirit agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection, it opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions.
He talks about the divisions, the things that divide us.
But what is it that will unify us, said George Washington?
He said, in vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens.
This would be religion and morality.
He says the mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them.
A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity.
Let it simply be asked.
Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice?
And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion.
Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.
It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government.
The rule indeed extends with more or less force to every species of free government.
Who that is a sincere friend to it can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric.
The foundation of the fabric has been shaken.
When we look at the tributes to George H.W.
Bush, that is the biggest reminder.
That is the biggest reminder is that George H. W. Bush reminded us of a time when there was a common social fabric.
Now, there are a lot of people who will say, yeah, but I wasn't part of that social fabric.
I was excluded.
Right.
And then we made moves to try and include more people in that social fabric.
But at the same time, we decided it was necessary to shred the social fabric in the name of inclusion.
And what that means is that we are now included in a group in which we have no commonality.
And that's what we are all reminded of.
And when I look at the lineup of presidents who are sitting there, President Trump, who is, for all of the policies that I like about President Trump, a divisive figure.
Barack Obama, who is a radical, radical leftist with a corrupt history in Chicago.
Bill Clinton, who is a corrupt politician through and through.
And his wife, Hillary Clinton, who ran for president, being a very corrupt politician.
And what we are looking at is a country that really has less and less in common these days.
Well, that has led Ross Douthat over at the New York Times to write a piece talking about why we miss the Wasps.
And what he's specifically talking about is what exactly is it about George H.W.
Bush that we miss?
What is his sensibility that we miss?
He says, has many wellsprings, admiration for the World War II generation and its dying breed of warrior politicians, the usual belated media affection for moderate Republicans, the contrast between the elder Bush's foreign policy successes and the failures of his son, and the contrast between any honorable politician and the current occupants of the Oval Office.
But two of the more critical takes on Bush nostalgia got closer to the heart of what was being mourned in distant hindsight with his death.
Writing in The Atlantic, Peter Beinart, who is just an awful human being, described the elder Bush as the last president deemed legitimate by both of our country's warring tribes before the age of presidential sex scandals, plurality winning and popular vote losing chief executives and white resentment of the first black president.
All Also in the Atlantic, Franklin Ford described the subtext of Bush nostalgia as a fondness for a bygone institution known as the establishment, hardened in the cold of New England boarding schools, acculturated by the late night rituals of skull and bones, sent off to the world with a sense of noblesse oblige.
So Douthat says, I think you can usefully combine these takes and describe Bush nostalgia as a longing for something America used to have and doesn't really anymore.
A ruling class that was widely, not universally, but more widely than today, deemed legitimate and that inspired various kinds of trust, intergenerational, institutional, conspicuously absent in our society today.
Put simply, Americans miss Bush because we miss the wasps, because we feel at some level that their more meritocratic and diverse and secular successors rule us neither as wisely nor as well.
Now, I have my disagreements with this, because if you look at the presidents who we've admired the most, people like Harry Truman, to take a particular example, he was a white Anglo-Saxon Protestant, but he was certainly not upper crust.
And this feeling like, this noblesse oblige feeling that Dowd had us talking about, that this was our group of rulers who we were going to pick from among them, Yeah, I think that has its discontents and certainly it has its downsides as well.
I think something else has happened.
I don't think that we miss the ruling class.
I think that we miss the idea that the ruling class in the United States, this sort of aristocratic caste at the top of society, that they actually still had a lot in common with us.
What's weird is that as the people who we vote for become more like us, we seem to have less in common with the people we vote for.
And I think that's just because, as a country, as a whole, we have less in common with the people around us.
We don't know our neighbors.
We don't spend any time with them.
And we don't aspire to be a George H.W.
Bush.
We resent people who make a lot of money.
We resent people who are at the top of the so-called meritocracy.
I want to talk a little bit more about that in just a second.
First, let's talk about something that you can do for yourself this holiday season to make yourself look like a million bucks, and that is you can get a watch that looks like that.
Look at this watch.
This is a really nice watch.
How do I know it's a really nice watch?
Because I wear it every day.
It is a movement watch.
MVMT.com.
They've sold over 2 million watches worldwide, and you'll be sure to find the perfect holiday gift this season when you head over to To MVMT.com.
You know I'm all about supporting ground-up entrepreneurs who work hard for what they want, which is why I love MVMT so much.
They're a true success story.
It makes wearing their products that much more meaningful.
They came up and made a name for themselves in one of the most established markets in the world.
They've reached exponential growth.
There's a reason for it.
Their product is really good.
And they're not going to give you watches that tell you eight different time zones and try and measure how many steps you take today.
Instead, they just tell you the time in a spare, minimalist, classy-looking package.
Movement Watches start at just $95.
You're looking at $400 for the same quality from a traditional brand.
Not only do I wear a Movement Watch, so does my wife, so does my mom, so does my father.
I've gotten them for a bunch of my friends as well.
Movement has sold almost 2 million watches in over 160 countries.
Right now, they have awesome gift boxes and packages for the holiday season.
If you need help giving the perfect gift this Christmas, but you don't know where to start, the guys over at Movement Watches have your back.
They've curated all your favorite styles into special gift boxes for you, so you can absolutely crush this holiday season without the added stress.
Get 15% off today.
With free shipping and free returns by going to MVMT.com slash Shapiro.
Movement launching new styles on their site all the time.
Go check them out.
MVMT.com slash Shapiro to get 15% off today with free shipping and free returns and they have great holiday deals right now.
MVMT.com slash Shapiro.
Join the movement.
Go check them out right now.
Okay, so Ross Douthat basically makes the claim that George H.W.
Bush was beloved because we accepted our ruling haste more Way back when.
I don't think that's right.
Again, I think it's that we had more in common with our ruling case.
That we thought, okay, one day if I work hard, I can be like those people because this is a free society and we share the same values.
We have all the things in common that George Washington talked about in his farewell address.
But we don't anymore.
We don't anymore.
Here's what Douthat writes in contravention of this idea.
He says, If some of the elderbush's mourners wish we still had a wasp establishment, their desire probably reflects a belated realization that certain of the old establishment's vices were inherent to any elite, that meritocracy creates its own forms of exclusion, and that the wasps had virtues that their successors have failed to inherit or revive.
Those virtues included a spirit of noblesse oblige and personal austerity and piety that went beyond the thank you notes and boat shoes and prep school chapel going.
A spirit that trained the most privileged children for service, not just success, that sent men like Bush into combat alongside the sons of farmers and mechanics in the same way that it sent missionaries and diplomats abroad in the service of their churches and their countries.
So, he sort of chalks this up to WASP habits.
What I would say is that these used to be much more universal values, and they also applied to the people who ruled the country.
And now they're not universal values, and they apply to no one.
And so, our last several presidents have had significant moral failings.
Have real significant moral failings.
And the one who's probably the best man among them, George W. Bush, was excoriated as warmonger by everybody else.
Well, none of this really... all the feel-goodism didn't really hold up to scrutiny for very long because, as it turns out, we are still an extraordinarily divided nation.
And, as you know, I'm not ripping on displays of patriotic unity.
I think that sometimes those are necessary.
But it is hard not to look at the display Yesterday, in which you had President Trump sitting next to Melania, sitting next to the Obamas.
The Obamas despise the Trumps, and probably vice versa.
And then you have the Obamas sitting next to the Clintons.
The Obamas despise the Clintons, and the Clintons despise the Trumps.
And they all despise each other.
And now think to yourself...
Maybe we as a country have lost something, right?
And that's not a rip on Trump specifically, or even Obama specifically, or even Clinton specifically, although I have serious problems with all of the aforementioned.
It does raise questions as to what we as a country have in common when our leadership has virtually nothing in common with each other.
And you can see that in some of the video from yesterday.
Some of the video from yesterday that was going viral was Hillary Clinton purportedly snubbing the Trumps, and I can see the media trying to gin this up.
I am unclear as to whether Hillary Clinton is actually spurning Melania Trump here.
It would not be supremely surprising if she were, but I think it's a tape that can be read both ways.
What certainly cannot be read both ways is the media coverage of it.
So here's what it looked like when Donald Trump and Melania Trump sat down next to the Obamas and the Clintons.
So what you will see is Melania and Trump, they're shaking hands with people, and Trump reaches over, he shakes hands with Michelle Obama, and then the Clintons sort of look away from him.
President Trump shaking the hands of the Obamas.
The Clintons did not acknowledge President Trump.
So, obviously the media very into the idea that all these people hate each other, because the truth is, we all know, deep down, they really do hate each other.
But, you know what the media hates most of all?
What the media hates most of all are the Trumps.
So, MSNBC went nuts over Trump.
Now, Trump's behavior at the funeral was nothing, right?
I mean, like, he didn't do anything wrong at this memorial service.
Trump's behavior at the memorial service was perfectly normal.
That didn't stop the media from losing its ever-loving mind over his presence at the funeral.
What I love is all of the people in the media saying, well, Trump ripped on George W. Bush, and he ripped on Jeb Bush, and he was mean to them, so he shouldn't have shown up.
Does anyone remember?
Barack Obama calling George W. Bush a war criminal, in essence.
And he did it a lot.
Does anybody remember Bill Clinton going after George H.W.
Bush in 1992?
Excoriating him?
Trying to destroy him?
Does anybody remember any of this?
Politics is partisan game.
But the media were very upset that Trump would even be in the same vicinity as an event that people have emotional attachment to.
So here's MSNBC going nuts over President Trump.
There has not been an example since he emerged on the political stage of him being able to see anything as not about him.
So this was a service that was not about him.
And the premise of being invited was that at least for maybe two hours you'd stop all this and it's not about you and just take it in.
And it really wasn't about him, and you could completely ignore him.
I mean, because all he could do was sort of sit there, and the rest of the program went on.
Okay, so MSNBC is very upset that Trump did not make it about himself, but it was still all about him.
Okay, Don Lemon was even worse.
He says that Trump should not have even shown up to the funeral after talking smack about George W. Bush.
Again, the great meeting of the mental luminaries Don Lemon and Chris Cuomo on CNN discuss.
I don't think that's respect for the human being.
If you talk smack about them, if you say the nastiest things about them, if you treat them as subhuman, and then you want to show up at their funeral?
Really?
Hell, no.
First of all, the Bushes invited President Trump, right?
John McCain, Senator McCain's family didn't invite President Trump, so President Trump didn't show up.
The Bush family invited President Trump and wanted him there specifically for the show of unity.
But it doesn't matter.
Trump can obey the wishes of the Bush family, and he still will get ripped up and down.
The Washington Post's coverage of this was particularly absurd.
They have a piece by Greg Jaffe today that says, at George H.W.
Bush's funeral, a magisterial presidency meets one diminished by division.
Are we gonna pretend that George H.W.
Bush's presidency wasn't diminished by division?
That his presidency was purely magisterial?
Is that what we're gonna do now?
He served one term, and then he lost because a third-party candidate won 19% of the vote.
But apparently, you know, every opportunity to use George H. Bush to contrast to Trump, as opposed to contrasting what the country was in 1990, And maybe before, with the spirit of America now.
No, it's all going to be about Trump.
I don't think they would be writing the same thing about Barack Obama, who militarized the executive branch against his political enemies.
That wasn't the only article on the front page of the Washington Post website.
They had another article that said, This one from Philip Rucker.
From the moment he crossed the transept of the soaring Washington National Cathedral, tore off his overcoat, and took his seat in the front pew, President Trump was an outsider.
When the others sang an opening hymn, his mouth did not move.
When the others read the Apostles' Creed, he stood stoically.
And when one eulogist after another testified to George H.W.
Bush's integrity and character and honesty and bravery and compassion, Trump sat and listened, often with his lips pursed and his arms crossed over his chest.
So now we're doing body language breakdowns of President Trump at a funeral for national unity.
Mm-hmm.
Well done, Washington Post.
Really good stuff.
Also, I do love that a lot of people are very upset that President Trump and Melania didn't say the Apostles' Creed.
Well, other people said the Apostles' Creed.
Are we supposed to pretend that Bill Clinton saying the Apostles' Creed makes him a saint?
That suddenly Bill Clinton gets canonized because he was saying the Apostles' Creed?
He's a true Christian, Bill Clinton.
You know, and he's not schtuping everything in sight with or without consent.
We're supposed to pretend that that is just a sign of decency now?
The Washington Post continues, Wednesday's state funeral was carefully orchestrated to be about one man and his milestones, Bush the father, the friend, the war hero, but inevitably became about Trump too.
For it was impossible to pay tribute to the 41st president without drawing implicit contrast with the 45th.
I've been saying this for days, that the reason the media are doing a lot of the over-the-top hagiography of George H.W.
Bush is specifically in order to tear down President Trump.
That was pretty obvious from the outset.
Look, again, you can look at George H.W.
Bush and miss maybe a time when Americans valued statesmanship, but let's not pretend that the end of statesmanship began with President Trump because that is a bunch of nonsense and we all know it.
We all know it.
In a second, I want to talk a little bit about George H.W.
Bush's sort of reaction to President Trump.
And I also want to talk about the Democrats preparing for 2020.
But first, let's talk about how you cook your dinner.
With the holidays fast approaching, meal prep is the last thing you want on your plate.
You don't want to be schlepping on over to the grocery store, trying to figure out a recipe, buying too much of the ingredients, coming home, making a giant mess.
What if cooking delicious, wholesome meals is actually easy?
Well, it can be with Blue Apron.
Folks around the office have been using Blue Apron for months.
They say that it is fantastic.
It's such a great idea.
I mean, having these pre-packaged meals essentially made for you, you make them for yourself, right?
All the ingredients come pre-packaged, the freshest ingredients, the best ingredients, and the best recipes, and you're cooking like a gourmet in your own home.
It's pretty amazing.
Blue Apron really gives everyone a better way to cook.
They take the chore out of meal prep, and they give you creative and mouth-watering options that fit Your taste.
Check out this week's menu.
Get your first three meals for free at blueapron.com slash Shapiro.
These are meals worth sharing on social media in as little as 20 minutes.
It's blueapron.com slash Shapiro.
I'm looking at some of these meals right now.
This is the stuff you could be making.
Seared steaks and loaded mashed potatoes.
Panko-crusted chicken and maple dipping sauce.
Creamy saffron risotto.
I mean, this is solid, solid stuff, and you could be making this in your own home, yourself, like a gourmet.
Blueapron.com slash Shapiro to get your first three meals for free.
Blue Apron is indeed a better way to cook.
Go check them out right now.
Okay, so...
Well, all this morning for George H.W.
Bush goes on, and while we contrast the era of George H.W.
Bush and maybe the social fabric of George H.W.
Bush with today's social fabric, it is important to note, as I said yesterday, that George H.W.
Bush and the establishment Republicans' disdain for people who are not of the elite did breed a backlash.
So here's what Rod Douthat is right over at the New York Times.
When he says that there's a nostalgia for a sort of aristocracy in the United States, let's not pretend that that did not create a backlash.
It absolutely did.
One of the things that always used to make me a little sick to my stomach was watching as the Bush family embraced the Clinton family.
I never understood it.
It made no sense to me.
These were not people who shared values.
These were not people who shared a vision for the country.
And if they embraced each other because they felt that they had something else in common, I'm wondering what exactly that was.
I always felt like a fan of the Boston Red Sox and the New York Yankees, and you're rooting for your team to beat the other team, and then you find out that the players in the offseason are best friends and go fishing together, and you think to yourself, wait a second.
Aren't they supposed to, you know, be fighting against each other?
That doesn't mean they should be beating each other's brains in, but the sort of warmth that Bush showed toward the Clintons, the Bush family showed toward the Clintons, was always off-putting to a lot of people who felt like this was more of an evidence of an inborn elite who had decided to associate with each other than people who were really unified with the American people per se.
So when Maureen Dowd says that George H.W.
Bush cursed about Trump and threw his shoe at the TV whenever he appeared, You know, that creates a rather large backlash against exactly the sort of aristocracy that Ross Dude had us talking about.
H.W.
was talking about how much he liked Bill Clinton and Obama, and I said, what do you think of this Trump-Berther thing?
And he just said, you know, in essence, he's a jerk with a different word.
I just, I think, I heard later that he was throwing a shoe at the television set when Trump came on.
And this is why the media, of course, are doing a hagiography of George H.W.
Bush, because this is what they want.
They want this division.
Now, again, we are going to have to rebuild the social fabric from the ground up, but that's not going to happen anytime soon, not with the politics that we currently have.
The latest evidence of this comes courtesy of Elizabeth Warren, so this is just too funny.
Do you remember a few weeks back, this is mid-October, Elizabeth Warren decided that it was imperative that she release a DNA test to demonstrate her Native American bona fides, because many people had said, Lady, you are whiter than the backside of this sheet of paper right here.
I mean, you are as white as the driven snow.
And Elizabeth Warren said, No!
I have high cheekbones!
I'm Native American!
And then she went and she got like a genetic test, a DNA test, and it turned out she was maybe 1,024th Native American.
And the media celebrated this.
We read the headlines at the time.
The media said, she has been vindicated.
She's a Native American.
How dare you question her ancestry?
Well, the rest of us were like, uh, that's not what the test showed.
And also, what?
Well, now it turns out, That we won the argument, right?
Those of us who actually have any tenuous relationship with reality, we won this particular argument because now the New York Times is reporting that one-time Democratic 2020 presidential frontrunner, Senator Elizabeth Warren, has fallen on hard times politically.
Why?
Because of that DNA test.
So Trump trolled her into taking a DNA test and now she's got problems.
Quote from the New York Times.
Nearly two months after Ms.
Warren released the test results and drew hostile reactions from prominent tribal leaders, the lingering cloud over her likely presidential campaign has only darkened.
Conservatives have continued to ridicule her.
More worrisome to supporters of Ms.
Warren's presidential ambitions, she has yet to allay criticism from grassroots progressive groups.
Liberal political operatives and other potential 2020 allies who complain that she put too much emphasis on the controversial field of racial science, and in doing so, played into Mr. Trump's hands.
So, she tried to break into the intersectional group by releasing a DNA test, and everybody was like, no lady, you're white.
Not allowed.
So it's really fun to watch all of these upper-crust white candidates try to break into the intersectional battleground that the Democratic Party has become.
On the one hand, you have somebody like Kirsten Gillibrand, another rich white lady, who tweets out, And we're just getting started.
intersectional, powered by our belief in one another.
And we're just getting started.
As my friend and business partner, Jeremy Boring says, I'm not sure why she's allowed to assume the gender of the future.
That seems transphobic.
But in any case, Warren went even further in an attempt to prove she could compete with all the other minority candidates.
She didn't just pay tribute to intersectionality.
She tried to become part of the intersectional coalition, and she looked really bad doing it, and now the New York Times is recognizing this.
So, how's the Democratic Party breaking down for 2020?
Well, they've got the intersectional radicals, then they've got the establishmentarians, and then they have the Bernie Sanders radicals.
And this means that if you had to name the people who are the top candidates right now, it would be from the establishment Joe Biden, from the intersectional side Kamala Harris, and from the Sanders bro flavor of the month, that'd be Beto O'Rourke.
So those would be your top three candidates if you had to handicap this race right now.
All three of them Are increasingly radical and Elizabeth Warren was not radical enough.
She tried to break from the Sanders, bro.
Take, for example, the issue of intersectionality.
the intersectional area of the party and she failed dramatically because as it turns out, there are serious gaps between these three sections of the party if you are a Democrat.
And these gaps are only going to get larger as the Democratic Party becomes more and more radical on a wide variety of issues.
Take, for example, the issue of intersectionality.
So intersectionality now demands that we ignore anti-Semitism in favor of more put upon intersectional groups, right?
We've talked about this in the past.
That intersectionality, for those who don't know, is a theory that says that everybody's experience is defined by their group identity.
So if you're a black person, you have a different experience in America than a white person.
If you're a black woman, you're a member of two intersectional groups, and those overlapping experiences, those intersecting experiences, define your life in America.
And we can determine how seriously to take your opinion, or how victimized you have been, which are flip sides of the same coin in leftism.
Well, when it comes to this intersectional hierarchy, we rank various groups by level of victimization in American society.
Jews, because they're economically successful in the United States, rank very low on the intersectional hierarchy.
So the left has decided that anti-Semitism is no longer a problem.
They're not going to focus in on serious anti-Semitism.
Unless they can shout about anti-semitism in order to bash President Trump like they did after the Pittsburgh white supremacist shooting.
Thus, you now have several members of the Democratic caucus who have come out in favor of the openly anti-semitic proposal to boycott, divest, and sanction the state of Israel for building extra bathrooms in East Jerusalem.
And they're still willing to hobnob with folks like Mark Lamont Hill.
Mark Lamont Hill recently fired from CNN after going to the UN and shouting the Hamas slogan from the river to the sea, Palestine shall be free.
Well, it turns out that just a few months ago, nobody cared about this, back a few months ago, September 2018, Marc Lamont Hill suggested that the Jews were poisoning the water of the Palestinians.
That's called the blood libel.
For those who don't know any Jewish history, back during the Crusades, there were suggestions, lies, back in the 11th and 12th centuries, there were lies that Jews had been poisoning the wells of Christians in order to kill them.
How can you romanticize nonviolence when you have a state that is at all moments waging war against you, against your bodies, poisoning your water, limiting your access to water, locking up your children, killing you?
you know, an intellectual of sorts.
How can you romanticize nonviolence when you have a state that is at all moments waging war against you, against your bodies, poisoning your water, limiting your access to water, locking up your children, killing you?
We can't romanticize resistance.
Poisoning your water.
Poisoning your water.
Yes, he gets away with that.
No problem at all.
And on the intersectionality side of the Democratic Party, it gets even more radical when we get to gender.
And then wait till we get to sort of the Bernie Sanders side of the party, which is becoming more radical as well.
So for all the Democrats who think they're going to just walk over President Trump in 2020, all I would say is look to your own house first, guys.
We'll get to all that in just a second.
First, let's talk about your Second Amendment rights.
You're a gun lover and you're running out of time.
Why?
Because you could hit the range tomorrow with a brand new gun.
I know that I would love to do so, and the USCCA wants to make that dream come true for you right now.
They're here to help train and protect responsible gun owners like you and me.
And right now, they're giving away free guns every day, so you have to check them out.
They're giving you up to 24 chances to win a different gun every single day, but it all ends soon.
Just text SAFE to the number 87222 and get entered right now.
You could get up to 24 chances to win your gun daily.
It could be 24 Kimbers, 24 Glocks, 24 new SIGs.
All you have to do is text the word SAFE, S-A-F-E, to 87222 and reveal which gun you could be taking home today.
But this all ends soon.
Today's gun disappears at midnight tonight.
These guys are doing some really great things.
They provide you all sorts of services other than the ability to win a free gun.
All you have to do right now to get yourself involved is text SAFE to 87222.
Get your free entry to win that SAFE.
There are folks who provide you the legal assistance necessary if God forbid you actually have to fire a gun at somebody.
They give you all the educational background that you need.
They give you all sorts of other services.
And again, you could win a new gun today just by texting SAFE to 87222.
Go do it right now.
The USCCA, making the lives of gun owners in America better every day.
Text SAFE to 87222.
Go check that out right now.
Also, make sure that you go subscribe over at dailywire.com.
For $9.99 a month, you can get the rest of this show live.
You can also get the rest of Michael Knowles' show live, Andrew Klavan's show live.
You get all of these wonders when you subscribe.
Plus, coming January, if you subscribe, you get two extra hours of me a day.
So you think that I race through the news at lightning pace on this podcast?
Wait until I actually have the ability to expand on my thoughts in a full three-hour format, because that's what begins in January.
Go check it out right now over at Daily Wire.
For $99 a year, you get that, all of that, plus this, the very greatest in beverage vessels.
We are on the road, and as you know, I can't say it works for everyone.
I can't promise you that if you get a Tumblr that that will actually be one of the features of the Tumblr.
I can say that it may or may not be true.
And it disappears.
When I get back to Los Angeles, I will hit the button and it will automatically reappear.
I can't say it works for everyone.
I can't promise you that if you get a Tumblr that that will actually be one of the features of the Tumblr.
I can say that it may or may not be true.
In any case, go check that out.
You get all of those things.
And subscribe over at YouTube or iTunes.
Leave us a review.
We really appreciate it.
We were one of the top 10 downloaded podcasts in America according to iTunes for the year 2018.
Thank you so much for doing that for us.
Tell all your friends to subscribe so we can continue that growth trajectory leading up to 2020.
Go check us out right now.
Right now we are the largest, fastest growing conservative podcast in the nation.
So the intersectional left growing increasingly radical.
Elizabeth Warren, not radical enough for them.
In fact, insulting to them.
Elizabeth Warren.
It's really insulting to them.
Speaking, by the way, of the intersectional left, it'll be amazing to watch as the bad behavior of particular candidates who please the intersectional left are completely overlooked.
So I will take, for example, Kamala Harris, who I mentioned before as a possible tier one candidate for the Democrats in 2020.
What makes her a tier one candidate?
Well, she's a senator from California and she's a woman and she's black.
That's pretty much it.
Those are the things.
Because she doesn't have a legislative record.
She was not a good attorney general in the state of California.
I was there.
I remember.
She Does not do anything of note except for tell lies about Brett Kavanaugh apparently in judicial hearings, but this has made her a frontrunner because something.
Okay, but she's such a frontrunner.
She's so high on the intersectionality scale that she can get away with ignoring the fact that a longtime top staffer of hers just had to pay out $400,000 in a harassment and retaliation settlement.
And she didn't do anything about it.
This is according to the Sacramento Bee today.
A longtime top staffer of U.S.
Senator Kamala Harris resigned on Wednesday after the Sacramento Bee inquired about a $400,000 harassment and retaliation settlement resulting from his time working for Harris at the California Department of Justice.
Larry Wallace, who served as the director of the Division of Law Enforcement under then Attorney General Harris, was accused by his former executive assistant in December 2016 of gender harassment and other demeaning behavior, including frequently asking her to crawl under his desk to change the paper in his printer.
The lawsuit was filed December 30th, 2016, when Harris was still Attorney General, but prepping to be sworn in as the Democratic Senator.
It was settled less than five months later, in May 17, by Xavier Becerra, who was appointed to replace her as Attorney General.
By that time, Wallace had transitioned to work for Harris as a senior advisor in her Sacramento office.
We are unaware of this issue and take accusations of harassment extremely seriously.
This evening, Mr. Wallace offered his resignation to the Senator, and she accepted it.
Harris spokeswoman Lily Adams wrote in an email, I love this.
Harris, who said she will decide over the holidays whether to run for president in 2020, has been a prominent figure in the MeToo movement.
So in other words, she knew this for years and she didn't care for years until the Sacramento Bee asked her about it.
How do we know she didn't care?
Because she brought him along when she moved to the senator's office.
Right, so sexual harassment... Don't worry, don't worry.
They'll cover up for Kamala Harris.
There's no way they're gonna let Kamala Harris go down on something like this.
The same thing is true of folks on the left who are... I mean, it's not just her.
There's a story out of New Jersey today that's astonishing about the New Jersey governor, Governor Murphy.
Governor Murphy is a new Democratic hero, Governor Murphy, but...
It's okay, because he's a Democratic hero, for him to have overlooked allegations of sexual assault in his administration.
This is according to Andrew Seidman over at the Philadelphia Inquirer.
An official in the Murphy administration described in harrowing terms Tuesday how high-ranking members of Governor Murphy's campaign and staff, including the governor himself, failed to act when she tried to alert them about a campaign aide who she says raped her.
I had access to people in the highest positions of power in the state of New Jersey.
Katie Brennan, Chief of Staff for the State's Housing Agency, testified during a legislative hearing.
At each turn, my pleas for help went unanswered.
Somehow, it wasn't a priority to address my sexual assault and working with my rapist until it impacted them.
So she testified about all of this.
This is the first major scandal for Murphy, for Governor Murphy.
But is it going to take him down?
Of course not.
Of course it's not going to take him down.
He's a Democrat!
Let's not be silly.
Okay, the current senator from the state of New Jersey was embroiled in sexual allegations about underage prostitutes in Puerto Rico, or in the Dominican Republic, rather, and is still doing just fine.
So New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy will survive all of this and continue to be a Democratic star because Democratic priorities trump all else.
So the intersectional nonsense that the Democratic Party continues to embrace will continue to unfold before us in real time, ignoring all of the downsides.
Speaking of intersectional nonsense today, the American Association of University Professors, which is this highfalutin group of university professors, they've decided that there are not two sexes.
They're no longer two sexes, so intersectionality, picking up steam as we go on.
It's not just intersectionality, intersectional wings of the Democratic Party that are moving far to the left.
It is the economic wings of the Democratic Party that are also moving increasingly far to the left.
Their latest bugaboo, the thing that they are going to use to scare everybody into giving them control of the economy, Global warming is going to be the tool that they use for global redistributionism.
Despite the fact, by the way, that the United States is the number one carbon emissions reducer this year on planet Earth, and the fact that global carbon emissions continue to increase thanks to countries that are signatories to the Paris Accords.
This is according to the Washington Post today.
Global emissions of carbon dioxide are reaching the highest levels on record, scientists projected on Wednesday in the latest evidence of the chasm between international goals for combating climate change and what countries are doing.
Between 2014 and 2016, emissions remained largely flat, leading to hopes that the world was beginning to turn a corner.
Those hopes appear to have been dashed.
In 2017, global emissions grew 1.6 percent.
The rise in 2018 is projected to be 2.7 percent.
Why?
Well, let's see.
It says the unmitigated growth of carbon emissions, 4.7% increase thanks to China.
The United States basically kept level with its prior increases.
EU dropped.
India increased by 6.3%.
The expected increase is being driven by nearly 5% growth of emissions in China and more than 6% in India.
As nations continue climate talks in Poland, the message of Wednesday's report was unambiguous.
When it comes to promises to begin cutting greenhouse gas emissions that fuel climate change, the world is well off target.
But this makes Democrats happy because this gives them an excuse, the Bernie bros, it gives them an excuse to push for vast redistribution of wealth.
And of course, the person leading that charge in terms of vast distribution of wealth, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
Now, again, I don't mean to pick on Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
She just says dumb stuff a lot.
It is also true that if were Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez an actual presidential candidate, there's a good shot that she would wipe out everybody else in the Democratic Party in the primaries.
I kid you not.
A first-term congressperson.
She could easily... I mean, Barack Obama was in Congress for five seconds before he ran for president.
If Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez were to run for president... I mean, she can't.
She's ineligible.
She's too young.
If she were old enough to run for president, she would do serious damage on the Democratic side because she spans two of the groups.
So again, there are three groups in the Democratic Party.
The establishment, the Bernie bros, and the intersectional group.
She spans the intersectional group and the Bernie bros.
And she knows how to pay homage to the Establishment group.
You have to have two of those groups in order to win a primary.
There are very few of these candidates who do.
Well, Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, using the climate change issue as a baton to wield against the United States economy, here she is explaining that climate change is going to establish economic justice across the world, meaning redistributionism.
It's not just possible that we will create jobs and economic activity by transitioning to renewable energy, but it's inevitable that we are going to create jobs.
It's inevitable that we're going to create industry, and it's inevitable that we can use the transition to 100% renewable energy as the vehicle to truly deliver and establish economic, social, and racial justice in the United States of America.
I mean, that is sheer nonsense what she is saying there.
She's saying basically that if you cram down enormous amounts of regulation and destroy the carbon basis for the economy, which is particularly effective for poor people, that this will somehow establish economic and racial justice.
Really?
They're trying that in France right now.
You know what it resulted in?
Massive riots in the streets and the government of France backing off their own carbon tax.
So, no, none of that is true, but she's saying the stuff that is necessary inside the Democratic Party.
So, the great hope for the Republicans is not that President Trump somehow pulls a rabbit out of the hat again in 2020.
The great hope for the Republicans is that the divisions in the Democratic Party continue to widen, the divisions between the intersectional side and the progressive side, and that both of those sides continue to double down on the stupid, that both of those sides continue to grow more and more radical, that the intersectional politics of the left causes them to savage each other, Which intersectionality inherently does.
And that the progressive side, the Bernie Sanders side, continues to embrace more and more socialistic policies, including massive crackdowns on the U.S.
economy.
It was amazing.
Bernie Sanders was tweeting out the other day that Europe has gotten their emissions under control.
Why can't we do the same?
Okay, so what carbon tax rate would Bernie Sanders prefer?
It's always amazing.
You never hear anybody on the left actually talk about the tax rates in Europe, which are exorbitant.
We talked about it the other day.
The tax on diesel fuel in France is 60%.
The tax on unleaded gas in France is over 60%.
There's not a country in the EU that has taxes on unleaded fuel below 50%.
You think that'll work out well?
You try that in the United States?
It's real easy for all these folks to say this when we are the biggest booming economy in the history of the world.
What happens when the United States economy drops?
Do you think that Europe's going to be able to continue to grow economically if the U.S.
destroys its own economy on the shoals of this environmental redistributionist nonsense?
Of course not.
Of course not.
But Democrats will continue to promote it because they have lied to their base about the impact of all of their proposed policies.
Now speaking of liars, this is an amazing story.
Lena Dunham Who's the creator of Girls and just an awful person.
She claimed she had inside information in November 2017 exonerating a writer named Murray Miller from claims by actress Aurora Perrineau that he had sexually assaulted her in 2012 when she was 17.
Well, it turns out that she lied.
So she issued a statement in 2017.
She said, While our first instinct is to listen to every woman's story, our insider knowledge of Murray's situation makes us confident that, sadly, this accusation is one of the 3% of assault cases that are misreported every year.
On Wednesday, writing in The Hollywood Reporter, Lena Dunham offered an apology to Perrineau, beginning by celebrating the past year for unprecedented dialogue about issues like wage equality and systematic bias, and most notably, sexually assault and harassment.
But then, she got to the issue.
So many of us have spent such a long time hiding our trauma.
At least I know I had.
And I walked around feeling like such a victim.
And she talked about how tough she's had.
Tadish says, I never stopped, much less stopped to consider that I might be capable of traumatizing somebody too.
And so I made a terrible mistake.
When someone I knew, someone I had loved as a brother, was accused, I did something inexcusable.
I publicly spoke up in his defense.
There are a few acts I could ever regret more in this life.
I did not have the insider information I claimed, but rather blind faith in a story that kept slipping and changing and revealed itself to mean nothing at all.
So, Lena Dunham lied about having insider information exonerating a friend of hers in the Me Too movement.
Which, again, goes to show you that so many of these movements can be easily politicized for personal gain.
It is astonishing.
It is astonishing.
Okay.
In just a second, let's get to some things I like and then some things I hate.
So let's do a thing that I like.
The thing that I like today... So I had a plane ride yesterday.
The thing that I hate is that this plane ride had no internet, but you were able to at least download the United app, and that meant that you could watch a certain number of movies.
While I'd seen a lot of the movies that were there, I had not seen Borg vs. McEnroe.
I am a tennis fan.
And this movie is really quite good.
Shia LaBeouf basically plays Shia LaBeouf.
Actual cannibal Shia LaBeouf.
He actually plays Shia LaBeouf.
And he stars as John McEnroe and a guy whose name I'm gonna mispronounce dramatically here, Sverre Gudnadsson.
He, not even close.
He plays Björn Borg.
The movie is really first rate.
Here's a little bit of the trailer.
It's the perfect rivalry.
The baseline player and the net rusher.
So, a lot of the movie is in Swedish, obviously, because Borg grew up in Sweden.
No special build.
when you flick the bullet. - No special villains.
Just funny, bro. - The only thing standing between Borg and that record is you.
You and Borg are as different-- - So the movie is really worth watching if you're a tennis fan, if you're a sports fan, And it's good drama.
It's well acted.
LaBeouf is really first rate in it.
He's actually a really good actor.
He's a talented guy, Charlie LaBeouf.
It's too bad the guy has such issues.
Because if he could control himself, he'd really be a bigger star than he is, as opposed to making headlines for whatever is his latest shtick.
Okay, so time for another thing that I... Let's see, is there anything else that I like today?
No, let's do some stuff that I hate.
So, things that I hate.
Okay, thing that I hate, number one.
So California is now looking to mandate solar power for new homes.
According to the Orange County Register, California officially became the first state in the nation on Wednesday to require homes built in 2020 and later be solar powered.
To a smattering of applause, the California Building Standards Commission voted unanimously to add energy standards approved last May by another panel to the state building code.
Two commissioners and several public speakers lauded the new code as a historic undertaking and a model for the nation.
The new provisions are expected to dramatically boost the number of rooftop solar panels in the Golden State.
Last year, buyers took out permits for more than 115,000 new homes, almost half of them for single-family homes.
Why do I hate this?
Not because I hate solar energy.
I'm fine with solar energy.
I hate this because, inevitably, this is going to increase real estate prices because now it costs more to build a home.
When the cost goes up, that cost is passed on to the consumer.
Or, theoretically, it will be the state of California paying for the subsidy for all of this, which means raising taxes in the state of California yet again.
The state of California is already running massive, massive, hundreds of billions of dollars of debt, and the idea, trillions of dollars of debt if you count their unfunded liabilities.
And if you look at all of that combined with the tax rates in California, which are the highest in the nation, Let's just add some more regulation on top of that and increase real estate prices in the middle of a real estate shortage.
Makes perfect sense to me.
Just genius stuff happening in California every single day.
When there are no consequences to your activity because people in California vote basically straight-line Democrat no matter what, then you can do presumably whatever you want.
Okay, other things that I hate.
So there's a story over at BuzzFeed News today about Neil deGrasse Tyson.
This is really starting to gain steam now.
And it is amazing.
Neil deGrasse Tyson has had a bevy of allegations now come out against him about sexual harassment and one case sexual assault.
There was a claim by a woman that way back when they were at University of Texas at Austin together that he sexually assaulted her, that he raped her.
That allegation came out a couple of years ago and didn't make a lot of waves.
But now there are a bunch of other women who are coming forward And saying that they have been sexually harassed or abused by Neil deGrasse Tyson.
Apparently there was an assistant named Ashley Watson who was ecstatic earlier this year when she got a job to be Neil deGrasse Tyson's driver.
She wanted to be a Hollywood producer and thought the gig with his hit TV show Cosmos could help make her useful industry connections.
And then she was driving him around at one point and apparently he invited her up to his apartment to unwind over a bottle of wine.
She felt uncomfortable as he gazed into her eyes and held her wrist to feel her spirit connection.
Which is... That's a move, I guess.
They spent two hours together as he made sexual references to song lyrics and described his need for physical release.
As she was leaving, he took her by the shoulders and said, I want to hug you so bad right now, but I know that if I do, I'll just want more.
So, she went to the line producer and reported the incident, and she resigned.
And the line producer said that she should tell everybody she was leaving due to a family emergency.
So that was another story.
And then there's the rape story.
And there's a third story, where apparently he was at a party with this woman who had a tattoo of the solar system, which is a weird thing to do, and he asked if he could see Pluto and then tried to look down her shirt, apparently.
In front of other people, this is the allegation.
And now there is a fourth allegation of something similar.
The fourth allegation essentially states that he came on to her at a museum holiday party.
She says that they were at this museum holiday party and he started hitting on her and he tried to touch her or something.
In any case, none of this is great stuff for Neil deGrasse Tyson.
And it just shows you that powerful men in positions of power You know, they really have to... Number one, they should be careful.
Number two, they should be moral.
And number three, depending on which side of the political aisle you're on, you can survive any amount of this.
So, again, if this had been a claim that was made about anybody on the right, I highly doubt that everybody would have been treating the claims with quite such skepticism, considering how they treated unverified and unverifiable claims against Brett Kavanaugh.
So, that's that.
All right, so we will be back here tomorrow.
We'll be back in our normal studios.
We will have reactivated our Leftist Tears hydrocold tumbler, so you'll be able to physically see it.
But until then, keep...
Keep your head down, have a nice day, and we'll see you here tomorrow.
▲
Export Selection