All Episodes
Previous Next
March 1, 2019 - The Ben Shapiro Show
57:09
We Didn’t Start The Fire | Ep. 728
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Democrats become even more radical as Joe Biden prepares to jump into the 2020 race.
Ilhan Omar, another fresh face, so much freshness and faceness, resets her anti-Semitism clock back to zero and we check the mailbag.
I'm Ben Shapiro.
This is The Ben Shapiro Show.
Oh man, a million things to get to today.
We're going to get to all of it.
First, let's talk about Congress.
Okay, Congress is full of people who don't know what the hell they're doing, but want to control your lives.
And they also are not interested in circumscribing their own power the way the Constitution was designed to do.
But this is why we need to take control of Congress once again, and it's why I'm a big believer in calling a convention of states where we the people can propose amendments.
Yes, amendments that could force term limits on Congress, for example, and make them balance the budget.
We've got to stop these idiots before it is too late, because they obviously are not protective of their own power from the executive, and also, they don't care about limiting the power of the government at all.
This is why we need to restore the checks and balances that the Constitution provided for originally, but have been overridden by administrative government for the last century.
Can you imagine the look on the faces of these congresspeople when they realize that they have been circumscribed once again in their power by amendments to the Constitution?
This is why calling a convention of states is the only way to get the job done.
There are already 3.8 million people with us on this, more every day.
Join me and my friend Mark Meckler.
Go to conventionofstates.com slash ben to sign the petition today.
That's conventionofstates.com slash ben.
I keep hearing from folks that convention of states could become a runaway convention.
That's not how the article 5 convention works.
It still requires confirmation by two-thirds of the states.
38 states have to be there and they have to confirm it.
So there's that.
Also, people say, well, you know, amendments to the Constitution could hamstring Congress too much.
Is that really what you're worried about at this point in time?
Seriously?
Conventionofstates.com slash Benza.
Sign the petition today.
Go check it out right now.
OK, so.
Big news.
We get to update our list of candidates for the 2020 race for the Democratic side.
Joining the race, or about to join the race, is, of course, Joe Biden.
We've pulled some theme music for Joe Biden, since we have theme music for everybody else.
Here's some Joe Biden theme music.
Yeah, so that guy, he's about to join the 2020 race.
According to The Hill, he is basically setting up all of his campaign apparatus in New Hampshire, in South Carolina.
According to The Hill, in recent weeks, the former vice president's longtime advisors, Steve Reschetti and Mike Donilon, Have led a string of meetings with potential aides to fill out the campaign if Biden makes a decision to enter the race, according to various sources.
Whenever the VP makes a decision, we'll be ready to go, said one source with direct knowledge of the planning.
Greg Schultz, who has run Biden's PAC American Possibilities and served as his political director in the White House, is expected to be the campaign manager.
Apparently, Mike Donilon is expected to play the role of chief strategist.
Cade Bedingfield, who was Biden's communications director in the White House, is also expected to run his communications shop.
Longtime advisors have been talking to other Biden alumni for other press jobs.
Now, if Biden doesn't get Barack Obama's endorsement, he's going to have a bit of a rough ride here because he is outflanked on his left by Bernie Sanders and he is outflanked on the intersectional side by Kamala Harris.
So the early polls that have him up, I've been around through several presidential election cycles with open primaries, and what you see is that very often the person with the highest name recognition leads initially, and then immediately falls away as soon as the competition actually begins.
Biden does not have a massive lead in places like New Hampshire.
He's up like 26-22 on Bernie Sanders in some of the polling.
Were he to declare, he might jump to 30, but by no means is Biden the prohibitive frontrunner inside the Democratic Party.
And he knows this, which is why Biden is constantly playing both sides of the fence.
Here's what I mean.
So Joe Biden does this routine where he says, I'm friends with people on the other side of the aisle.
I'm friends with people on the other side of the aisle that they're good guys.
You know, I believe in a better, kinder, gentler.
I'm not like Donald Trump.
I'm not a polarizing political figure.
Forget about the time I called Mitt Romney basically a would-be slave master.
Forget about the time I said he wanted to put black people back in chains.
Forget about all of that.
No, I'm a really good guy.
And that's because I like people on the other side.
I mean, that's what that's what politics is all about.
Now, what's amazing is that Joe Biden then gets called out by his own side and he runs screaming from his own bipartisanship.
So here's what happened in the last 24 hours with Joe Biden.
And it really is telling about the state of American politics.
People are constantly talking about Donald Trump being so radical, so extreme, so polarizing, so mean to his political opponents.
And Joe Biden, oh, he longs for a better time.
I remember at John McCain's funeral, he got this from Joe Biden.
Him going out there and saying, yeah, John McCain and I, we got along gangbusters.
We were just, we were just the best of friends and we were really nice to each other.
And every so often you see this, right?
Elijah Cummings with Mark Meadows doing the same thing.
Oh, well, you know, we're really good friends.
I know Mark Meadows isn't a racist.
But when people on the left are called out by their own side, they will not step forward to defend people with whom they are purportedly friends very often.
It's pretty rare.
It's pretty rare.
I mean, I said, even on my birthday this year, for example, I talked with a lot of folks on the left that I consider friends.
Many of them would text me or direct message me on Twitter saying, happy birthday, and would not do so publicly, specifically because they were afraid that they would get blowback from their friends.
This is not a rarity that is confined to presidential politics.
It is true across the board.
Here's what I mean.
So, Reid Epstein, who's a reporter for Politico, he tweets out, This is very bad.
Joe Biden must never acknowledge Mike Pence as a human being.
This is very bad.
Joe Biden must never acknowledge Mike Pence as a human being.
According to the radical left, Joe Biden acknowledging Mike Pence is akin to saying he agrees with Mike Pence.
And we all know that Mike Pence is a vicious bigot and homophobe who wants to put gay people in re-education camps or something.
So Cynthia Nixon, the failed gubernatorial candidate in New York against Andrew Cuomo, she tweeted out, Joe Biden, you've just called America's most anti-LGBT elected leader a decent guy.
Please consider how this falls on the ears of our community.
And then she also atted Biden's wife to make sure that Joe Biden would see her tweet.
So he can't be a decent guy because you disagree with him on same-sex marriage.
He's a bad guy.
So Joe Biden then responds to Cynthia Nixon.
And he says, you're right, Cynthia.
I was making a point in a foreign policy context that under normal circumstances, a vice president wouldn't be given a silent reaction on the world stage.
But there is nothing decent about being anti-LGBTQ rights.
And that includes the vice president.
Ah, so in the end, Joe Biden is saying, you know what?
You're right.
Mike Pence, not a decent guy.
Actually, a very bad guy because he disagrees with me on all of the LGBTQ politics.
So I agree with Cynthia Nixon.
I've been called out.
I apologize for ever saying that Mike Pence is a decent guy.
This is what poisons our politics.
This right here is what poisons our politics.
Joe Biden is a national leader, like it or not.
And him coming out and saying that Mike Pence is a decent guy, well, that should be normal politics.
I'm old enough to remember when John McCain did it about Barack Obama.
And Mitt Romney did it about Barack Obama.
Democrats don't do this for people on the other side.
They just don't.
Democrats at high level.
Joe Biden is supposed to be king of bipartisanship over here.
And the minute that he's called out by a radical like Cynthia Nixon, then it's, well, you know, I guess Mike Pence isn't a decent guy.
I guess he's a bad guy now because I need Cynthia Nixon's support.
There's an actual term for this.
We call it getting duplaste.
And I know a little bit about this.
For those who missed this story, it was probably, what, six months ago, maybe?
There's an actor and director named Mark Duplass, very talented guy in Hollywood.
And he was doing a new movie about gun control and the gun debate.
And so he reached out through a mutual friend and asked if he could come into the Daily Wire offices.
And he asked if he could talk with me for a little while about the pro-gun position.
And I said, sure.
He came in.
I gave him maybe an hour and a half.
We just talked about guns and gun control and the various positions and where pro-gun people are coming from, what the Second Amendment means and all the rest.
And I gave him a lot of time.
And as he was leaving, I said, dude, you may not want to let people know publicly that you were here because you're going to get clocked by your own side.
Well, about a month later, Duplass tweets out, if you want to follow somebody from the other side who's honest and well-intentioned, you should follow Ben Shapiro.
And he's hit with an inordinate number, a wave, a tsunami, a tidal wave.
of hatred from the left saying Ben Shapiro isn't a decent guy.
Do you think Ben Shapiro is a decent guy for X, Y, and Z?
Here's all the bad things we think Ben Shapiro has ever said.
So simply for saying I'm a decent guy with whom he disagrees, he gets hit with a wave of response.
And then, being a coward, Mark Duplass backs off his original comment, deletes his tweet saying that I'm a well-intentioned person, and puts out a statement saying that he stands against racism, bigotry, sexism, and homophobia.
That is called being duplassed.
Joe Biden just duplassed Mike Pence.
And here's the problem.
I think this is an endemic thing to an enormous number of people on the left.
They are so afraid of their own side eating them for simply acknowledging the humanity of people who disagree with them, that they are willing to dump those people under the bus at the drop of a hat.
It really is sickening.
I mean, that's sickening behavior by the vice president.
He knows Mike Pence.
He knows Mike Pence is a decent guy.
They may disagree on politics.
But that does not change the reality on the ground that Mike Pence is a decent American who is well-intentioned, even if he and Biden disagree.
I've been striving in recent years.
It's really something I've striven to do.
I've been striving to try and grant the initial recognition of people with whom I disagree, the initial recognition of their good intentions.
Now, sometimes you can't uphold that.
Sometimes the intentions, it's just not possible.
We'll get to Ilhan Omar in a second.
Sometimes it's not possible to read people's comments other than as a reflection of underlying animus.
But there's a concept in Judaism called Dan Lechav Tzchuz, which means that you are supposed to try and see people in the most favorable possible light.
You're supposed to treat them like human beings.
And if we don't do that, we can't have a common conversation.
Because if, in the end, Joe Biden believes that Mike Pence is a bad, ill-intentioned guy, there's no conversation to be had.
Then it's just about clubbing him to death like a baby seal.
Joe Biden got clubbed into shape by Cynthia Nixon, who's not even a mainstream political figure in the Democratic Party.
I got an email from a friend last night.
I'm not going to mention who.
This is a person who is on the left.
And this person emailed me and said, you know, is the conservative movement... This person was watching.
CPAC, and was noticing that there are some people who are sort of fringy at CPAC, and this person was saying, do you think that the conservative movement is unusually susceptible to grifters?
Do you think the conservative movement is unusually susceptible to people who take advantage of conservatives?
Because there are a lot of people in the conservative movement who rely on purity tests, meaning that it's very easy to get people to buy into your program when you say things like, people who disagree with me are insufficiently pure, therefore come around to my side.
And I said to this person, no, this exists on all sides of the political aisle.
But it certainly exists on the left, because what just happened there is Joe Biden throwing the sitting vice president of the United States under the bus as an even decent human being, just because Cynthia Nixon, a radical in every sense of the word, a radical, says that Joe Biden should not even make absolutely anodyne, milquetoast comments about Mike Pence being a human being.
That's really sick stuff.
And it's bad for our politics.
It destroys our politics, in fact.
So Joe Biden is a weakling.
He's a moral weakling.
And he demonstrated that in front of the world.
Nobody's going to pay attention, of course, because if you hate Mike Pence or what Mike Pence stands for, then you also don't believe he's a human being.
But if we don't get to the point where we acknowledge that people on the other side are at least human beings or that they can be human beings and that simple political disagreement is not a mark of bigotry, animus and hate, There's not gonna be a republic for very long in this country.
If you really believe that your opposition is innately motivated by bigotry and hatred, why exactly would you respect their vote?
Why would you respect their right to free speech?
Why would you respect their right to congregate and associate?
You wouldn't.
If you think everybody on the other side's a Nazi, then you start treating them like Nazis.
And that's not... That's not a good thing.
There aren't a lot of Nazis left in America.
But if we start treating each other like the other side is a Nazi, and you can punch a Nazi, Rights are endangered.
Rights are endangered, and so is our common social fabric.
We'll get to more of the 2020 Democratic presidential race in just one second.
First, let's talk about the best holsters you can buy.
We the People holsters.
They offer custom-made holsters, all produced right here in the United States.
They design all their holsters in-house, which means they don't use any third-party molds for their holsters.
Instead, they design every unique mold in Las Vegas in order to best fit each and every firearm absolutely perfectly.
We the people holsters even have their own 3D design team.
They measure every micromillimeter of their guns to ensure the perfect fit.
It's not just enough to have a good gun.
If you have a concealed carry permit, you need a good holster.
Their unique intuitive clip design allows for you to easily adjust both the cant and ride of your holster.
The cant is the angle, and the ride is how high or low it sits on your waist, so that it will fit comfortably and securely at all times.
Every holster also has adjustable retention, which is signaled with a click sound, which lets you know that your firearm is securely in place.
You don't have to worry about that thing falling out.
Custom printed designs in-house, they've got thin blue line, thin red line, the Constitution, camo, an American flag.
They have more designs coming out each and every month.
We the People holsters, they start at just $37 apiece, which is a great price for a fantastic holster.
Every holster comes with a lifetime guarantee.
Every holster ships for free.
And if it's not a perfect fit, send it back for a refund.
I mean, this is a great product.
WeThePeopleHolsters.com slash Ben.
When you enter promo code Ben at checkout, you get $10 off your first holster.
So that means it's as low as $37 and shipping is free with an additional $10 off using my promo code, Ben.
Again, that's wethepeopleholsters.com slash Ben promo code Ben at checkout for $10 off.
Exercise your Second Amendment rights in the smartest possible way.
Get a We The People holster.
It's wethepeopleholsters.com slash Ben and use promo code Ben to get $10 off their holsters, which start at like $37 with free shipping.
So that's a solid deal for a fantastic American made holster.
Go check them out right now.
OK, so it's not just Joe Biden who is radical.
It is Beto O'Rourke, so Beto!
Dude's ready to run, yo!
Do we have some Beto theme music?
I think that we need some.
I can't handle it without it.
Do we have it, guys?
Oh.
No.
No!
Yes.
Beto is ready to skateboard into the 2020 race.
According to Oregon Live, when a U.S.
Senate bid comes up short, the losing candidate typically must pump the brakes on his or her ambition.
The next move tends to be sideways, a run for governor or maybe state AG, or backwards, a House of Representatives seat.
That's not true for Beto.
He lost his attempt to move up in the Senate last year and then became a national political star because the media decided that he was a hero.
O'Rourke told the Dallas Morning News on Wednesday, Amy, that's his wife, and I have made a decision about how we can best serve our country.
We are excited to share it with everyone soon.
And then he ruled out running for Senate against John Cornyn, the other senator in Texas.
So he is famous for skateboarding and riding bicycles and generally being a rad dude.
So he's going to be running as well.
So that's very exciting.
Bye now.
Everybody is pumped up about Beto.
He's kind of a second tier candidate.
If you have to rank the candidates right now, you have to rank them at the top.
Biden, Sanders, Kamala Harris.
Beto is a top of the second tier, is where you'd put Beto O'Rourke.
Pretty obvious VP pick if Kamala Harris wins the nomination.
Speaking of which, Kamala Harris gets herself in a little bit of trouble.
So it turns out that Kamala tried to rewrite history with her own policy.
Do we have some Kamala Harris theme music?
Because it's actually fitting.
There it is.
So Nark Kamala Harris, who has undercut her support with her own bass because her history is basically being an AG, right?
Like an actual prosecutor.
Well, according to PolitiFact, she actually lies about her own record now.
They say presidential candidate and U.S. Senator Kamala Harris has made protecting undocumented youth a top priority during her time in the Senate.
She's been a vocal supporter of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which gives temporary protections to more than 700,000 young undocumented immigrants or dreamers brought to the country as children.
But on the campaign trail in Iowa this past weekend, Harris made some questionable statements about a 2008 San Francisco policy that reported undocumented youth to federal immigration officials upon their arrest by local police.
At the time, Harris was the San Francisco DA, and she supported the policy, which didn't take into account whether the youth were actually found guilty of a crime, meaning as soon as they were arrested, ICE was notified.
And then she lied about it.
Now, that's actually the right policy.
The right policy is that ICE should know when people are accused of a crime and are also illegal immigrants.
But she lied about it.
So she was asked, could you give us some insight on how, when for whatever reason you were supporting this policy that was essentially handing over undocumented people to ICE before they had been convicted, what's changed on that?
How did you come up with those changes?
Harris said, that ended up being an unintended consequence of the policy, and I did not support that consequence of the policy.
And I believe that policy has since been changed because it was not the intended purpose of that policy.
That, unfortunately, is completely false.
It is completely false.
Former San Francisco County Supervisor David Campos strongly opposed the policy change.
He said that her statement just doesn't fly.
He said, with all due respect to Senator Harris, who has been a friend, I don't understand how she can say that.
Turning over young people and children who are accused of a crime that later turned out they did not commit was not an unintended consequence of what was going on.
It was precisely what was going on and what we were trying to avoid when we changed the policy.
You cannot rewrite history.
And then, so the policy was reversed?
Gavin Newsom at the time was the mayor of San Francisco and he refused to enforce the reversal.
Harris, of course, explained her position, saying, there was an initiative that was written by a board of supervisors that was passed, and there was opposition to that, but it did pass.
We're going to have to wait to see how the courts interpret it.
From my perspective, I think it would be in conflict with federal law, and we have to follow the law.
So she knew full well the consequences of the policy when she endorsed it.
Now she's reversing herself.
PolitiFact, which is a left-leaning source, if ever there was one, they say that the very purpose of the policy that Harris endorsed is the one she says she did not endorse.
They say, Kamala Harris does have an opening to her left.
that undocumented residents should be protected by and able to trust local law enforcement.
That sentiment, however, does not take away from her mischaracterization of the goal and fraught history of the 2008 policy she supported.
And they write Kamala Harris's claims false.
This is Kamala Harris does have an opening to her left.
Bernie Sanders is going to take that opening.
So again, I think that Joe Biden right now has the most name recognition, but there is not a clear path to him to the nomination unless he is endorsed by Barack Obama, who looks like he's going to sit this one out.
And the Democratic base is too radical for Kamala Harris, so Bernie may be the guy.
Beto is sort of hoping he can draw enough from these various pools to win the nomination.
But it's going to be a I think it's a Bernie versus Kamala race, maybe to the end here with Biden trying to sneak up the middle.
So that's basically where things stand.
Meanwhile, the Democratic extremism is not relegated only to the 2020 race.
There's an unfortunate truth.
Anti-Semitism has a home in the Democratic Party.
It does.
And Ilhan Omar is praised by the by the higher ups in the Democratic Party, despite saying routinely anti-Semitic things.
Every two weeks, she has to apologize for anti-Semitism.
She's like that, she's like that GIF from Futurama.
Days since accident.
The person who goes up and nails up a one, and then the one falls down to reveal a zero.
Days since antisemitism.
Ilhan Omar, it, usually it's about 10, and then she has to reset it back to zero.
So you'll recall that Ilhan Omar, like, literally two and a half weeks ago, tweeted out, it's all about the Benjamins, with regard to American support for Israel, as though the Jews, the nefarious Jews, were paying off Americans to support Israel.
And then she apologized for it, but not really.
She says, no, I never apologized for being anti-Semitic.
And she walked back her own apology.
You've since apologized unequivocally for the tweet.
You've said rightly that anti-Semitism is real.
But just to be clear, I mean, we're a few weeks on now.
I mean, what were you apologizing for?
Was it a badly worded tweet that you were apologizing for?
Or was it for being anti-Semitic wittingly or unwittingly?
Oh, absolutely not.
I apologized for the way that my words made people feel.
The reason, you know, and the purpose of the apology was to make sure that the people who were hurt felt understood and heard.
Okay, that's an amazing non-apology.
Right?
They're so fresh and so face Ilhan Omar.
I mean, on the cover of Rolling Stone, with Nancy Pelosi, smiling and grinning away, open anti-Semite.
Open anti-Semite.
So is Rashida Tlaib, also an open anti-Semite, who in the past has suggested that American Jews are rife with dual loyalty.
That American Jews only like Israel because they're actually secretly nefarious Jewish workers for the Jewish state.
The Jews!
It can't be that American Jews are supportive of Israel because Israel is the home of Jews protecting Jewish lives.
Israel is a democracy, the only democracy in the region, and the place all over the world where Muslims have the most rights.
It can't be because of that.
It has to be because Jews are nefarious secret agents of the Israeli state.
That's really why all of this is happening.
Rashida Tlaib tweeted something out about that three months ago.
No apology from Rashida Tlaib.
So open anti-Semitism, totally fine inside the Democratic Party.
And Ilhan Omar, that apology is an incredible apology.
Imagine that you get in a fight with your spouse and you say something truly terrible to your spouse.
I mean, you do essentially what Ilhan Omar did.
You call your wife a whore.
I mean, she's basically suggesting that American Jews and Americans who support Israel are whores who can be bought off with money.
That's basically what she suggested when she said it's all about the Benjamins.
Imagine you said to your wife, you know what, sweetheart?
You're a whore.
And then she said, well, that's a pretty awful thing to say.
How dare you?
That's an evil, terrible thing to say.
And you said, you know what?
I apologize for how my words made you feel.
No, it's the thing you said that's evil.
It's the thing you said that's bad.
But Ilhan Omar never apologized really for those comments, but we were all supposed to overlook that because so fresh, so faced, and of course she can claim in her intersectional way that she is a minority woman from Somalia who is a Muslim, and therefore that's the reason people are angry.
Not because she's a rabid anti-Semite, and she's been consistently anti-Semitic for legitimately her entire career.
It's not because of that.
It's because she's a Muslim woman that people are very angry at her.
Weird, weird, because there are lots of Muslims that I know who are not anti-semitic and yet she is anti-semitic.
So I have very little faith that this has anything to do with Islam.
I have a lot of faith that it has to do with her being a blatant anti-semite is the reason why people are upset with her.
Okay, so Ilhan Omar yesterday doubled down on her anti-semitism.
She was doing an event This was an event in New York.
Sorry, it was in Washington, D.C., actually, at some bookstore.
She was doing it with Rashida Tlaib.
And at a certain point here, somebody in the audience yells out, it's all about the Benjamins.
And both Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar smile, according to press reports.
And then Ilhan Omar explains that what she really wants to question is why these nefarious Jews are so loyal to Israel.
I want to talk about the political influence in this country that says it is okay for people to push for allegiance to a foreign country.
I want to ask, why is it okay for me to talk about the influence of the NRA of fossil fuel industries or big pharma and not talk about a powerful lobbying group that is influencing why is it okay for me to talk about the influence Okay, because the NRA is pushing for a principle.
Okay, the Koch brothers push for principles.
Your suggestion, Ilhan Omar, you anti-Semite, your suggestion is that AIPAC and the Jews broadly in the United States and American Israel supporters in the United States are not supporting Israel based on principle.
They are doing so based on dual loyalty.
They are doing so based on tribal loyalty to Jews.
So in other words, if Israel decided to become a monstrous dictatorship overnight and start legitimately executing people, that all the Jews in the United States would call for continued American support for Israel.
Because they're principle-free.
I mean, that's her essential contention.
Her essential contention is that American Jewish support for Israel is not based on any sort of principle.
It is based on allegiance to a foreign power.
Now, think about how absurd that is in the context of other states.
I am a big believer that the United States should stand with the continued existence of Great Britain.
And I think that the existence of Great Britain is a great and wonderful thing.
Why?
Because it is a country that has stood for human dignity and liberty, because it is a country that is democracy, because it is an ally of the United States in real politic terms.
Does this mean that I have allegiance to Great Britain?
That I have full allegiance to the British?
I think France should exist.
I think Germany should exist.
And I think Israel should exist, too.
And I think that backing the continued existence of the State of Israel in the face of genocidal terrorism is not, in fact, a violation of America's priorities.
I think it should be one of America's moral priorities.
That does not indicate dual loyalty or allegiance to Israel.
That's an insane contention.
And an anti-Semitic one.
Because, again, it is suggesting something about Jews that you would not suggest about anyone else.
Would Ilhan Omar be willing to say that Catholics have dual loyalty to Rome?
Catholics have dual loyalty to the Pope?
No!
Catholics have a series of religious principles that they hold dear.
And those religious principles jibe with their American citizenship.
Because they believe that America forwards certain basic precepts that agree with the basic precepts of Christianity.
This notion that if you have certain... We all have certain fundamental moral principles that dictate what we support and what we do not.
But that's not what Ilhan Omar is claiming.
She's claiming...
That the Jews particularly don't have any central moral principle for supporting Israel.
There's no moral principle underlying it.
It is simply dual loyalty or allegiance to the government of Israel.
That is a vile smear that has been perpetrated against Jews for legitimately centuries.
That the Jews are a people apart who only have tribal loyalty and they don't have any underlying principles that leads to a belief that the Jewish people should exist.
That essentially, Zionism is racism.
That essentially, belief in the Jewish people as a whole has nothing to do with Jewish principle and everything to do with ethnicity.
That is a lie.
It's a disgusting lie.
But it's a lie that she perpetrates.
So, she says all this.
And the Democratic Party?
Absolutely silent.
Has Nancy Pelosi said a word?
No.
Is she going to say a word?
No.
She's going to appear on the cover of Rolling Stone with Ilhan Omar.
Why would she say a word?
Are you going to hear anything from Chuck Schumer, that supposed great friend to Jews in New York?
No, he's not going to say a damn thing.
Because the Democratic Party is fully comfortable with the intersectional pyramid that suggests that if you rank higher in terms of victimology in the United States than the white Jews, then that means that you get to say whatever anti-Semitic things you please.
Now, what's so hysterical about this, of course, is that if you're going to look, by hate crime statistics, at who is most victimized, who should be higher on the intersectional pyramid, in terms of, for example, hate crimes, Jews should be higher than Muslims on the intersectional pyramid.
Because Jews are victimized at twice the rate of Muslims in the United States on a per capita basis, according to FBI statistics.
That cuts no ice for folks on the left who believe that Jews are too successful to be part of the intersectional pyramid.
Jews, broadly speaking, are too successful, therefore, if they are insulted by a group that is less successful in the United States because all unsuccess in the intersectional pyramid is based on American bigotry.
It's based on the idea that America is a vile, terrible place that is keeping people under its boot.
Those groups are allowed to victimize Jews and yell about Jews and be as anti-Semitic as they damn well please.
It's disgusting.
But don't worry, Ilhan Omar's a fresh face.
And if we talk about her anti-Semitism, it's only because she's Muslim.
It really must be because of that.
It must be because of her religion.
It's insane.
By the way, the radicalism of the new fangled Democrats is just, it's tremendously extreme.
It really is.
And the mainstream Democratic Party is disappearing.
And it's leading us down a path where there can be no agreement.
I mentioned earlier, Joe Biden basically suggesting you can't be friends with a Republican, that there are no decent Republicans.
He called Mike Pence a decent guy and then immediately walked it back.
Well, among the Democrats, now Democrats are going after not only Republicans, but each other.
So first of all, they continue to suggest that all people they disagree with are vicious racists.
Rashida Tlaib, who again is just as vile as Ilhan Omar in her anti-Semitism.
You'll recall that a couple of days ago during the Michael Cohen hearing, Michael Cohen was contending that President Trump was a racist.
And Mark Meadows pointed to a woman named Lynn Patton who works with President Trump.
And he said, well, Lynne Patton works with President Trump every day, and she's here, and Lynne Patton has given me this piece of testimony saying that she's never seen President Trump be a racist.
I said this was not a good argument.
I said it was an emotional appeal, that I have a black friend is not a real good response to, you are a racist.
All of that can be true.
Rashida Tlaib went further.
She said that Mark Meadows was an actual racist for saying, here's a black person who knows President Trump and doesn't think that he's a racist and deals with him every day.
Rashida Tlaib said that Mark Meadows was a racist and that was a racist act.
And then she supposedly apologized for that.
But just like Ilhan Omar's apology, it's not real.
She then went on CNN and doubled down on it.
Do you still today believe that Congressman Mark Meadows engaged in a racist act?
I believe that that moment, as a person of color, and not only myself, two, I think three other of my colleagues had mentioned how insensitive that act was.
I think all of us, I mean even folks at home, kind of gasped when that actually happened.
I think if we want to talk about race in this country, that was not the way to do it.
So in other words, she says that that still was a racist act.
Mark Meadows participated in racism by saying, here is a black woman that I know who works with President Trump, and she can testify that President Trump has never acted in a racist way toward her.
Why is that racist?
Well, supposedly because Mark Meadows was engaging in a form of tokenism.
It's very weird when the left will suggest that tokenism is occurring.
So the left will suggest that tokenism is occurring when, for example, Mark Meadows says, here's a black person who knows President Trump.
But tokenism is not occurring when Michael Cohen asks how many black people are on President Trump's staff, as though if he had a bunch of black people working for him, that would also be a defense against racism.
So tokenism only works when the left says that it works.
It's an inaptly applied label.
Also, it's a little bit insulting to a black woman, Lynne Patton, to suggest that she's willing to stand there and be used as a token of her race.
Lynne Patton immediately responded along those lines.
Here's what Lynne Patton had to say about Rashida Tlaib.
What I'd like to ask the Congresswoman from Michigan is, you know, why does she take the word of a self-confessed perjurer and criminally convicted white man over a black female
Who's highly educated, rose up through the ranks of one of the most competitive companies in real estate, spoke before 25 million people at the Republican National Convention, and now works in one of the most historic administrations in history.
And so to me, that would be my question.
That's more racist than being put up there as a quote-unquote prop.
Okay, yeah, calling her a prop, that is a bad thing, right?
That's not, that seems pretty racially charged.
Didn't matter.
AOC then defended her fellow fresh face.
All the fresh faces defend each other.
They're fine with each other's anti-semitism or the sort of racism that reeks, the intersectional racism that reeks off of them.
AOC tweeted out total bravery from Rashida Tlaib as she reminds the nation that tokenism is racism.
So again, it's not racism if you ask how many black people do you have in your office as a proof of your non-racism.
It is racism if you say, here's how many black people I have in my office to prove that you're not a racist.
Also, bravery has certainly changed its definition.
Rashida Tlaib is so brave.
I mean, just like Normandy.
Just like Normandy.
Calling Republicans racist these days?
I mean, talk about taking a risk.
My goodness.
In a second, we're going to talk about what else AOC is doing to help oust the supposed moderates left in her party.
We'll get to that in just a second.
First, $9.99 a month means you subscribe to Daily Wire, and that means you get the rest of the show live.
You get two additional hours a day.
You can ask questions during the breaks.
You can join our chat room, which apparently is always a lot of fun.
My producers watch it for good questions.
So go check all of that out.
$99 a year means that you get not only the annual subscription, but also this, the very greatest in beverage vessels, the Leftist Tears hot or cold tumbler.
And you know what comes along with that?
The ability to appear on the show.
So today we are featuring a Daily Wire premium subscriber.
We want to give a shout out to a different subscriber every week as a thank you for helping support the Daily Wire.
Although, let's be honest, we are already giving you folks way more than you deserve.
Really.
This week's shout-out goes to Samantha, at samigirl417, on Twitter.
Samantha starts her day with a little extra freedom, sipped from her Leftist Tears tumbler.
Samantha is as American as they come, with the grand old flag in the background.
Thanks for being a subscriber, Samantha, and thanks for your service.
Looks like Samantha's in the military, so...
You are awesome.
You are awesome.
If you want to receive a shout out and experience the pure bliss that Samantha is likely experiencing at this very moment, you have to be an annual subscriber and you have to post a photo of your Tumblr on either Twitter or Instagram with the hashtag LeftistTearsTumblr.
It's hashtag LeftistTearsTumblr.
You can even be in the photo if you would like.
Get creative.
We like it when you make us laugh.
Entertain me.
And then maybe you'll make it on the show.
Samantha, you are awesome.
That is a great photo.
Love it.
So go check that out.
Hashtag us at Leftist Tears Tumblr if you want to appear on the show.
Also, make sure that you subscribe over at YouTube and iTunes.
When you do, then leave us a review.
You also get access to our Sunday special a day early.
This week's Sunday special features the awesome Dan Crenshaw.
I'm going to admit that we arm wrestled.
I lasted longer than I thought I would against the former Navy SEAL.
I will not say that it went great for me, but in any case, Dan Crenshaw is on the Sunday special, becomes the Saturday special when you subscribe, so go check that out right now.
Right now, we are the largest, fastest-growing conservative podcast and radio show in the nation.
Okay, so House Democrats are now dividing in on themselves.
It's not just that Democrats have become radical and attack Republicans as racist and bad people at every turn, while engaging in some of the most racist anti-Semitic behavior I've seen in modern American history.
Not just that.
The radicals in the Democratic Party are now trying to eat their own.
According to the Washington Post, House Democrats explode in recriminations as liberals lash out at moderates.
By the way, they're not liberals.
They're leftists lashing out at liberals.
There are no moderate Democrats left in the Democratic Party, basically.
So those are liberals.
And then there are the leftists, who are censorious woke-scolds, who are trying to shut down members of their own party.
Mike DeBonis is reporting, he says, House Democrats exploded in recriminations Thursday over moderates bucking the party, with liberal representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez threatening to put those voting with Republicans on a list for a primary challenge.
As though AOC has any weight at all.
In the last election cycle, she endorsed a bunch of other people, and it did not work.
It was just a giant fail for her.
Virtually all of them were defeated.
In a closed-door session, a frustrated speaker, Nancy Pelosi, lashed out at about two dozen moderates and pressured them to get on board.
We're either a team or we're not, and we have to make that decision, Pelosi said.
According to two people present but not authorized to discuss the remarks publicly, but Ocasio-Cortez, the unquestioned media superstar of the freshman class, upped the ante, admonishing the moderates and indicating she would help liberal activists unseat them in the 2020 election.
Corbyn Trent, a spokesperson for AOC, said she is putting her colleagues, the Democrats, she told her colleagues, the Democrats who side with Republicans, are putting themselves on a list.
Oh, this isn't going to go poorly at all.
This is going to go great.
Apparently AOC and her other leftist colleagues are targeting the quote-unquote moderates.
By the way, those moderates now include apparently people like Dianne Feinstein, one of the most left-leaning members of the Senate in American history.
I mean, those moderates include people who exist in purple states.
It's really funny, there was a lot of talk about how the Tea Party had made the Republican Party more radical, how people had been primaried, moderates had been primaried and replaced with less traditional candidates who were purer ideologically, and how bad that was.
I'm missing that same sense of recrimination from the media when AOC, an open democratic socialist who is a member of the DSA, when she says that she's going to cleanse the party with fire.
Triggering the blowup were Wednesday's votes on a bill to expand federal background checks for gun purchases.
26 moderate Democrats joined Republicans in amending the legislation, adding a provision requiring that ICE be notified if an illegal immigrant seeks to purchase a gun.
That infuriated liberals.
Why would that infuriate liberals?
Because they're not liberal.
They're insane.
Why would, if an illegal immigrant tries to buy a gun, why should ICE not be notified?
So in other words, Democrats believe that if an American citizen purchases a gun, that should basically not be allowed, but if an illegal immigrant tries to purchase a gun, ICE shouldn't even know about it.
The Democratic infighting reflects a fractured caucus and a diverse freshman class, with dozens of moderates elected in districts President Trump won in 2016 at odds with hard-charging liberals.
The split has exposed divisions among Pelosi and her top lieutenants, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer of Maryland and Majority Whip James Clyburn, South Carolina, over the party's strategy to keep its newfound majority.
It's going to get uglier inside the Democratic Party because, again, the radicals have control of the tiller.
Nancy Pelosi may just be along for the ride, or maybe she's going to have to fight AOC for the actual control of the party.
Whatever it is, there's no question the Democratic Party has lost, is losing whatever moorings in reason are available.
And that means moorings in a social fabric.
And listen, the right is not immune to this.
Certainly not.
I've been very critical of Republicans this week on a variety of issues, but let's be clear.
What the Democratic Party is doing in embracing the most radical form of their base is deeply damaging not just to the Democratic Party overall, I think we need two viable parties, but deeply damaging to the country because that radical base is firmly convinced that people on the other side are bad human beings who must be destroyed at any cost and believe that they can say anything in the pursuit of that destruction.
Alright, time for the mailbag.
So, Joe says, Hey Ben, my girlfriend and I got into a debate on whether or not anxiety is a sin.
I know it states in the Bible that we are to put our trust in God, and if we don't, we are questioning God's plan.
As someone who suffers from a panic disorder, I was a little off-put by the idea that I was sinning over something I had no control over.
So my question is, can you separate a panic anxiety disorder from sinful anxiety?
Thanks, love the show.
Listen, as a Jew, I'm not a big fan of the idea that your feelings are typically a sin.
I think that usually your actions are a sin.
Judaism is more of an acts-based religion than a faith-based religion in the sense that facts don't care about your feelings and acts don't care about your feelings.
So, sinful anxiety, I would assume, would be taking measures that demonstrate a lack of faith in God in some sort of fulsome fashion.
Um, but just being anxious over the future I think is sort of a natural part of the human condition.
Trying to fight it is going to make your life better.
Trying to be more accepting is going to make your life better.
Here's a phrase my dad taught me many years ago when I had a little bit of anxiety in law school.
I didn't like being away from home.
I didn't like living in an apartment by myself.
I had lived at home during college and so I, you know, used to get anxious being by myself.
3,000 miles away from my family and he used to say acceptance is relaxation and That is a basically religious principle that you have to sort of accept the reality of what is But as far as anxiety itself being a sin, I think it's something that can be fought without it necessarily being a sin I tend to think of sin as activity not as feelings now again if you allow the feelings to dominate your life the part of your life that you can control, then you may be veering into sin, but I don't think that the feeling itself is sinful.
Nicholas says, "I was recently a part "of a discussion about abortion.
"I was in charge to combat this question.
"Where do we draw the line in terms of what is okay "to use as birth control, such as the morning after pill?
"I'm interested to hear your response." So the basic pro-life position on this is that once conception has taken place, anything that ends the chain of creation of human life is in fact abortion and not birth control.
So condoms, for example, are birth control and not abortion.
There's been no conception yet.
The sperm is separate from the egg.
There's been no new DNA formed.
There's been no inception of human life.
But if you're talking about the morning-after pill that prevents, for example, implantation, right?
I'm still I believe that that's generally the morning after pill does.
There are some people who suggest that it prevents conception itself.
Again, if it were to prevent conception, I think that's not abortion.
If it prevents implantation, I think that that is more like abortion.
And even though I pointed out they do collect sales tax, it got me thinking.
Why should we tax businesses at all?
It's one thing to tax people who, in theory, use the roads, schools, safety net, etc.
that taxes provide.
Wouldn't it be better to encourage businesses to keep all their profits and put the money back into the business, expand or even give higher wages?
Wouldn't the economy grow faster that way?
Or are there enough loopholes that most businesses don't pay taxes and Amazon is just the fall guy at the moment?
Well, loopholes don't... When people use the phrase tax loopholes, that's not a phrase that really exists.
What they mean is tax deductions.
So if you have a tax deduction, that is not a loophole.
It's just that some people don't have the same deductions as others.
That's just a fact of life, right?
Some people have a mortgage deduction.
Some people don't have a mortgage deduction.
If you rent, you don't have a mortgage deduction.
Does the person with the mortgage deduction have a tax loophole?
No, that's called a mortgage deduction.
Amazon uses whatever deductions are available to it.
As far as the idea that taxing businesses is bad for the economy, of course that's true, which is why one of the most fascinating things about the Nordic countries that the left so loves is that their corporate tax rates have generally been lower than America's corporate tax rates, which is why they can still support this massive social welfare state, despite the fact that they have high personal income.
Businesses are still willing to invest over there because businesses can still make a profit over there.
The Indiana Senate just passed a hate crimes law, which is significant because Indiana is one of five states that has no hate crimes law.
But the law has raised a considerable amount of controversy because the Republican senators stripped away specifically protected characteristics from the law.
So I think hate crimes laws are garbage.
I don't see a rationale for them.
the hate crimes law allows a judge to determine the bias of a crime more generally as you can imagine my cheery co-workers at npr along with all forms of press in indiana and all the democrats in the state are furious that specific characteristics in the bill are not mentioned everyone is painting the republicans as foolish weak and parochial what is your take on hate crimes laws so i think hate crimes laws are garbage i don't see a rationale for them every crime is motivated by a certain level of hate and i don't see why we should punish certain levels of hate more than we punish other levels of hate
You're not, in fact, creating an impetus for people not to be hateful simply because there are hate crimes laws on the books.
I have seen no evidence of that.
As far as the idea that you're not going to name protected classes, I assume the reason you're not naming protected classes is because you don't want people filing hate crimes legislation against you if you have, for example, a religious bakery that says, I don't want to cater this same-sex wedding.
And then someone says, oh, well, that's a hate crime.
Or you're a business, and you don't hire a transgender person because you're a religious day school.
Or simply because you don't want to hire a transgender person for a makeup job or something.
You should be able to associate with whomever you want, and if people want to react to that by boycotting you, that's their problem.
They're not associating with you.
That's their problem as well.
The notion of hate crimes laws, the thought policing of hate crimes laws, is deeply counterintuitive to basic American freedoms.
And again, that's not in favor of hate or in favor of crime.
It is in favor of a government that polices action and not thought.
Well, I'm a big musicals fan, so the ones who come to mind are folks like Cole Porter.
Oscar Hammerstein is tremendously underrated.
Stephen Sondheim, of course.
As far as sort of other lyricists, Johnny Mercer is a fantastic, fantastic lyricist.
But again, I favor some of the old lyricists.
I don't think any of the new lyricists do anything of a real import, to be frank.
Zachary says, I've recently watched The Best of Enemies, the documentary about the debates between Gore Vidal and William F. Buckley during the 68 election.
Given that you're a conservative like Buckley, if a similar documentary were to be made about politics today, who would be your Gore Vidal?
Well, I mean, the problem is that most folks who are prominent on the left are not interested in actually having discussions.
So it's difficult to find a Gore Vidal.
I mean, at least in 68, Buckley and Vidal would get on set together and then argue with one another.
It's difficult to get people to do that on a repeat basis these days.
There are people with whom I disagree, with whom I am very friendly.
I mean, Eric Weinstein is the person who comes to mind.
He and I are very friendly.
And he and I disagree on a lot of stuff politically oriented.
But as far as being just a screed-driven, non-facts-based person, Gore Vidal is pretty indicative of the left.
I think there are plenty of folks like Gore Vidal.
I think there are very few like William Buckley.
Charles says, Hey Ben, can you explain the difference between a kippah and a yarmulke?
Is there a religious significance to using one word instead of the other?
The only difference is that kippah is in Hebrew and yarmulke is in Yiddish.
That's the only difference.
So typically speaking, the way that Orthodox Jews tend to, we tend to speak Hebrew more than Yiddish these days.
Although it depends.
I mean, if you're in the Hasidic community, I assume that people use the word yarmulke more often.
In my Orthodox community, virtually everyone calls it a kippah, not a yarmulke.
In conservative and reform communities, the word yarmulke tends to be used a little more frequently.
Ashley says, As you may know, the Missouri House of Representatives has perfected and passed the most restrictive pro-life bills in the country.
I work as a legislative chief of staff for a state rep that supports this legislation.
Per usual, reps are in support of this, and they're receiving a ton of emails in opposition.
But one of them stuck out to me because this person claims that anti-abortion laws are anti-Semitic.
Please help me understand her reasoning.
Below is part of the email.
Just so you know, abortion restrictions and bans are anti-Semitic.
Judaism doesn't believe in the whole life begins at conception.
Well, not according to Rabbi Moshe Feinstein.
Not according to Aharon Lichtenstein.
These are all Orthodox, very, very prominent rabbis of the last century.
The basic Jewish position is that abortion is the taking of a human life and is unjustifiable except in cases in which the mother's life is in danger.
Now, there may be dispensations that are given by individual rabbis for a variety of individual reasons.
Those are called heters.
But the basic rule is the rule that I just stated.
And as far as the notion that in the Talmud it suggests that the fetus is quote-unquote like water for the first 40 days, Moshe Feinstein, who's an actual posaic, a person who gives halachic judgment, Jewish law judgment,
Has said from what I've heard anyway that that judgment is meant to reflect Simply the the status the sort of purity status of the woman if she were to lose the baby at that point that it doesn't count As a miscarriage at that point for purposes of purity that doesn't mean you can have an abortion There are no Orthodox rabbis of whom I know who believe that abortion on demand is a thing none and by the way I find it highly ironic that When people who are pro-choice suddenly start citing rabbis as their rationale for why the law should be pro-choice.
What happened to your theocracy complaints?
What happened to your whole, we shouldn't listen to these religious crazy people.
Let's listen to these other religious crazy people.
What happened?
Why is it that we should defer to the rabbis?
I thought that you guys don't want to defer to anybody religious.
Weird.
Brian says, Hi Ben, I'm a veteran and my main incentive for serving was the GI Bill.
Many people are advocating for free college.
What do you think the effect would be on a volunteer-only military if we take the GI Bill off the table because we offer free school to everyone?
This is a great question.
I mean, obviously, some incentive for some people to join the military is the capacity to have their college paid for.
If everybody is getting free college, I assume that recruitment would drop.
Again, you're removing an incentive.
That's a real concern.
Ishe says, Hi Ben, I'm confused with the current talk by AOC on the Green New Deal.
I thought her camp basically took down the document and the frequently asked questions, claiming it was a draft in the end.
However, I do not see a new one.
So are they pushing the draft?
Or are they playing if you say something enough, people will believe it without ever putting up a supposedly final draft?
Love the show.
Well, this is obviously true.
It was not a first draft.
It was a final draft.
It was put up.
It was idiotic.
Everybody made fun of it.
AOC pretended that she had been victimized by her own staff.
There was no new draft put up.
I pointed this out literally the day this happened when AOC suggested That it was a first draft.
I said, okay, so where's the final one?
Like, if I posted a draft on a website of an article that a final draft existed, and I found out about it, we'd immediately take down the first and put up the second.
This would not be difficult.
But there is no new draft, because it's all bullcrap.
AOC absolutely meant what she said in that ridiculous Green New Deal document.
Sean says, Hi Ben, huge fan.
Pence Shapiro 2024.
My question regards the death penalty.
As a pro-life conservative, I often find myself debating others on the right regarding the death penalty.
Being pro-life, I believe, as in the Well, that's not moral relativism.
Moral relativism is the belief that there is no such thing as evil.
Moral relativism is the idea that in any given situation, there is no better choice and no worse choice.
resort to moral relativism, the left-wing belief, where I hear phrases such as, well, these people are evil, so they don't deserve to live.
Well, that's not moral relativism.
Moral relativism is the belief that there is no such thing as evil.
Moral relativism is the idea that in any given situation, there is no better choice and no worse choice.
All choices are equally justifiable and equally moral, depending on your perspective.
It's not moral relativism to say that a person who murders babies should be put to death, but a baby should not be put to death.
That's not moral relativism.
That's saying that people are responsible for their actions.
The best argument against the death penalty is that it is unequally applied, that it is applied after too long, that there's a possibility of making mistakes.
Those are all good arguments against the death penalty.
The principled argument that you should not execute anyone for any reason is something with which I heartily disagree.
If somebody rapes and murders a five-year-old, that person shouldn't just die.
That person should be put to death seven times and then burn in hell for eternity.
Benjamin says, Ben, often you guys at the Daily Wire complain about the double standards on the left.
What are the conservative double standards we need to be careful of?
Well, I mean, obviously there are people on the right who are willing to justify behavior by President Trump.
They would never, they would never justify if that behavior were on the left.
That is the most obvious.
There are also certain I would say that on the right, there's a certain willingness to engage in an affirmative action belief that we ought to give more value to certain opinions because of the speaker, which is something I generally disagree with.
The identity of the speaker should bear no relevance to the efficacy or use of what the person is saying.
There are people on the right who, again, will change their standards of objectivity when it comes to folks on the left.
Those are the ones that come to mind.
I'm sure I could come up with ten more.
I think that political partisanship, as I've said before, is a hell of a drug.
And I think that people are willing to blind themselves to basic double standards out of lack of ability to comprehend cognitive dissonance.
Let's see.
One more.
Linda says, Hi from Australia.
Can you do a Jordan Peterson impersonation?
Actually, I did one.
I went to a Jordan event in L.A.
He and Dave Rubin invited me to stop by, and I did a little bit of a Jordan Peterson impersonation.
It was more in content than in style, but I walked on stage and I presented Dave Rubin with a cupcake because there was this big controversy over whether I would bake a cake for Dave Rubin's wedding.
As a religious Jew, the answer is no.
Dave is gay.
I'm not going to participate in a same-sex wedding.
Am I willing to bake a cupcake Or a cake for Dave?
Sure.
I love Dave.
Dave's great.
He's my friend.
Why wouldn't I bake a cake for him?
So I brought a cake on stage.
A cupcake on stage.
And then I said that I had also brought a cake for Jordan Peterson.
But it was a metaphorical cake.
It was so bloody metaphorical.
That's the importance of the cake.
What you have to understand is that a real cake is instantiated with work and a reality that doesn't really reflect the underlying hardship of life.
Cakes are too sweet.
They don't really take into account how difficult and bloody important life is.
Life is about struggle.
Life is about understanding that we work and then we die, but the work is what's truly important.
And that's why a metaphorical cake is so good.
Until you understand the struggle of the metaphorical cake, you don't deserve the real cake.
That's more of a content Jordan Peterson impersonation.
I can't really do the accent.
I'm not great with Canadian accents.
I mean, I'm not great with any of my impersonations.
Let's be frank about this.
Some of them are slightly better than mediocre.
My Obama is pretty good, but my Jordan is not great.
The content, though, is not terrible.
Okay, time for a couple of things that I like.
So, thing I like number one.
So, my sister, Abigail Roth, opened CPAC today.
And forget your politics, whatever your politics are.
She is an immensely talented human being.
Here she was singing the Star-Spangled Banner to open CPAC this morning.
O say can you see, by the dawn's early light, What so proudly we hailed at the twilight's last gleaming?
Whose broad stripes and bright stars through the perilous fight So Abbey is immensely talented, obviously.
She went to the Metropolitan School of Opera on scholarship.
She had a full scholarship, full ride at USC in opera.
She's an incredibly talented human being.
You can follow her on Twitter, at ClassicallyAbbey, and she does all sorts of kind of makeup videos and classical music stuff, and she really is an incredibly talented person.
So you should go check that out.
Speaking of incredibly talented people, Sadly, Andre Previn passed away yesterday.
Andre Previn is one of the most talented people of the 20th and 21st centuries.
He was a pianist, a conductor, a composer, and he really started early.
I mean, he was already working for the Hollywood studios while he was in high school and arranging music.
He was a composer-conductor for MGM when he was 18 years old.
He had an amazing career in classical music.
He was responsible for arranging some of the great MGM pictures of all time, among them, I believe, American in Paris.
Here is Andre Previn playing and conducting Rhapsody in Blue.
Rhapsody
in Blue Incredibly talented guy.
He won four Academy Awards.
He scored Gigi in 1958.
He scored Porgy and Bess in 1959.
You're not allowed to mention Porgy and Bess anymore because it's very bad.
Even though it's one of the great works of American art of all time by George Gershwin, we're not allowed to mention Porgy and Bess because it has to do with race.
And then he also won best score for Irma La...
Adaptation or treatment for Irma LaDuce and also for 1964's My Fair Lady, immensely talented human being and also a terrific composer.
So you can go check out a lot of Andre Previn's work on YouTube.
Go check it out in tribute to him today.
Okay, time for a quick thing that I hate.
I hate.
So final word on the excreble Ilhan Omar, who truly deserves the accolade.
Now, I've called Michael Knowles excreble in joke, in jest.
Ilhan Omar is truly an excreble human being.
She proved that today when she said that she would not recognize the interim president of Venezuela.
So just to get this straight, she's very much against Israeli dictatorship and Trump's dictatorship, but actual dictators who slaughter people in the streets and also make sure their citizens eat dogs, those people should remain, according to Ilhan Omar, at least in Venezuela.
We are threatening intervention.
We're sending humanitarian aid that is in the guise of, you know, eventually invading this country and the people of the country do not want us there.
You don't support, like your fellow Democrats and like the US government does and the Canadian government does, you don't support the leader of the opposition as being the president right now, not President Maduro?
Absolutely not.
Absolutely not.
So, by the way, this is a lie that the United States is on the verge of military intervention in Venezuela.
One of the reasons that people are recognizing Juan Guaido is to create an incentive for Maduro to leave.
She is siding against that because she thinks America is a nefarious force in the world.
Because she believes that Maduro is more legitimate, apparently, than Guaido.
So she'd prefer that pressure not be applied to Maduro.
She'd prefer that everything just be left alone.
But we're supposed to believe that this fresh face of the American Congress is supposed to be good for the country?
That she's good for American principles?
Sure, sure.
But don't worry, the Democrats aren't extreme in any way.
All righty, we'll be back here later today for two more hours.
This is why you should subscribe.
Or alternatively, we will see you here on Monday and bring you all the updates.
I'm Ben Shapiro.
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.
The Ben Shapiro Show is a Daily Wire production.
▲
Export Selection