Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Jan. 16, 2019 - The Ben Shapiro Show

57:45

Is Everybody Conservative Racist? | Ep. 696

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi tells President Trump not to give the State of the Union address.
	On the heels of the Steve King debacle, Democrats try to claim that all Republicans are racist and another razor company goes after men.
	I'm Ben Shapiro.
	This is the Ben Shapiro Show.
	Well, we have a lot coming up here today on The Ben Shapiro Show.
	I'm obviously with it today on The Ben Shapiro Show.
	It's the day after my birthday, guys.
	You're going to have to give me a little room to run.
	And I do appreciate all of the nice birthday wishes from yesterday, especially you on the left, who sent me private messages wishing me a happy birthday, but would not do so publicly for fear of being called out by your leftist friends for treating me as a human.
	Really appreciate that.
	That was great.
	We're going to get to all the news.
	We have a lot of news coming up here today.
	I also want to remind you that I'm speaking at the March for Life on Friday, which should be a blast doing my podcast live from there.
	We have some special guest surprises if we can make it work at the March for Life.
	So be sure to show up for that first.
	Before we get to any of the news, you need to look good, OK?
	You look like a schlub.
	I'm just sorry to break it to you, but you do.
	Because you need a better suit, okay?
	Dudes, if you want to look cool, you want to look snazzy, you want to look like you have a tailored suit, you ought to have a tailored suit, a suit made for you.
	And that's where Indochino comes in.
	Indochino is fantastic.
	They have a huge variety of fabrics, colors, and patterns, and it makes them incredibly stylish.
	And it's a unique experience.
	You play designer, you get to pick all of the details on your suit.
	You get to pick the fabric, you get to pick the interior lining of the suit, you get to pick a monogram, you get to pick Lapels.
	All of it.
	Indochino is North America's leading made-to-measure menswear company.
	They make suits and shirts to your exact measurements for an unparalleled fit and comfort.
	Dudes love the wide selection of high-quality fabrics and colors to choose from and the option to personalize all of those details.
	Here's how it works.
	You visit a showroom and have them take your measurements personally or measure at home yourself and shop online at Indochino.com.
	Choose your fabric inside and out.
	Choose your design customizations.
	Submit your measurements with your choices and then relax.
	Well, your suit gets professionally tailored and then mailed to you in a couple of weeks.
	This week, my listeners can get any premium Indochino suit for just $359 at Indochino.com when you enter promo code SHAPIRO at checkout.
	That is 50% off the regular price for a made-to-measure premium suit.
	Plus, shipping is free.
	That is Indochino.com promo code SHAPIRO for any premium suit for just $359.
	Free shipping.
	Incredible deal for a premium made-to-measure suit.
	Go check them out right now.
	Indochino.
	My favorite suit is an Indochino suit.
	Fits like a glove.
	It's great.
	Go check them out.
	Indochino.com.
	And when you use promo code Shapiro, you get Eddie suit for 359 bucks, which is lower than you get at a department store.
	Alrighty, so we begin today.
	with Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, who has now decided that the President should not give the State of the Union Address from Congress.
	Now, let me just say this.
	If President Trump is responsible for the death of the State of the Union Address, it will be the greatest achievement in the last 100 years of the presidency.
	I cannot express how much I despise the State of the Union Address.
	In fact, about five years ago, when my daughter was born, she was born the day of the State of the Union Address.
	I was grateful for two things that day.
	One, that my daughter was born.
	Two, that her birth had obviated the need for me to cover the State of the Union address.
	In fact, I tweeted that out on the day of her birth.
	I tweeted out, thank you to my daughter for being born on the day of the State of the Union address so I don't have to cover this bleep show.
	I hate the State of the Union address.
	It is an anti-Republican, anti-Democratic, monarchical spectacle of nonsense where the president shows up and all the legislators cheer and they clap and they pretend that they like the president and then everybody smiles as though the president is the king and he's arrived for a royal visit.
	I hate the State of the Union no matter who the president is.
	So, if Donald Trump just issues a long letter the way that George Washington did for his original State of the Union address, Well, Nancy Pelosi wants the president not to show up in Congress.
	He does an Oval Office address, summing up the main points in like seven minutes.
	That would be great.
	I would be so happy with the president, I cannot even tell you.
	Well, Nancy Pelosi wants the president not to show up in Congress.
	Now, the real reason Nancy Pelosi doesn't want the president to show up is because he will then have a captive audience for legitimately 100 million people.
	And he will tell them that the reason the government shutdown is still on is because the Democrats refuse to reopen the government.
	That's really what they are upset about.
	Nancy Pelosi wrote a letter to Trump today, and here is what the letter said.
	She said, On January 3rd, it was my privilege as Speaker to invite you to deliver the State of the Union address on January 29th.
	The Constitution calls for the President to, from time to time, give to Congress information of the State of the Union.
	Notice, by the way, that the Constitutional language never, never suggested that the President has to show up in Congress and then jabber at us for an hour, which is what the State of the Union is.
	During the 19th century, and up until the presidency of Woodrow Wilson, these annual State of the Union messages were delivered to Congress in writing.
	And since the start of the modern budgeting in fiscal year 1977, a State of the Union address has never been delivered during a government shutdown.
	In September 2018, Secretary Nielsen designated the State of the Union addresses as national special security events, recognizing the need for the full resources of the federal government to be brought to bear to ensure the security of these events.
	The extraordinary demands presented by NSSEs require weeks of detailed planning with dozens of agencies working together to prepare for the safety of all participants.
	The U.S.
	Secret Service was designated as the lead federal agency responsible for coordinating, planning, exercising, and implementing security for national special security events by Public Law 106-544, December 19, 2000.
	However, both the U.S.
	Secret Service and the Department of Homeland Security have not been funded for 26 days now, with critical departments hamstrung by furloughs.
	Sadly, given the security concerns and unless government reopens this week, I suggest that we work together to determine another suitable date after government has reopened for this address or for you to consider delivering your State of the Union address in writing to Congress on January 29th.
	Thank you for your attention to this matter.
	So that's not actually Pelosi asking Trump not to do the State of the Union.
	That's her saying we're not doing the State of the Union.
	That is her basically saying straight out, I am uninviting you, you are not welcome to show up in Congress.
	Now, Trump has a couple of options.
	One, Trump could go to Senate Majority Leader McConnell and say, listen, we're just going to do the State of the Union from the Senate floor, right?
	We'll just go over to the Senate.
	It'll be smaller.
	Most of the Democrats aren't going to show up anyway.
	And then I'll give the State of the Union address from there.
	Or alternatively, Trump could say, look, another stupid pompous spectacle that I've ended.
	So great.
	I'm all for this.
	This is fantastic.
	And I'll give a little speech.
	That'll take 10 minutes and not waste everybody's time.
	And it'll be complete with visuals and spectacle.
	That's what he should do.
	What the president should do is he should just give another Oval Office address.
	Except this time, I've never understood why presidents don't do this legitimately.
	Like, we have this tool.
	It's this thing.
	It's called television.
	And on television, you can show images.
	And when you show images on television, they have more emotional impact than just a face talking at you.
	Which is why, if you listen to this show, you should buy a subscription so you can actually see when we show the clips and watch as I make faces at those clips.
	And when we actually show information, it is more telling than when we do not.
	The president has so many opportunities to do something unique with the State of the Union, specifically because Nancy Pelosi is doing this, and save us so much time and effort in the process, and get rid of the monarchic spectacle.
	So again, if President Trump Decides not to give the State of the Union.
	I will be so happy with him.
	I cannot even say.
	It'll just be another benefit of the government shutdown.
	Everybody's very concerned about all the costs of the government shutdown.
	And yes, the government shutdown has costs, but this would be a real benefit.
	Us not having to sit there for two hours and do the runway show.
	for the for the president of the United States and members of Congress and pretend that we all like them and and then we have the president who just shouts out to people up in the balcony and here's Bob and Bob had a hard life story and everybody cheers for Bob and then we all sit down and we stand up and sit down again.
	If we could do not that this year, oh man, that'd be great.
	Maybe the president should just, instead of the State of the Union address, he should sit in the Oval Office, and he should just rebroadcast like a football game.
	And the ratings would be amazing, and people would love it.
	Maybe he should actually, like, broadcast a WrestleMania spectacle.
	Where he has somebody dress up with the head of CNN.
	It would be like so many different options available.
	And I'm very excited about all of them.
	In the end, Trump will give a State of the Union address.
	He'll probably do it from Congress.
	And I'll be very irritated.
	But for the moment, I choose to remain optimistic about all of this.
	Well, that was actually the second most interesting story of the day.
	The most interesting story of the day was Alexander Ocasio-Cortez.
	Again, The reason I talk about her is because she is now an important person as deemed by the media and also because she says such dumb things on a regular basis.
	So this is fantastic.
	So she did an interview with the Washington Post and she was asked about conservative media setting her up as another bogeyman on the left.
	And here's what she said.
	She said this interview was given about a week and a half ago.
	She said, I also think it's encouraging because this is my sixth day in Congress and they're out of all their artillery.
	The nude, because there's a fake nude that was put up of her, and the Daily Caller covered it.
	So the nude is supposed to be like the bazooka.
	You know, like, we're gonna take her down.
	Dude, you're all out of bullets.
	You're all out of bombs.
	You're all out of all of this stuff.
	What have you got left?
	I'm six days into the term, and you already used all your ammo.
	So enjoy being exhausted for the next two years while we run train on the progressive agenda.
	Now, That's not a great phrase, run train, on the progressive agenda.
	For those of you who are innocents in the world, for those of you who are not familiar with urban dictionary, for those of you who may be Tony or upper class and you have no idea what the phrase run train means, it means a bunch of men Having gang sex with a woman.
	That's what running train means.
	Okay, running train, it is a term of awful import.
	It is just, it's a terrible term.
	And usually it's used in a derogatory fashion, like if you wanted to mean somebody.
	And what's amazing about this is she's Alex from the Bronx, right?
	She ain't upper class.
	She's down home, you know, with the people, with the townsfolk, as she said in a recent tweet, with the townspeople in the Bronx.
	She said she's gonna run train on the progressive agenda.
	Would the headlines have ever stopped if Sarah Palin had said that in 2009?
	It'd have been, wow, look how dumb Sarah Palin is.
	Look how stupid she is for saying that.
	Very weird that Alexander Ocasio-Cortez wants to Gang rape, the progressive agenda.
	That seems like a weird thing to do.
	She's a progressive.
	Maybe that should be President Trump's 2020 slogan.
	Running train on the progressive agenda.
	Don't worry, she is the best and the brightest among us.
	She's not dumb in any way.
	She's real smart.
	I know because I've been told so by so many members of the media.
	OK, the big story of the day overall is not any of that.
	It is actually that there was a major terrorist attack in Syria on a much more serious topic, obviously.
	The Washington Post reports the Islamic State asserted responsibility Wednesday for a suicide blast in the U.S. patrolled city of Manbij in Syria.
	The first such attack since President Trump said American forces would withdraw from the country because the militant group has been largely defeated.
	A spokesman for the U.S.-led coalition battling ISIS said that U.S.
	service members were killed while conducting a routine patrol in the city, but did not say how many died or provide further details.
	Some reports were suggesting, by the way, that these U.S.
	soldiers were killed at a restaurant in a suicide bombing.
	So the height of cowardice by members of ISIS, something we've come to expect.
	In Washington, U.S.
	officials said initial reports suggested that four Americans may have died.
	Earlier, Reuters news agency quoted an unidentified U.S.
	official as saying four soldiers were killed and three wounded in the blast.
	There was no immediate confirmation of those figures from Operation Inherent Resolve, which is the U.S.-led coalition against ISIS.
	Statements published by ISIS's official news agency, Amak, said that the attacker used an explosive-laden vest to target coalition forces.
	The Amok statement claimed nine American troops were killed or injured in the attack, but didn't present evidence for the claim.
	The Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said at least 19 people were wounded or killed.
	The Kurdish news agency said at least 10 people were injured in the attack, which it said occurred outside a popular restaurant.
	And what this has to do with President Trump withdrawing from Syria?
	Open question.
	Open question.
	Because ISIS obviously would be pursuing violence in any case.
	But it is not uncommon for terrorist groups to ramp up violence right in the immediate in the immediate forerunning to a troop withdrawal, specifically so that they can then claim to their supporters that they drove the United States out of Syria, that ISIS drove the United States out of the area.
	So they unleash a wave of bombings right as the United States is about to pull out.
	Anyway, I want to get into a little bit more of that.
	And then I want to talk to you about Chris Christie, who has a new book coming out.
	And I also want to talk to you about Steve King, because there's a lot more of the left focusing on Steve King.
	First, got to talk to you about how you are going to make your business better this year.
	So you're figuring out how to make your business better this year, which roles to fill with different people.
	And you need a great way to find employees.
	Well, the best way to do it is ZipRecruiter.com slash Daily Wire.
	It is smart.
	It's the smart thing to do.
	ZipRecruiter finds qualified candidates for you.
	They have powerful matching technology that scans thousands of resumes to identify people with the right skills, education, and experience, and then actively invite them to apply to your job so you get qualified candidates fast.
	That's why ZipRecruiter is rated number one by employers in the United States.
	That rating comes from hiring sites on Trustpilot with over a thousand reviews.
	And right now, my listeners can try ZipRecruiter for free at ziprecruiter.com slash dailywire.com.
	There's a reason we use ZipRecruiter here at the DailyWire offices.
	If you love the show, show your support for the show and ZipRecruiter by going to ZipRecruiter.com slash DailyWire.
	Again, that is ZipRecruiter.com slash DailyWire.
	ZipRecruiter is indeed the smartest way to hire.
	Go check them out one more time at ZipRecruiter.com slash DailyWire.
	And you can try ZipRecruiter for free Meanwhile, Chris Christie has a new book coming out and the media are all agog at it because this is how it works.
	Anybody who was once close with Trump becomes an interesting person to the media as soon as they turn on Trump.
	Now, the last thing I want to hear is Chris Christie whining about why Trump was mean to him.
	Chris Christie is probably responsible for Trump being president in some ways.
	Chris Christie committed the first political murder-suicide on national television in the New Hampshire primary debates when he murdered Marco Rubio and then turned the gun on himself, politically speaking, leaving the pathway open to President Trump.
	You remember Marco Rubio was gaining a lot of momentum after Iowa and then Chris Christie took out Rubio and then proceeded to hand over New Hampshire to Trump.
	Well, Christie is very angry now.
	He's very angry with the Trump administration because he never got a job in the Trump administration.
	Not even getting those burgers for the Clemson Tigers the other day.
	During the campaign, Chris Christie was the designated fast food run guy.
	But Chris Christie couldn't even get that job apparently.
	He was briefly considered for chief of staff a few weeks ago, and then he was blocked in that effort by other folks in Trump's immediate orbit, and you can tell who is trying to block him from who Chris Christie is angry at.
	So according to Axios, former New Jersey governor Chris Christie settles scores in Let Me Finish, a memoir out January 29th from Hachette, writing that President Trump trusts people he shouldn't, including some of the people who are closest to him.
	First of all, that's a terrible name for a memoir.
	Let Me Finish.
	I mean, honest to goodness, that's an awful name for a memoir.
	It sounds like a sports memoir, actually.
	It sounds like a guy on sports talk radio.
	It's like Stephen A. Smith's Let Me Finish, but instead it's Chris Christie in Let Me Finish.
	And second, I'm going to explain what exactly is in this book that's got the media so aghast.
	So Christy asserts that Trump has, quote, a revolving door of deeply flawed individuals, amateurs, grifters, weaklings, convicted and unconvicted felons, who are hustled into jobs they were never suited for, sometimes seemingly without so much as a background check via Google or Wikipedia.
	Now, I think there's some truth to this in the early stages of the Trump White House.
	There were a lot of grifters in the Trump White House very early on because Trump had surrounded himself with a lot of people who would work with him.
	A lot of the more mainstream kind of Republicans would not work with him during the campaign or early on in his administration.
	And as his administration has progressed, the administration has actually gotten better, not worse.
	So Rex Tillerson has been replaced with Mike Pompeo.
	Good move.
	You've seen that Steve Bannon was tossed out Good move.
	And the president's made a lot of good personnel moves while he's been there.
	And he's upgraded in a bunch of different ways.
	That's really good.
	Chris Christie, though, is mad that he wasn't included in Trump White House 1.0 or Trump White House 2.0.
	Instead, he just thinks that he should have been appointed VP, right?
	Remember, he was considered for... You have to feel a little bad for Chris Christie, right?
	He was considered for VP and then rejected.
	Then he was considered for Attorney General.
	And rejected.
	Then he was considered for Chief of Staff.
	And rejected.
	So, he couldn't even make Waterboy at this White House.
	Here's what Christie writes.
	He says, I did everything I could to make sure my friend Donald reached the White House fully prepared to serve.
	But a handful of selfish individuals sidetracked our very best efforts.
	This is the point at which a mirror slowly raises in front of Chris Christie to awaken him to the fact that he may have been one of the selfish individuals in Trump's orbit.
	So they set loose toxic forces that have made Trump's presidency far less effective than it would otherwise have been.
	If this tragedy is ever going to be reversed, it is vital that everyone know exactly how it occurred.
	Once Steve Bannon started unburdening himself in his Trump Tower office, he couldn't seem to stop.
	The kid's been taking an axe to your head with the boss ever since I got here, he blurted out.
	It's been constant.
	He never stops.
	Ancient bitterness, I guess.
	This is Christy whining about Jared Kushner, the president's son-in-law, who's been very effective and also very loud in terms of policy inside the White House.
	In Bannon's speak, the kid is only one person.
	Not Donald Jr., not younger son Eric, not Ivanka or Tiffany.
	The kid is Jared Kushner, the husband of Ivanka Trump and the son of the real estate developer Charles Kushner, a man I once sent to prison.
	Christy then says he doesn't understand Trump's endgame, and he goes after Trump personally.
	I do love that all these people who really, really wish that they were involved with the Trump administration write these books about how terrible everyone in the Trump administration is, and what they say is, he's just surrounded by bad people.
	Trump himself has never made a bad decision.
	It's just that he's surrounded by bad people.
	Now, listen.
	President Trump is his own man.
	I think it is fair to say that.
	Anybody who knows President Trump, anybody who knows the people who talk to President Trump, this guy has a mind of his own.
	If you could control President Trump, do you think his advisors would be letting him tweet asinine things every five seconds?
	Do you truly think that his advisors would be in favor of him going on Twitter and then just unleashing a Syrian withdrawal?
	Do you think that his advisors would be super happy with him going on Twitter and then ripping into Elizabeth Warren by mentioning wounded knee?
	Probably not.
	Trump does what he wants to do.
	And yet there is this mythos that's been built up around Trump by people who want to kiss his butt that says every mistake that you've made, it's because of bad advice.
	It's because the people around you have badly advised you.
	Well, you know who one of those people was during the campaign?
	Chris Christie, who was there virtually the whole time.
	We all remember the videos of Chris Christie looking like a wounded dog as President Trump spoke.
	And Christie's off on the side, looking like deep down inside his soul, he wants to crawl into a hole, cover himself up and die.
	So Christie going after other members of the Trump administration now that he's no longer there, and now that he's not been involved, is pretty scurrilous.
	But I would expect nothing less from Chris Christie, who is one of the most egregiously egotistical politicians in the history of Republican politics.
	So the media, of course, are very excited over all of this, and they hope that this will be the kill shot.
	They're constantly hoping that something will be the kill shot with regard to the Trump presidency.
	The truth is, the only thing that's going to end the Trump presidency, if anything does, is going to be him being defeated in 2020.
	And we'll talk about the 2020 candidates in just a minute.
	First, I want to talk a little bit About an ad that was put out by Harry's Razor.
	So we talked about Gillette a couple of days ago.
	Gillette put out an ad about masculinity, about how masculinity was really bad, right?
	Toxic masculinity.
	And the ad featured a bunch of guys grilling while they watched two kids beat the snot out of each other and did nothing.
	And then the Gillette ad said, well, this is what men have been doing, basically, since time immemorial.
	It's time for men to change.
	It's time for men to change.
	Well, now in their race to the bottom, in their race to the woke bottom, now we've got Harry's razor that has jumped into the fray.
	Yesterday, they tweeted, because it was International Men's Day, and here's what they tweeted.
	Today is International Men's Day.
	Believe it or not, that's a thing.
	Now more than ever, being a man demands introspection, humility, and optimism.
	To get to a better tomorrow, we need to take a look at today, and at the misguided stereotypes that got us here in the first place.
	And then, they put up a bunch of phrases and crossed them out, because these phrases are apparently very bad.
	What are these phrases?
	These are phrases like, boys will be boys, because we can't say that.
	Or man up.
	If you say man up, that's bad, because if you say man up, you're implying that somebody should be a man, and you know, make sacrifices, take responsibility, stop whining, in the words of Arnold Schwarzenegger.
	They say it's time for a new definition of masculinity.
	Again, they say that if you say grow a pair to somebody, that this is really bad.
	If you say that being a man has anything to do with, you know, not being a wimp and not being a loser and taking responsibility for your own life, that's really bad.
	So they say it's time for a new definition of masculinity.
	Now, I don't know why all these razor companies have suddenly decided to cut themselves off at the knees with their entire base, right, which are men, as it turns out.
	But it has something to do with the draw of social media to folks on the left.
	One of the most amusing things about folks on the online left is that the same folks who despise capitalism, think capitalism is terrible, hate major corporations, they will happily retweet Harry's Razor and Gillette and Nike.
	Look, they're so woke now.
	Meanwhile, all those companies are making bank off the leftists who are suddenly pro these corporations.
	So the corporations have a monetary interest in doing all of this.
	I saw a statistic this morning that Gillette was mentioned on Twitter 1.5 million times this week.
	The previous week, 10,000 times.
	So this campaign is working for them.
	Same thing with Harry's razor.
	But it does speak to what the left actually thinks of masculinity, which is that masculinity is really, really, really bad.
	And the left's hatred for masculinity crosses all boundaries.
	In a second, I want to get to CNN attacking President Trump for making a gender joke.
	It's really, oh my god, how could he?
	How could he?
	We'll talk about that in just one second.
	First, I have a question for you.
	Are you more Native American than Elizabeth Warren?
	So we know a few things about Elizabeth Warren.
	She likes to drink beer.
	She's glad her husband is at home when she's making an ad for the presidency, and she's won 1,024th Maybe Native American.
	You might be more Native American than Elizabeth Warren.
	How would you define that out?
	You'd go to 23andMe.
	23andMe allows you to go beyond ancestry and access more personalized insights based on your DNA.
	So I've taken the 23andMe test.
	What it found is that, true to form, I'm 100% Ashkenazi Jewish.
	People get on my case when I say that I'm 100% Ashkenazi Jewish.
	That's not a point of superiority.
	It doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things, but it's kind of fun to know that my ancestry is really, really, really Jewish.
	What's your ancestry like?
	I also found out traits like apparently I have the body mass of a muscle, like a bodybuilder.
	I mean, I knew that, too, because underneath this coat lies the body of a Greek god.
	No one knows that except my wife, but let me tell you, it's stunning.
	But I now know that because of 23andMe, and I have objective proof of it.
	They give you a lactose intolerance report, a caffeine consumption report that tells you how much caffeine you tend to consume, a genetic weight report so you can discover if your genes predispose you to weigh more or less than average.
	Buy your 23andMe health and ancestry kit today at 23andme.com slash Shapiro.
	That's the number 23andme.com slash Shapiro.
	Again, 23andme.com slash Shapiro.
	Go check it out.
	23andme.com 23andme.com slash Shapiro.
	Go check it out right now.
	It's a lot of fun.
	You're going to want to do it.
	Okay, so.
	Meanwhile, the attack on masculinity continues to pace attack on masculinity and humor.
	Apparently, if you believe that there are men and there are women and these are two different things, then this is very, very bad.
	And if you make a joke about women in any way, and this is particularly terrible.
	So here's Aaron Burnett.
	Aaron Burnett, yesterday on CNN.
	The CNN panel was very upset with President Trump.
	Why?
	Because President Trump hosted the Clemson football team and he joked that Melania could make some salads, maybe.
	Oh no!
	We must never suggest that Melania make salads!
	No!
	We can't do that to the same media who hate Melania Trump so much that they've never put her on the cover of a single fashion magazine I can think of, while they're falling over themselves to put Michelle Obama on fashion magazines.
	And just on an objective level, like Melania Trump was a model, she was like an actual model, and they won't put her on fashion magazines.
	Now they're saying it is beneath Melania Trump to make a salad.
	Beneath her.
	Here's Aaron Burnett being very, very deeply offended at Trump joking that his wife might make a salad.
	By the way, you know what my wife does when people come over?
	She makes salads for people.
	Like, really.
	It's a thing that she does.
	And she's a doctor.
	So that's not me ripping on the ability of women to operate in the workplace.
	Here's Aaron Burnett being a dummy.
	Sex is one of those things where sometimes what people say when they're being funny exposes exactly who they are and what they think.
	Not that there was any question, but this is pretty clear.
	How in the world do you not perceive that as sexist?
	To make the assumption that his wife's gonna go make salads for the bunch of football players?
	What is she, like the cook?
	I'm not overreading it.
	He made a joke that was sexist about women.
	I guess maybe what we're disagreeing with is whether it's funny.
	And whether humor is something that's serious.
	Whether humor is something that's serious.
	No!
	As it turns out, the definition of humor is that it's not serious, because it's funny.
	I like how we're now rewriting all this.
	So basically, according to the left, humor, comedy...
	It's supposed to be serious.
	This is, again, why Hannah Gadsby is renowned on the left for being a deeply unfunny human being.
	Because she is woke.
	Being woke is the new funny.
	So she's really funny.
	Samantha Bee, for some odd reason, is the new funny.
	She never has to make you laugh.
	She has to make you think.
	Making you think is the new funny.
	And also, if you say something that is a joke, then we are going to take it similarly seriously, because it reveals your inherent biases.
	So if President Trump makes a joke about Melania Trump making a salad, well, obviously he hates women.
	Clearly, clearly.
	First of all, if you want evidence that President Trump ain't great with the ladies, I got a whole long list for you.
	I got like a big, long list of comments that President Trump has made about women in the past that are really quite terrible.
	If the one you pick on is that he made a joke about his own wife making salads, You may have Trump derangement syndrome.
	Pretty amazing stuff.
	Speaking of a derangement syndrome.
	So the left has decided now that Steve King is the most important person in America.
	That's because Steve King last week said something racist.
	He just did a New York Times interview.
	And in the Times interview, he suggested that the phrases white nationalism and white supremacy were unobjectionable or should be unobjectionable.
	Now, King's defense to this is he says that the New York Times took him out of context.
	And what he actually was talking about is that the left conflates and uses all of these phrases routinely to slander kind of normal ideas like Western civilization.
	Whatever it is, Steve King has walked that line many, many times.
	And I have given him the benefit of the doubt in cases past.
	And I think now, in retrospect, unjustifiably so.
	At a certain point, you can't give somebody the benefit of the doubt anymore.
	So here's what happened.
	Steve King says something that is overtly bad.
	Now, he said something overtly bad was caught on tape by the Weekly Standard last year, and many people on the right, including me, condemned him for that at the time.
	So when that happened, then there wasn't that much press about it.
	There wasn't a huge amount of press about it.
	The right has decided to disown Steve King because he said something so egregious that there's just no way to walk back from it.
	And it's too, it's, it's, it's incredibly obvious.
	It's too obvious for him to wiggle out of as he may have in the past.
	So what does the left do?
	The right condemns Steve King and excises him, right?
	They remove all of his committee assignments.
	He's being primaried.
	The NRCC declared months ago they wouldn't support him in his, in his general election effort even.
	He almost lost to a Democrat in a heavy red district in Iowa.
	So the Republicans have been working to get rid of Steve King for a while here.
	Just like they got rid of Roy Moore.
	Just like they worked to get rid of a bunch of Republicans in the past in the John Birch Society in times past.
	Just like they worked to kind of fringe out Pat Buchanan and his ilk.
	The Republican Party has tried to do this before.
	But every time the Republican Party tries to do the right thing with somebody like Steve King, they immediately get whomped on the head by the left.
	They say, well, why didn't you do this before?
	What took you so long?
	You know, the fact that you even want to get rid of Steve King is demonstrative of the fact that you are a racist.
	So the way this works is if you don't get rid of Steve King, you're a racist.
	If you do get rid of Steve King, you are also a racist because you didn't get rid of Steve King before.
	Instead of, well, I'm glad that you finally came around on Steve King, It's, well, I'm glad you finally came around on Steve King, but not really.
	I'm not really that glad you came around on Steve King.
	In fact, you're an idiot for having apologized or for having come around on Steve King in the first place.
	You wonder why so many Republicans, so many people on the right, are willing to double down in defense of people who should not be defended?
	It's because if you actually come out and condemn bad behavior on your own side, you don't get credit for it from the left.
	Instead, the left suggests that you are part of a broader racist movement.
	And it's that that has allowed people on the right, and given impetus to people on the right, to give benefit of the doubt in cases where maybe they shouldn't have given benefit of the doubt.
	If you call everything racist, people on the right are immediately going to say, well, you called Mitt Romney a racist, so why would I take you seriously when you call this other person a racist?
	Maybe you're just deliberately misinterpreting them too.
	You're acting in bad faith.
	The left refuses to acknowledge that it has ever mislabeled anyone racist.
	Folks on the left believe that every time they label something racist, it is racist.
	And there is no problem of over-broadly applying the label racist because everything is racist in their view.
	Now, if everything is racist, then that's going to lead to a reactionary response that goes overboard in which people assume that nothing is racist, which of course is also not true.
	But watch the reaction of folks on the left to the right condemning Steve King.
	Like, literally every major Republican I've spoken to or who has commented publicly has condemned Steve King His base of support has been completely undercut.
	And yet Bill Maher, Bill Maher, who's used the n-word on his own show, I should mention.
	Bill Maher goes on MSNBC, talking to Chris Matthews, and he suggests that Republicans are so racist that we're supposed to cheer them for denouncing white supremacy?
	No.
	You're supposed to actually treat it honestly when people do the right thing.
	But we can't do that.
	We have to rip people when they do the right thing.
	The bar is, Chris, that we're cheering the Republicans because they say we don't believe in white supremacy.
	This is how far down we've gone.
	This is where they draw the line.
	I'm glad they drew the line somewhere because I'm beginning to wonder if they would ever draw a line.
	But again, the question we always have to ask is what will the Republicans put up with?
	That's what it comes down to.
	Okay, why do we always ask that question after the right doesn't put up with something?
	Again, the right sacrificed a Senate seat in Alabama to not put up with Roy Moore.
	The right has sacrificed... I mean, the right basically sacrificed a Senate seat in Virginia because Corey Stewart was vaguely on that racist fringe, right?
	He had neoconfederates in his campaign and such.
	So the right has sacrificed two Senate seats, basically, to the proposition that there are certain people who should not be part of the Republican caucus.
	But for the left, that means that the right is racist and bad.
	Because again, the left conflates everything that is conservatism with racism.
	So what they do is they say, well, obviously you guys are motivated by racism.
	Your desire for the wall is coming from the same place as Steve King's desire for a wall, even if you don't like Steve King, even if you think that his comments are ridiculous.
	I'm going to get to more of this in just one second.
	But first, we need to talk about how you're going to maintain your energy level today.
	Do you struggle to get started every day and then you have bursts of productivity and then you crash again in the mid-afternoon and you kind of limp across that 5 p.m.
	finish line?
	What if you could avoid drinking multiple cups of coffee or cans of soda or energy drinks to survive that day?
	Well, a bunch of physicians gathered and they formed a Brickhouse Nutrition.
	They developed an advanced formula to stimulate more than just your heart, also your brain and your cells.
	It's called Dawn to Dusk.
	Dawn to Dusk provides clean energy, focus, improved mood for up to 10 hours, no jitters, no afternoon crash, no calories, no sugar.
	Folks around the office have been using it.
	Let me tell you, they are much more productive.
	With Dawn to Dusk, there's no need to be anxious when your coffee mug is empty.
	While others leave the office for that overpriced refill, you're still getting things done.
	Give it a try.
	BrickHouseBen.com.
	So you can get a bottle of this formula at BrickHouseBen.com.
	Get a bottle.
	Try it out.
	When you use promo code Ben, you get 15% off your first order.
	Again, 15% off your first order.
	Give it a try.
	You really don't have anything to lose.
	BrickHouseBen.com.
	Again, that's BrickHouseBen.com.
	You can be more productive.
	You can have more energy.
	Give it a try.
	Give it a spin.
	BrickHouseBen.com.
	So you can get a bottle of this groundbreaking formula and use that promo code Ben to get 15% off your first order.
	Go check it out right now.
	BrickHouseBen.com.
	Again, BrickHouseBen.com.
	Okay.
	Well, I'm going to get to the response of Meghan McCain yesterday to all the allegations that the Republicans are widely racist in the aftermath of them excising someone who said a racist thing.
	We'll get to that in just one second.
	First, you're going to have to go and subscribe at dailywire.com.
	When you do, you get the rest of this show live.
	You get the rest of the Andrew Klavan show live.
	You get the rest of the Matt Wall show live.
	And today, of the Michael Moore show live, too.
	I mean, I almost forgot about Michael, because why would I remember him?
	But today and every day, when you subscribe, you get two additional hours of me.
	Later today, I'm here slaving away for you people.
	And my goodness, the least you could do is join up and become a subscriber.
	When you do, and you get the annual subscription, you also get this.
	The very greatest in beverage vessels.
	Look at this.
	The Leftist Tears Hot or Cold Tumbler.
	View this magnificence.
	Enjoy it.
	Feast your eyes upon it.
	And then, get it yourself with the annual subscription.
	We have all sorts of goodies for you when you subscribe.
	Also, you should subscribe at YouTube or iTunes because we have a Sunday special that you won't get if you're not a subscriber.
	So go check it out.
	Today's, this week's Sunday special is Lieutenant Colonel Allen West, American Hero.
	Here is Lieutenant Colonel West.
	Hey, greetings everyone.
	Lieutenant Colonel Retired Allen West, former member of Congress.
	I'm here with Ben Shapiro on The Ben Shapiro Show, Sunday special.
	Please join us here at The Daily Wire where we talk about how we can really get America back in shape and we can restore this constitutional republic.
	Great young man.
	He lowered his standards so I could be here, but check him out.
	Okay, so we'll get to more of our show in just one second.
	First, go subscribe right now.
	Again, dailywire.com, 99 bucks a year.
	We are the largest, fastest growing conservative podcast in the nation.
	All righty, so Jane Koston, who I've talked up her work before, she has a piece over at Vox.com that's pretty interesting called Why Republicans Took So Long to Call Out Steve King's Racism And her basic thesis is that Republicans ignored it because they don't take racism all that seriously.
	I mean, that really is her essential thesis.
	She says that the right has defined racism down to If you say something clearly white supremacist, then we excise you.
	Anything else, we won't.
	But that obviously is untrue because there are a bunch of people on the right who have been excised for saying things that are borderline before.
	Folks like me were very critical of President Trump in the aftermath of Charlottesville, for example.
	Right?
	Trump got reamed by a lot of folks on the right for his comments in the aftermath of Charlottesville.
	But that's not good enough.
	According to the left, the right just doesn't get racism because racism is far broader than just people being white supremacists.
	Jane, Jane basically, she quotes Peter Beinart, who is an awful, awful columnist, who wrote in 2017, conservatives feel their cultural vulnerability acutely.
	In 2011, researchers at Tufts University observed that conservatives consume more outrage-based political radio and television than liberals do.
	One reason they suggested in a follow-up paper is that conservatives are more fearful than liberals of discussing politics with people with whom they disagree because they dread being called a bigot.
	Liberals express no comparable fear, at least in the As a result, they felt less need to take refuge in the safe political environments provided by outrage-based programming.
	Well, the reason that the right fears being called a bigot is because the left will call you a bigot for legitimately anything.
	Mitt Romney was called a bigot.
	John McCain was called a bigot.
	Rick Perry was called a bigot.
	George W. Bush was called a bigot.
	Name a Republican who has not been called a bigot.
	One, can you name a Republican who has not been called a racist or a bigot?
	Now, folks on the left answer by saying that's because all Republicans are racists and bigots.
	And that's what drives the right to not take seriously certain allegations from the left of bigotry.
	And that's why, and I've said this before, that's what's led me in the past to grant the benefit of the doubt to people like Steve King.
	I said, I went back and I updated an article that I wrote in 2017 in which he said something that could be interpreted one of two ways.
	I talked about this on the show last week.
	He said something about we can't restore our civilization with somebody else's babies.
	And I said that this could be interpreted a couple of different ways.
	One is the racist way that black and brown babies can't become members of Western civilization.
	And the other way is suggesting that people who are raised in a different culture are going to have a bad impact on our civilization if that culture runs counter to the culture of our civilization.
	And King went on TV, and he sort of clarified it in the second way, and I said, well, you need to grant him the benefit of the doubt.
	Well, maybe I shouldn't have granted him the benefit of the doubt, but the idea is that everything King has been saying for 15 years is inherently racist, and what the left does, and this is how they get themselves in trouble, is what drives a reactionary response from the right, is they take a bunch of comments that King said that are borderline and dicey and bad, and then they lump them together with a bunch of normal conservative commentary and say, well, obviously all of these comments are racist.
	So, for example, when he ripped into multiculturalism a while back, this was considered racist by the New York Times.
	It was not racist.
	That statement was not racist.
	But when he said stuff about how there were a bunch of people who were crossing the border with calves like cantaloupes, that was a lot closer to racism and maybe outright racist.
	According to the left, if you make any such distinction, then you are not taking racism seriously enough.
	And this, of course, is just a lie.
	I think there can be honest disagreement about whether a comment is racist or not.
	And maybe it's easy to err on the side of giving the benefit of the doubt to people you don't give the benefit of the doubt, or you shouldn't.
	But on the left, they give no benefit of the doubt to anyone on the right, but complete benefit of the doubt to everyone on the left.
	And so, for example, you got Chuck Todd, right?
	So Chuck Todd of NBC, he says, you know, Republicans are happy to condemn Steve King's racism, but they won't condemn President Trump's racism.
	I'm wondering what world he's living in, honestly.
	Could it be that Republicans feel that they can be tougher on racism on Steve King after the midterm wiped out in the suburbs?
	Could it be that they feel that they can't criticize a president who's very popular among their own primary voters?
	Could it be they fear President Trump would punish them by supporting a primary challenger?
	Well, you know the answers to all of those questions.
	Yes, yes, and yes.
	Okay, or maybe it is that a lot of Republicans did criticize Trump in the aftermath of Charlottesville.
	Maybe it is that a lot of Republicans were very critical of Trump during the 2016 race.
	Maybe it is that you can't get rid of Trump the same way that you can get rid of Steve King, right, by primarying him in a congressional race.
	And maybe it is that Trump didn't actually come out and just say white nationalism and white supremacy, okay, right?
	I mean, come on.
	But according to Chuck Todd, it always comes down to the same thing.
	So Meghan McCain, I think rightly went after folks on The View, because folks on The View began conflating support for a border wall with Steve King-like racism.
	And here was Meghan McCain aptly taking down this argument.
	42% of this country that support the wall, are they all racist?
	That's a good question.
	There are a lot of people that support that wall, and I think when you blanket, I think this is the problem with identity politics in the country, which is something we sort of touched on yesterday, is when you broad stroke everyone, all black people think one thing, all Hispanic people think one thing, all Republicans think one thing, that's how we got ourselves into this mess.
	Do you think 42% of Americans are racist?
	I just said I don't know.
	Well you did just call 42% of the country, there was an implication that they could be racist.
	Okay, and the folks on the left, this is a very convenient argument for them, is that if you support a particular policy, this means that you are inherently racist.
	And people on the left say, where's the evidence that you're not racist?
	You know, there's an interesting question of burden of proof here.
	And burden of proof in the law is the question of whether you're accused of a crime.
	Is the burden of proof on the police to prove that you committed the crime, or is the burden on you to prove that you are innocent?
	According to the left, we can automatically assume you are guilty of the crime of racism based on your political positions, and then it is up to you to prove that you are not in fact a racist.
	And every attempt to prove you're not a racist proves more that you're a racist because you didn't do something else the left wanted you to do.
	Hey, so if you are for a wall, we can assume you're a racist.
	And then if you say, well, I'm not a racist, they say, prove it.
	And you say, well, you know, like Steve King said this thing the other day, and I condemn that.
	So why don't you condemn every other comment that Steve King ever made?
	Hmm?
	Hmm?
	Well, maybe you're being intellectually dishonest and what you actually want to do is just apply the racist label as broadly as possible because it is politically beneficial and allows you to pat yourself on the back.
	Meanwhile, being fine with racism in your own ranks.
	The Democratic Party, obviously okay with anti-Semitism in their own ranks.
	The DNC covered its butt yesterday.
	By disassociating from the Women's March after it became completely obvious from Tamika Mallory and others they would not disassociate from Louis Farrakhan, never mind the fact that 21 different members of the Democratic caucus have taken pictures and hung out with Louis Farrakhan, none of whom have ever condemned Louis Farrakhan in any way.
	And you have folks in the Democratic caucus like Rashida Tlaib, who is a fresh face because she's a Muslim congressperson.
	Now, you can be a Muslim congressperson and not be an anti-Semite, obviously.
	Rashida Tlaib, however, is an anti-Semite.
	We're a religion to the side.
	She suggests that we're anti her because she's Muslim, not because she's an anti-Semite.
	So she tweeted out today, right wing media targeting me again rather than focusing on the president's reckless government shutdown.
	Yes, I am a Muslim and I'm Palestinian.
	Get over it.
	Focus on the human impact of this disaster.
	Hashtag and the shutdown.
	Turns out I can focus on both the shutdown and the fact that you are a radical anti-Semite.
	The entire Democratic caucus is cheering on.
	I can do both those things.
	Now, I can ask the same questions about Democratic willingness to accept anti-Semitism that the left asks about right-wing willingness to accept racism.
	The difference is that nobody in the Democratic Party has condemned Rashida Tlaib once.
	A time.
	A time.
	The Democratic Party gets mild credit for having withdrawn from the Women's March, but they don't get full credit simply because they still have members in their caucus who are saying things like Rashida Tlaib, and they don't care.
	They don't care.
	So what am I supposed to take away from that?
	It's not like this is a big secret.
	So let's be real about this.
	People do what's politically convenient.
	There is some of this on both sides.
	People are willing to overlook bad stuff on their own side.
	They would not be willing to overlook on somebody else's side.
	And we all have to fight that instinct.
	But to pretend that that instinct is inevitably tied to some deep-rooted discriminatory belief system, Is ridiculous.
	Again, I think that you can make a better case that the Democratic Party has embraced anti-Semitism considering that they booed Jerusalem in the DNC in 2012, considering the fact that they en masse voted against a proposition Okay.
	Meanwhile, in other news, Kirsten Gillibrand of New York has announced she is running for president because we need 1,000 candidates who are all the same.
	for years then you can make the case that the entire republican party is racist because they just got rid of steve king i think that's a that's a bigger it's a much bigger stretch okay meanwhile in other news kirsten jillibrand of new york has announced she is running for president because we need 1 000 candidates who are all the same so kirsten jillibrand is going to run for president on the exact same platform as beto o'rourke or kamala harris or any other of the the democratic candidates But she's running for president on a really unique platform.
	She's a woman.
	Unlike 50% of the population, she in fact is a woman.
	She announced that she was running for president and was given time to do so by Stephen Colbert, who has become basically just a bullhorn for Democratic presidential politics.
	Here is the uncharming, utterly malleable Kirsten Gillibrand.
	You remember when she first ran for Congress?
	She ran as a quasi-pro-life, pro-gun Democrat.
	Now she's a radical-left Democrat.
	She's basically... You know how they do this routine with Jeff Bridges in all of his movies now, where they kind of age-reverse him?
	Like they did in Tron, where they sort of age-reverse these actors.
	They did it with Nicole Kidman in Aquaman, where they make them look younger.
	So basically, Kirsten Gillibrand is just Hillary Clinton age-reversed.
	So here's Kirsten Gillibrand on Stephen Colbert announcing she's running for president.
	I'm just curious, do you have anything you would like to announce?
	Yes.
	And what would that be, madam?
	I'm filing an exploratory committee for President of the United States tonight!
	Tonight!
	I like the half-hearted cheers from the people in the studio.
	They're like, yeah!
	All right.
	Colbert can't even get his audience up for it.
	Colbert is desperately trying to get his audience excited about Kirsten Gillibrand.
	And Kirsten Gillibrand's family is out in the audience going, eh, well.
	Okay.
	I guess.
	So, flashback to, like, a minute ago when Kirsten Gillibrand said that she would serve her full term in the Senate without running for president.
	Yeah, she was lying, just like she has about every other policy position she's ever taken.
	I just want to make this clear.
	You're saying you will not get out of the race, that you will not run for president, you will serve your six years.
	I will serve my six-year term.
	Okay.
	Well, she's right.
	She will serve her six-year term because she's not getting nominated.
	So she will actually serve her six-year term.
	But she was lying then because this is what politicians do on a regular basis, and it's really stupid and irritating.
	What is her platform going to be?
	Her platform is going to be, I'm a woman.
	Boo!
	Congratulations, lady.
	Here she is.
	of the beginning of the revival of the women's movement.
	This is the moment you will remember when women stood strong and stood firm and said never again!
	Okay, by the way, that is Kirsten Gillibrand speaking at the Women's March last year.
	The DNC has now disassociated from the Women's March over their association with anti-Semitism.
	So things are going great for Kirsten Gillibrand right out of the gate.
	It is amazing that in the Democratic Party, the only thing in the end that really matters, well, there are two factors that really matter.
	One is media coverage, and the other is how many intersectional checkboxes you get.
	That really is it.
	So Kamala Harris, We'll do much better than Kirsten Gillibrand because she's not just a woman.
	She's a black woman, which means even more victimized in American society, even though, by the way, the evidence does not show that.
	The evidence doesn't show that black women, based on when you remove all other factors, are deeply victimized by American society.
	In fact, black women growing up in high income households tend to out earn white women, according to a recent study from Stanford University.
	In any case, Kamala Harris has been given the patina of intersectional advantage by the left.
	So she has an advantage over Kirsten Gillibrand.
	Also, it means that she gets better media coverage.
	The media coverage battle also concerns people like Beto O'Rourke or Bob O'Rourke and Bobo.
	Apparently is going to get really great media coverage as well.
	Bernie Sanders is pretty much done.
	Elizabeth Warren doesn't have the same pizzazz as Kamala Harris.
	She's trying to go for that Bernie Sanders crowd.
	She might get some of them, but she'll split that vote.
	Right now, if you had to handicap the Democratic race, I would say that the chances of a Kamala Harris beta O'Rourke ticket are really good.
	I'd say that's probably the most likely ticket at this point.
	Not sure whether it's O'Rourke or whether it's Harris on the top of that ticket, but Harris obviously going to be given a big boost by the folks on the left, who are super not racist, but also will tell you that Kamala Harris is qualified for president specifically because of her race.
	But they're super not, they don't think in terms of race.
	Only you think in terms of race, because you think it's bad when someone uses the term white supremacist or white nationalist without condemning it.
	Okay, time for some things I like and then some things that I hate.
	So, things I like today.
	So after we saw Into the Spider-Verse, my wife and I rented Spider-Man Homecoming.
	And it's perfectly serviceable.
	It's a charming movie.
	You know, it's not any great shakes, but I will say that the new, the guy who plays Spider-Man now is much better than Tobey Maguire.
	Now, so if I, I mean, let's be real about this.
	It's hard to be worse than Tobey Maguire was in the old Spider-Man series.
	And we relaunch Spider-Man, you know, every couple of years here at this point, but the movie is fun.
	It really portrays Peter Parker the way that he is in the comics as like an actual teenager, as opposed to Tobey Maguire, who was 50 when he was playing Spider-Man.
	So, the movie is worth the watch.
	It's pretty fun.
	Go check it out.
	Here's a little bit of the preview of Spider-Man Homecoming.
	I also play it because there's also a new trailer for the next Spider-Man movie.
	I'll discuss that in just one second.
	Finally, here we go.
	Good evening, Peter.
	You have 576 possible web shooter combinations.
	That is awesome!
	I can keep that suit?
	Yeah.
	Doesn't fit me.
	When's our next retreat?
	What, next mission?
	We'll call you.
	Alright?
	The movie is very okay.
	It's mostly okay because Robert Downey Jr.
	is in it, and it's kind of a, you know, it's a typical Marvel movie in the sense that it's enjoyable cotton candy.
	Now there's a new preview out for the new Spider-Man movie, which just shows you that you are all suckers.
	Okay, you remember I got very angry at Avengers Infinity War.
	If you go back on the program, View the old episodes, what you'll see is that people were very mad at me because I was mad at Avengers Infinity War.
	Why?
	Because people were, like, crying at the end of Avengers Infinity War.
	I was like, what are you, dumb?
	What are you, idiots?
	Of course, at the end of Avengers Infinity War, when Thanos snaps his fingers and half the population disappears, and Robert Downey Jr., Iron Man watches as Spider-Man disappears.
	I was like, yeah.
	Yeah, sure.
	You're right.
	They're going to kill off these billion-dollar characters just to finish the Infinity War movie.
	So I'm not going to... Here's the deal.
	I'm not going to cry over Spider-Man being killed at the end of Avengers Infinity War or Black Panther, which literally made a billion dollars at the box office.
	I don't think they actually killed Black Panther.
	In fact, I remember watching the ending sequence in Avengers Infinity War and they killed off some of the fringe characters.
	I'm like, wow, that's kind of, that's kind of interesting.
	And then they killed off Black Panther.
	I was like, nope.
	Nope.
	You guys just spent a bunch of money on that movie.
	It just made a boatload of money.
	It's gonna win awards for intersectional reasons.
	And you're gonna kill off that character?
	Uh-huh.
	Uh-huh.
	And then they killed off Spider-Man.
	I was like, nope.
	So now the new Spider-Man movie is coming out, and Spider-Man is shockingly alive in that movie.
	And people are like, oh, so you mean that he doesn't die in Avengers Infinity War.
	Right, you dolts!
	So if you cried when it was obvious that these characters were not dying, I would say that your suspension of disbelief has gone too far.
	Now I know, I'm gonna get a bunch of flack for saying this because, hey, it's a fictional movie and you've made fun of fictional movies before.
	Right, but you have to have enough respect for the audience that there has to be at least some logical consistency within the universe that you've created.
	If every fictional movie ended with a giant Godzilla foot stomping all the characters out of existence, I think it would be fair to criticize the movie for failing to move within the universe it had created.
	So, you can't expect me to be emotional within the Avengers universe when you're killing off characters who I know are not dead in the slightest.
	Now it would be fair to cry at the next Avengers movie when they kill off In my prediction, Captain America, Iron Man, and Thor.
	All three of whom will be taken out because they're too expensive for Marvel.
	Which is the real reason they'll be taken out.
	And, you know, then I guess it's okay to get emotional.
	But if you got emotional over Spider-Man disappearing, then you're just stupid.
	Sorry, sorry to break it to you.
	Okay, time for a thing that I hate.
	So a couple of things that I hate today.
	People are very angry at Karen Pence.
	So Karen Pence is the wife of the Vice President, and she has taken a job, according to Mediaite, with a private school that discriminates against gay people and members of the LGBT community at large.
	What exactly is this terrible, horrible school?
	She's taken a gig as an art teacher for Emanuel Christian School in Northern Virginia.
	The school's application form requires teachers and staff to uphold traditional Christian norms and values, including against a pledge against sexual immorality, which includes homosexual conduct.
	This means she's very, very bad.
	She's teaching at a Christian school that upholds, you know, like, Christian principles.
	Terrible, terrible woman.
	How dare she teach at a religious school?
	If you are one of these intolerant jackasses who thinks that it's very bad for a Christian to teach at a Christian school because the Christian school upholds Christian principles, get out more.
	Deal with some people who don't necessarily agree with your secular humanist worldview.
	Deal with some folks who may, in fact, be religious and who treat you well in normal life and believe that certain things are sins that you don't believe are sins.
	Just get over it.
	You want to live in a diverse society, you might have to start by recognizing that our diverse society has people of religious belief inside of it.
	The Washington Post is very angry at this, however.
	They say that the form includes a section that says moral misconduct, which violates the bona fide occupational qualifications for employees includes, but is not limited to such behaviors as the following heterosexual activity outside of marriage.
	Now, I noticed that the media story is not very upset about this one.
	That the school condemns heterosexual activity outside of marriage.
	They're not upset about that one because they think that it's not necessarily that immoral to tell straight people not to have sex outside of marriage.
	They think it's super duper terrible to say that if you engage in homosexual activity then that is a sin in the Christian view.
	Although all of these are sins in the Christian view.
	Okay.
	Premarital sex, cohabitation, extramarital sex, homosexual or lesbian sexual activity, polygamy, transgender identity, any other violation of the unique rules of male and female sexual harassment, use or viewing of pornographic materials or website.
	So basically, schools can have social standards so long as those social standards are approved by the left.
	And if those social standards are not approved by the left, you cannot associate with that school or with that synagogue or with that church.
	You know my response to this?
	If you're gonna try and tell me where I can send my kids to school because you think you know better for my kids than I do, or because you think that your secular worldview is somehow morally better innately than my religious worldview, you can go to hell.
	I'm really not interested in your opinion on this.
	And I don't think Karen Pence is either.
	And I think she has every right to tell these people to take a long walk off a short pier.
	Other things that I hate today.
	So Beto O'Rourke is another one of these 2020 hotshot front runners.
	He has an interview that demonstrates that the dude is just an empty vessel.
	I mean, he's just an empty vessel.
	Did an interview with the Washington Post.
	And somebody suggested to me yesterday, and I tweeted it out, that Beto O'Rourke is basically Pucci from The Simpsons.
	He just goes around on his skateboard, and he's like, hey guys, awesome.
	And then everybody's, and he's like, yeah!
	Woo!
	That's Beto O'Rourke, and you can tell from this interview in the Washington Post, it's pretty amazing.
	The interview is basically Beto O'Rourke just not answering questions.
	So, for example, they ask him, what should be done to address visa overstays?
	And he says, I don't know.
	Pausing in a lengthy interview.
	And then they ask him about the visa systems and harmonizing them with Mexico.
	He says, that's an answer, but that's something that we should be debating.
	And then they ask him.
	About the wall.
	And he says, he says, The genius is we can non-violently resolve our differences.
	Though I won't get to my version of perfect, or I, working with you, will get to something better than what we have today.
	It's rare someone's ever been able to impose their will unilaterally in this country.
	We don't want that.
	So, we're like, we just asked about like whether you like a wall or not.
	We didn't ask about non-violence.
	And it's like to every question, to every question he just answers, I trust the wisdom of the people.
	The people will do the right thing.
	I just asked you if you want to order a burger.
	Like, I'm not asking you for, like, your general thoughts on the wisdom of the people.
	Which, by the way, you know what I'd love to hear one day from a politician?
	Is a politician say, you know what, sometimes people are just dumb.
	Right?
	Sometimes the people make dumb decisions.
	Sometimes this kind of worship for popular sovereignty is really ridiculous.
	Now, I'm a fan of popular sovereignty because, as Winston Churchill put it, it's the best system, it's the worst system aside from all the others.
	We don't have a better system.
	But this kind of, I trust the people, routine that you get from both right and left, the American people always know best.
	Really?
	Did the American people always know best?
	I don't think so.
	I think there are many cases in which the American people do not know best.
	Which is why leadership is important.
	Which is why sometimes you have to propose unpopular ideas and then try to teach people about those ideas until they become popular.
	The essence of being a good leader or a good politician is not necessarily bowing to the whims of public pressure.
	But O'Rourke is one slim reed.
	I mean, that dude bows before every political wind available.
	When asked about Syria, he says he'd like to see a debate, a discussion, a national conversation.
	When asked about a Green New Deal, he says, I'm glad the work has been done to articulate the goal.
	That's a perfect point from which to start a conversation.
	How about, like, a position?
	How about, like, a thing you think?
	How about that?
	That would be good.
	Then we can know whether you're proposing something good or not.
	But this is one of the frontrunners for the Democratic Party.
	So you've got Kamala Harris, who's a down-the-line progressive who did a terrible job as Attorney General in California.
	She's a frontrunner.
	You've got Beto O'Rourke, who doesn't hold a position, but rides a skateboard, guys, and has long bangs that he can flick back romantically in the sunlight way.
	And you've got Kirsten Gillibrand, who's a shapeshifter, who will take any position that is necessary for her to take, so long as it also allows her to say that she's doing it as a woman.
	Great, great gang you brought here, guys.
	Now, if any of these people win in 2020, we got a problem.
	We got a problem.
	Now, that's not to suggest that President Trump is perfect in any way, but it does show the threat of the left, because my goodness gracious, that's some bad stuff.
	By the way, Beto O'Rourke finished his interview by saying, That we may not be able to govern under the Constitution.
	He says maybe we can't be managed by the same principles that were set down 230 plus years ago.
	That should be frightening to anyone, but I guess that we don't get frightened by people saying they want to overthrow the Constitution unless those people are of the Trumpian persuasion.
	OK, well, we will be back here tomorrow with much, much more.
	Plus later today, if you're a subscriber, you get two additional hours of me.
	That's the thing you get every day.
	Go subscribe right now.
	What are you waiting for?
	Honestly, I have so much more to say about things, but we've run out of time.
	So go check out more later today.
	Dailyware.com, subscribe.
	We'll see you there, or we'll see you tomorrow.
	This is the Ben Shapiro Show.
	The Ben Shapiro Show is produced by Senya Villarreal, executive producer Jeremy Boring, senior producer Jonathan Hay.
	Our supervising producer is Mathis Glover, and our technical producer is Austin Stevens, edited by Adam Sajovic.
	Audio is mixed by Mike Karamina.
	Hair and makeup is by Jesua Olvera, production assistant Nick Sheehan.

▲