All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 13, 2020 - The Ben Shapiro Show
57:00
The Bernie Sanders Administration | Ep. 953
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
The media enter a state of denial after Bernie seizes control of the Democratic primary lead.
AOC and Bernie are at odds, and we examine Bernie's platform in detail.
I'm Ben Shapiro.
This is the Ben Shapiro Show.
Today's show is sponsored by ExpressVPN.
Don't let others track what you do.
Keep yourself safe at expressvpn.com slash Ben.
We're going to get to everything Bernie related in a moment and there will be a lot to talk about with regard to Bernie Sanders.
I do have to note that President Trump now seems to see Michael Bloomberg as his chief rival for the presidency.
The reason I say this is because Trump is focusing a lot On Michael Bloomberg on his Twitter feed.
Now, maybe that's because Bloomberg is under Trump's skin and Trump is under Bloomberg's skin.
The way that Trump is going after Michael Bloomberg is by calling him short.
Now, as somebody who is familiar with this particular tactic, I will say I do find it kind of obnoxious because, honestly, like...
So what?
Like seriously, so what?
But this is President Trump's favorite thing to do.
Apparently it does get under Michael Bloomberg's skin.
Maggie Haberman of the New York Times reported that actually Michael Bloomberg, believe it or not, lied on his driver's license at one point about his own height, which is never a particularly good look.
But President Trump, yesterday he tweeted out, Mini Mike Bloomberg is a loser who has money but can't debate and has zero presence, you will see.
He reminds me of a tiny version of Jeb Low Energy Bush.
I love that Jeb is just standing over here in the corner like, what did I do, man?
And Trump's just swiping at him.
Just getting completely sideswiped.
Jeb Bush is just the guy who's jogging along the street and Trump just opens that passenger side door as he's driving along the street and bam, just smacks Jeb for no reason.
He reminds me of a tiny version of Jeb Low Energy Bush, but Jeb has more political skill and has treated the black community much better than many, which is his new name for Michael Bloomberg as he calls him many.
This prompted Michael Bloomberg to come back at President Trump.
Actually, President Trump had a follow-up tweet to that.
We can go back for one second.
President Trump did a follow-up tweet.
He said, Minimike is a 5'4", mass of dead energy.
Everything's stupid, man.
It's so stupid.
Mini Mike is a 5'4 massive dead energy who does not want to be on the debate stage with these professional politicians.
No boxes, please.
That, of course, is a reference to the fact that Michael Bloomberg at at least one press conference had an Apple box that he stood on.
He hates crazy Bernie and will, with enough money, possibly stop him.
Bernie's people will go nuts.
So Trump, obviously, is trying to gin up A lot of conflict between the Bernie people and the Bloomberg people.
Believe me, that doesn't need any ginning up.
That's going to emerge on its own.
Bloomberg, for his part, then responded to Trump by saying, President Trump, we know many of the same people in New York behind your back.
They laugh at you and call you a carnival barking clown.
They know you inherited a fortune and squandered it with stupid deals and incompetence.
I have the record and the resources to defeat you.
And I will.
And this, of course, has got the Democrats all hot and bothered.
I mean, wow, Michael Bloomberg saying that he's a con man and a liar.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Again, all of this is childish crap, obviously.
But Trump does see Bloomberg as sort of his lead rival at the moment.
And the fact that he is and the fact that Bloomberg is willing to spend as much money as it takes in order to do some damage is Is something that has the Trump team at least awake nights.
Okay, in a second we're going to get to everything Bernie Sanders related because there is some Bernie Sanders news.
We'll get to that in just one second.
First, let's talk about the earphones you are using to listen to this show.
Are you using the earbuds from 1984 that have the wires attached to them?
You know, the ones where you take them out, put them in your pocket, you wrap them up, then when you unwrap them they are all tangled and there's no way to extricate them.
Or are you using earbuds that don't quite fit your ear properly because they're one-size-fits-all?
What you really should have is a great pair of earbuds from Raycon.
Raycon just released their best model yet, the E25s.
They have six hours of playtime, seamless Bluetooth pairing, more bass, and more compact design that gives you a nice noise-isolating fit.
Raycon's wireless earbuds are incredibly comfortable.
They are perfect for on-the-go listening and for taking phone calls.
I have Raycon earbuds, and what's great about them is that they come with this kind of metal card, and it has on it a variety of fits for the Raycon earbuds, so it'll fit your ear perfectly.
Unlike some of your other wireless options, Raycon earbuds are both stylish and discreet.
No dangling wires, no stems.
They come in a variety of colors.
Now is the time to get the latest and greatest from Raycon.
Get 15% off your order today.
That's B-U-I-R-A-Y-C-O-N-dot-com-slash-ben for 15% off Raycon wireless earbuds.
Go check them out right now at buyraycon.com-slash-ben for 15% off buyraycon.com-slash-ben.
Really a great set of earbuds that are not going to cost you a fortune.
Okay, well, while President Trump is worried about Michael Bloomberg, Bernie Sanders continues to lead the Democratic field.
And the polling in Nevada, again, does not exist.
This is one of the big problems, is that Nevada is notoriously difficult to poll.
It's, again, a caucus state.
Right now, the latest poll still is from January 11th, which is not going to reflect reality.
The widespread sort of wisdom, conventional wisdom, is that Bernie is leading in Nevada, which would make a lot of sense.
But there was a major union, the Culinary Union, yesterday that came out and bashed Bernie.
Amy Klobuchar is now spending some money in the state.
A surprise win by Amy Klobuchar could really throw a wrench into things, for example, because now you would have a real split in the moderate lane.
If Pete Buttigieg were to win Nevada, then he would presumably be seen As sort of the frontrunner outside of Bloomberg for that moderate leadership.
In the national polling average, however, Bernie Sanders has now pulled ahead.
So Bernie is about, in the betting odds, a 41% favorite in the betting odds.
Michael Bloomberg is standing at second at 28.6, Buttigieg at 15.1, and Biden has fallen all the way down into single digits in the betting markets at 9.2%.
Over at 538, to give you the update over there, on their estimates for who is going to take the nomination, Right now, Bernie has about a 1-in-3 shot of winning the nomination.
I guess they just updated this, so a 2-in-5 shot, about a 38% chance of winning the nomination.
Second?
No one.
Second is that they go into the convention without anyone having won a majority of the delegates.
Again, that is a significant possibility given the fact that most of the Democratic primaries, if not all of them, are split by proportional representation.
So that means that Bernie could win a state and he doesn't take all the delegates.
Like for example, right now, Pete Buttigieg actually has the delegate lead on Bernie, because he won one more delegate than Bernie did in Iowa, and they tied in New Hampshire in terms of the delegates.
Joe Biden, in that 538 estimate, still has about a 1-in-6 shot of winning a majority of delegates.
Bloomberg is down at 1-in-30, but he's the one who's been rising fast.
The reason that he's not higher is because he's skipping so many of the early primaries.
Okay, so Bernie, right now, he is the frontrunner, and the media just refused to accept this.
They refused to accept this.
Joe Biden is basically admitting this at this point, right?
Joe Biden is now having to campaign on.
Guys, I'm over here.
I'm not dead.
Not dead, guys.
Like, I'm not dead, please.
Please don't leave me here.
Please, guys.
Please don't leave me here.
Here's Joe Biden's new ad.
No one said the road would be easy.
Well, actually, you kind of said the road would be easy.
Like, that was sort of the widespread impression is that the road would be easy.
And as it turns out, people realize that you are not an alive human.
We have a tremendous opportunity to take the next great step forward.
We don't feel no ways tired.
We've come too far from where we started.
Nobody told me the road would be easy.
And I don't believe he brought me this far to stop now.
You don't like what's going on in this country, you only have one thing to do.
Work.
Together we can and will win.
Take back this country now.
There's nothing I like better than than Democrats who dropped the I'm not in no ways tired line.
You remember Hillary Clinton did this back when she was in the Senate in New York and she was running for the presidency.
She went to a southern black church and she started dropping into an inflected accent in order to draw particular support from the black community.
It's always weird when people like Joe Biden do that.
It's a very odd thing.
But Biden is fading fast.
And that means that Bernie, who's the only other person in the race with significant name recognition, except for Bloomberg, who again, is not getting in until March 3rd, right?
I mean, the Super Tuesday states in which Bloomberg is actually competing aren't coming for another three weeks.
Okay, with all of that said, this means that Bernie is the front runner and the media just refused to accept it.
So they cannot handle the idea that this octogenarian socialist is actually the leader of the Democratic Party.
So Chuck Todd, last night, he was talking about New Hampshire winners and the national poll leadership, and he said, I don't see Bernie as the frontrunner.
Is there any frontrunner right now?
Like, sure, he's won the first two states, and sure, he is favored to win Nevada, and sure, he's pulling second in South Carolina and has the most money, and sure, he has the national poll lead, but is he really the frontrunner, or do we just have no frontrunner?
Some wishful thinking here from Chuck Todd.
I don't know why some people, I feel like the only people that are going out on the limb and calling Bernie Sanders a frontrunner, they have other reasons to call him a frontrunner.
Feels like there's no frontrunner right now.
One person leads delegates.
One person has a lock on a chunk of the party.
Well, we don't know where this goes.
Is he the frontrunner?
He's certainly not getting the press at a frontrunner.
And the problem is... I don't understand how Bertie is considered a frontrunner.
This is a guy that had more... More people showed up to the polls.
Highest turnout ever, and his percentage went down that up.
Okay, but he's still the frontrunner.
I mean, like, what else are you gonna call him?
He's won the only two primaries that have taken place so far.
He's gonna win the third.
He may win the fourth.
And he is going to have the delegate lead.
He already has the popular vote lead.
Of course he's the frontrunner.
Just because Chuck Todd doesn't like it doesn't mean that he's not the frontrunner.
He clearly is.
Jim Messina, a former Obama campaign guy.
Jim Messina did the same thing.
He says, you know, it's so funny to watch the left scurry for who's the big winner from New Hampshire.
Obviously, Bernie is the big winner from New Hampshire, right?
There are other people who are making moves.
Klobuchar moved up.
Buttigieg got a bump from Iowa.
But the big winner is the guy who won.
I mean, can we be real about this for a second?
The guy who won would be the big winner.
But here's Jim Messina saying, well, maybe the big winner is Michael Bloomberg.
Okay, Michael Bloomberg did have a good night in New Hampshire because the more confused the race is, the more the guy with all the cash standing in the background matters a lot.
He, again, is rising in the national polling data.
But, with that said, it's pretty obvious that the big winner from Iowa and New Hampshire would be the guy who actually won the caucuses and then won the primary.
Here's Jim Messina trying to deny reality.
The second number that I think people need to watch is, you know, over 55% of voters voted for a moderate candidate.
They said the most important issue is who can beat Donald Trump.
And that, if you're looking at that number, the big number, the big winner last night could be Mayor Bloomberg as he gets ready for Battleship Bloomberg and this unbelievable spending that's about to come our way.
He's sitting back here ready to make a case that he's the best candidate.
So we are in early days and it's going to be very interesting moving forward.
Okay, now this could get super fun.
There are a few scenarios I'm going to unspool for you as to what happens at the convention if there's a split among the delegates.
We'll get to that in just one second.
First, let us talk about your underwear.
So here's the fact.
You haven't thought about your underwear in a while, right?
You just bought some old underwear.
They weren't old when you bought them, but you bought some underwear.
Now they're old.
Now they're sagging and they're not that comfortable.
But you haven't thought about them because who thinks about their underwear?
But you're in them basically all day.
So why would you not get the best?
Once you go Tommy John, you will not go back.
There's underwear and then there's Tommy John, the revolutionary clothing brand that has redefined comfort for Americans everywhere.
To put it simply, Tommy John is all about fabric, fit and function.
Tommy John obsesses over every little detail and stitch, using proprietary fabrics that perform like nothing you have ever worn before.
As a result, Tommy John's men's and women's underwear sport a no-edgy guarantee, comfortable stay-put waistbands, a range of fabrics that are luxuriously soft, feather-light, moisture-wicking, breathable, and designed to move with you, not against you.
That means no bunching and no riding up.
Tommy John is so confident in their underwear, That if you don't love your first pair, you can get a full refund with their best pair you'll ever wear, or it's free guarantee.
You can also find them in over 1,200 retail locations across the country, including Nordstrom stores nationwide.
Tommy John, no adjustment needed.
They're great for men.
They're great for women.
My wife has Tommy John.
She loves Tommy John products.
Hurry to tommyjohn.com slash pen right now for 20% off your first order.
They grace this incredible tuchus right now.
Go check them out right now.
Tommyjohn.com slash Ben for 20% off.
Tommyjohn.com slash Ben is America's ass.
Alrighty, so in just one second, so let's get to these scenarios unspooling in the Democratic primary.
So, as I say, it is quite possible that no one goes into the convention with a majority of the delegates.
In fact, right now, as I say, 538 has that as the second most likely scenario after Bernie going in with a majority of the delegates.
So let's say that Bernie goes in with a plurality of the delegates, but let's say that he's been losing a lot of the recent primaries.
Let's say by the time we get to the end of the race, the momentum is with Michael Bloomberg.
Let's say, for example, that Michael Bloomberg now has the national polling lead over Bernie Sanders, and that he is polling better in national head-to-head matchups against President Trump.
And let's say that he very narrowly trails Bernie Sanders in terms of plurality of delegates.
And the problem is that because Bernie is a radical and because Bernie's people don't care about the Democratic Party, right?
I mean, he brought in a bunch of people who really are not typical Democrats and they've taken over the party.
He's got the same systemic advantage that Trump had in 2016, which is to say, if they had tried to take the nomination away from Trump, A lot of Trump's voters would have just walked from the Republican Party.
Bernie could do exactly the same thing and then the Democrats lose.
So if Bernie walks in with the delegate lead, there's very little shot that he walks out without the delegate lead.
But what if Bernie finishes a close second?
What if Bernie finishes a close second in the delegates and nobody actually has a majority?
Bernie could play the same card.
Bernie could say, listen, I was jobbed by the Democratic Party again.
They keep trying to screw us.
And so I'm just not going to back whoever this is or my support will be soft.
But I'm not going to go further than that.
And so Bernie does have a lot of weight, simply because, number one, he's doing well, but number two, because he and his supporters are indeed so radical.
So this is a disaster area for the Democratic Party, because even a competitive Bernie means a real problem for the Democratic Party.
What they really need is for someone to blow Bernie out, or at least to defeat Bernie so solidly, at least as solidly as Hillary Clinton did, so that he can't complain that he was jobbed out of the nomination.
Now, there is some conflict in Bernie-land, according to Anthony Leonardi, reporting for the Washington Examiner.
Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders and the leader of the Squad are reportedly not seeing eye-to-eye on the campaign trail.
New York Representative AOC is reportedly frustrating the Sanders campaign during her appearances at the Socialist campaign rallies.
While Sanders was occupied in the Senate during the impeachment trial of Trump, AOC subbed in for him.
However, she did not mention the candidate by name during a January rally, though she endorsed him last October.
So she's going around doing the I'm AOC and I'm special routine, and she completely forgets that Bernie is apparently part of this whole thing, like sponsoring her to be on the campaign trail.
Vanity Fair reported that Sanders' campaign manager, Faiz Shakir, expressed his frustration to AOC's campaign manager over texts, saying her immigration stances were too extreme.
In fact, AOC is making him look bad.
Why?
Because she's going out there and saying we should just have wildly open borders.
Even for Bernie, she's saying the quiet part out loud.
There's not a lot of the quiet part with Bernie.
Bernie tends to say the quiet part out loud.
But AOC just goes out there and spills it.
So Bernie will say, we need a more tolerant and fair immigration system.
And then AOC will be like, that means open borders, guys!
Like, wow!
And Bernie's like, why would you say that?
That is not a good campaign tactic.
And so this sort of split is now moving out into the open.
And Iowa Rallies, she said, organizing is about tipping people off if you start to see that ICE and CBP are in communities to try and keep people safe.
That is overtly violating the law, right?
Calling on people to run away from the cops.
You're now complicit in a criminal act.
She says, I'm not here to reform some of these systems when we talk about immigration.
I'm here because Senator Sanders is actually committed to breaking up ICE and CBP.
That's why I'm here.
By the way, if you think that that doesn't end up in an ad, you are absolutely wrong.
President Trump runs that ad from now until the election.
AOC saying that the reason she's endorsing Sanders is because she wants people to avoid law enforcement and because she wants to completely break up both ICE and the CBP, which means effectively no law enforcement on the border.
Some in the Sanders campaign, according to the Washington Examiner, were reportedly frustrated by AOC's comments discouraging cooperation with federal authorities, saying they were off track of Bernie's stance, which opposes open borders.
Meanwhile, AOC's team was upset because Sanders accepted comedian Joe Rogan's endorsement.
Following blowback, Sanders' spokeswoman distanced the campaign from Rogan, but noted the campaign will need a big tent of supporters to defeat President Trump.
In addition to AOC's endorsement, of course, Sanders is supported by Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib.
So there's a little bit of trouble in socialist paradise.
The bigger trouble in socialist paradise is that eventually, eventually, somebody is actually going to look at Bernie Sanders' plans.
And that's the part where it's going to get real awkward, because so far he's been shielded from that.
The media keep making this mistake with Democratic candidates.
They did it with Hillary Clinton, they did it with Joe Biden, and now they're doing it with Bernie.
And that is, they shield the Democrats from criticism.
They don't do investigative, like basic investigative tactics.
They don't ask basic investigative questions of these candidates.
They go after Republicans hammer and tongs.
But when it comes to Democrats, when it comes to Hillary, Hillary was off limits.
And then when Trump hits her with the kitchen sink, it's like, oh my God, where did that come from?
And the American public are made aware of new information.
See, when it comes to the economy, I believe it was George Gilder who likened the economy to a phone line, that the economy works best when the phone line is clear, meaning that the rules are predictable, they don't change, there's not a lot of static on the line, there's not a lot of new information that's being added to the static on the line.
Okay, well, the same thing holds true in a political campaign.
The best thing in a political campaign is when there's no new information that is added, right?
This is why Trump has sort of a systemic advantage here, because Trump is a mud monster.
The more information you add, the less it matters.
Everybody knows everything about Trump.
There's not much you can say about Trump that hurts him.
Okay, but if you're Hillary Clinton and the media have been trying to portray you as clean as the driven snow, pure as the driven snow, and then it turns out you're not, that's gonna hurt you.
The same thing happened with Joe Biden.
I think this Hunter Biden thing hurt Joe specifically because the media, even as they reported the Hunter Biden stuff, it was originally reported in the New Yorker, tried to cover for it as not that big a deal.
And then Trump hit him with the kitchen sink.
Well, they've done the same thing with Bernie.
They've shielded him up to now.
And now they're looking around going, whoops.
Oops, we'll get into Bernie Sanders' plans, his record, the people he associates with in just one second.
First, let us talk about how you make your employment base better.
So let's say that once upon a time, a long time ago, you had a producer named Mathis, and he was just terrific.
One of your favorite people, Mathis.
He was just great.
And every day he would come in, do an excellent job on the show.
And let's say that he works really hard, like, worked weekends, worked nights, like, really worked hard to the point where he became, like, one of the top producers at the company, like, a person overseeing tons of other people at the company.
And let's say that he then forgot all the little people.
Let's say that he forgot about, you know, the basic tasks, like, making sure that the sign on your set is not crooked, like, it's not just hanging crookedly behind you and making the show look like garbage.
Let's say that he forgot about all the little tasks, the little things that make things go.
Well, you might think to yourself, well, maybe I need something different.
And that's when you check out ZipRecruiter.com.
By using ZipRecruiter's screening questions to filter candidates, you can find it easy to focus on the best candidates.
In fact, after you post your job on ZipRecruiter, you will find that you are getting qualified applicants incredibly quickly.
With results like that, it's no wonder four out of five employers who post on ZipRecruiter get a quality candidate within the very first day.
See why ZipRecruiter is effective for businesses of all sizes.
Try ZipRecruiter for free at our web address, ZipRecruiter.com slash DailyWire.
That's ZipRecruiter.com slash D-A-I-L-Y-W-I-R-E.
ZipRecruiter is indeed the smartest way to hire.
And don't worry, Mathis's job isn't in danger.
I wouldn't fire him just in time for his wedding, but if I were to do so, I would go check out ZipRecruiter.com slash DailyWire and make the magic happen for all of us at the DailyWire and make sure that we don't forget the little people.
Alrighty, so.
The Bernie Sanders platform is the real story here.
And again, the media have made a big boo-boo.
And now they are in emergency mode.
They're like, oh, maybe we should have talked about the fact that Bernie is an octogenarian socialist loon bag.
Maybe we should have talked about all of that.
Yeah, it's a little late now, guys, because now the only person who's going to talk about it...
is Donald Trump in the general election, and it's going to hurt.
So let's talk for a second just about the cost of some of Bernie Sanders' proposals.
So standforamericanow.com.
They've done a good job of adding up Sanders' expensive proposals.
They're basing this on Brian Riedel of the Manhattan Institute.
Riedel found that in total, Bernie Sanders is proposing $97.5 trillion of new spending in the next 10 years alone.
In the next 10 years alone.
So, let's think about this.
In the next 10 years, we've been spending about $4 trillion a year.
The United States government will spend probably on the order of $40 trillion.
Bernie Sanders is talking about tripling the budget.
Not doubling the budget, tripling the budget.
He's talking about adding another $100 trillion.
To that spend.
Okay, that's not incorporating the current spend.
It's an additional $97.5 trillion.
That means $137.5 trillion spent by the federal government as opposed to $40 trillion spent by the federal government.
Where does all this come from?
Well, according to Brian Riedel, his Medicare for All plan, people keep ballparking this thing at $32 trillion.
First of all, there has never yet been a government program that has come anywhere close to the ballpark figure originally put out for it.
And when you hear people on the left say things, well, it will save us money over the long haul because people are spending more in the private sector than they're spending in the public sector.
Well, that's like saying that if you nationalize all of the food distribution in the United States, that you could save money over private food, over how much Americans spend on private food.
You're comparing apples and oranges.
What Americans spend in the private sector compared to the public sector spending money on behalf of Americans is a very different thing because the quality is different, because the choice is different.
If the government were to give rations to the American people, we could save all sorts of money on the kinds of things that we are spending money on in terms of food in the United States.
Sure, a lot of restaurants would go out of business.
Sure, you wouldn't have a lot of choices between Indian food and Thai food tonight.
Sure, you'd basically just get like a ration kit.
But we could save all sorts of money, right?
And then you could classify it as money savings, as monetary savings.
That's what Bernie does, right?
He says, what we're going to do is we're going to take all the private spending people do on healthcare, and that includes you paying out of pocket to do a surgery that you need quickly so you're not waiting six months in line like you do in Canada.
That means being able to see a doctor fast.
It means being able to get drugs on demand.
It means being able to develop new drugs.
Bernie's like, it'll be cheaper if we just nationalize it and spend less money on it.
Literally true of every single commodity in the American private market.
Seriously true of all of these things.
Now, I know there are communists out there like, ooh, Ben's finally getting the point.
No, I'm making the point, if you notice, that the quality of government-run things is garbage-y generally.
If the government decided that the government was simply going to provide everybody with a 1989 Apple computer, Okay, we'd all save tons of money on tech, wouldn't we?
You wouldn't be shelling out for that brand new computer, but everybody would have an iMac from 1997.
I mean, don't you like how it has, like, a blue case back?
It's beautiful!
This is what Bernie is proposing, and then he's calling it saving money.
First of all, the chances are that over time, you're not going to end up saving all that much money, because either what ends up happening is rationing, or you have to increase the amount of the reimbursements that are coming from the government.
This is why when Bernie says that you're going to have exactly the same level of care, exactly the same doctor through Medicare, that you have through not Medicare, that is not true, which is why Medicare Advantage is a thing that many, many seniors, most seniors, take advantage of.
They buy additional coverage through Medicare Advantage.
Medicare for All, when he says it's going to cost $32 trillion over the next 10 years, it ain't.
It's going to cost $40, says Brian Riedel.
His climate plan, $16.3 trillion.
Guarantee, a full-time government job, right?
This is one of his things that has been glossed over.
He wants a full-time federal jobs program.
A full-time federal jobs program.
Okay, so if you lose your job, the government will just hire you straight out.
That would cost about $30 trillion.
He wants to cancel all student debt and free college for everyone in the country, which of course is an idiotic idea when we don't actually track people.
Like if you were going to make the case that you were going to have free college, but that everybody when they are 16 years old tests into a particular sector, and then you go into the most economically efficient sector, at least you can make a case.
That at that point people aren't going to useless schooling for no reason, right?
They have this sort of system in many countries in Europe, they have it in Israel.
If you are making the case that people are going to be able to choose what to major in and that we are supposed to subsidize some middle-upper class white girl to major in lesbian dance theory...
We're supposed to cover the cost of that.
That's an idiotic idea.
It's actually a regressive tax.
That's going to cost $3 trillion.
He wants to expand Social Security, which again, Social Security is bankrupt, guys.
We are putting out more money year on year than we are taking in in Social Security.
And he wants a federal housing guarantee, which he says is only going to cost $2.5 trillion, but it's going to cost more than that.
And then there are a bunch of other new programs.
There's paid family leave.
He wants to spend a trillion bucks on infrastructure, which is low.
He says that he wants $400 billion for public school teacher salaries.
That is low.
He wants $800 billion for K-12 education.
That is low.
Okay, every statistic that is put out here is going to be blown out.
There is yet to be a government program that comes in under budget.
It does not exist.
It does not exist.
As President Reagan once said, government programs are the only guarantee of everlasting life.
They do not die, they only grow, they never shrink.
So the total result is $97.5 trillion in new spending, according to Brian Riedel, 70% of the U.S.
economy on a year-on-year basis spent on government programs, 70% of the entire GDP of the United States every year, 90 trillion bucks added to the national debt, and 50% of the entire workforce employed by the government.
That sounds perfectly sustainable to me.
Does it sound sustainable to you?
I mean, I don't see the problem.
After all, bread lines have bread.
What is the problem?
We can all subsist on dreams.
Haven't you ever seen Hook?
Hook is a great movie.
Do you remember the scene where they're all eating air, but they use their imaginations, and then they have a food fight with their imaginations?
Peter, you're doing it, Peter.
Remember that?
Remember?
We could all do that.
You don't have to have actual food.
You could have imagination food.
Sure, the pie is fixed and there's not enough pie for everybody, but if you imagine a pie that is larger, then it simply exists in your imagination.
So here's the problem with all of this.
It's all crap.
Okay, so how do we know how radical Bernie is?
Because again, the media refuses to talk about this.
They simply gloss right over it.
So let's talk about the groups that he is using in order to push forward the prospective Bernie Sanders administration.
So the Washington Post has an article today that we are going to get to momentarily.
We'll get to that in just one second.
First, let us talk about something awkward.
What is that awkward thing?
That awkward thing is erectile dysfunction.
Yeah, that's something awkward to talk about.
But if you are going to get it taken care of, and you should, the people you need to go to are the people over at Roman.
In many cases, people have to wait around 29 days to see a doctor in major U.S.
cities, basically a month.
Well, if you're dealing with a condition like erectile dysfunction, hair loss, or cold sores, you want treatment ASAP, which is why our friends at Roman have spent years building a digital platform that can connect you with a doctor licensed in your state, all from the comfort of home.
Roman makes it convenient to get the treatment you need on your schedule.
Just click our link Complete a free online visit and you'll hear back from a U.S. licensed physician within 24 hours.
If the doctor decides the treatment is right for you, Roman's pharmacy can ship your medication to you with free two-day shipping.
You also get free unlimited follow-ups with your doctor anytime you have questions or you want to adjust your treatment plan.
Ooh, private health care.
With Roman, there are no commitments and you can cancel anytime.
It's not fun dealing with certain medical issues, but they are medical issues and you should deal with them.
Otherwise, they're not going to go away on their own.
So if you're struggling with ED or hair loss or cold sores or other issues, go to GetRoman.com slash Ben for a free online visit and free two-day shipping.
That's GetRoman.com slash Ben for a free online visit, free two-day shipping.
G-E-T-R-O-M-A-N.com slash Ben.
GetRoman.com slash Ben.
Okay, so back to Bernie Sanders and the people who are staffing up the potential Bernie Sanders administration.
So, there is an article in the Washington Post, it is titled, as Bernie Sanders ascends, his potential White House approach to the economy comes into focus.
So here's what it says.
Interviews with more than a dozen internal and external advisors reveal how his campaign team is squarely focusing on locking up the Democratic primary, but his success had led others to try to gauge what might be next.
Many of them spoke on the condition of anonymity because the process remains so fluid and many decisions have not been made.
Some parts of Sanders's policy agenda remain unchanged from 2016.
Advisors say his Medicare for All and $15 an hour minimum wage would probably top his list of first priorities.
He has expanded his 2016 agenda by adding policies such as the Green New Deal, a housing guarantee for all Americans, the elimination of all student debt held in the country, and an aggressive wealth tax on multimillionaires and billionaires.
Critics say it's unclear whether Sanders' team is up to the daunting legislative and policy challenges ahead, while supporters see a major asset in their rejection of traditional democratic channels and policy priorities.
Sanders has hired three former aides to Harry Reid, who had a knack for holding the line during public debates while also cutting deals with Republicans at opportune times.
But Sanders has retained longtime advisors in key roles.
Some of those advisors, by the way, include Jane Sanders, his wife, who has helped craft the 2020 campaign's climate and housing policies, which is great, after she ran a university directly into the ground.
I mean, like, a plane from 20,000 feet directly into the ground is how she ran a university in Vermont.
Let's definitely put her in charge of climate and housing policy in the United States.
Okay, so his advisors apparently are clashing with major democratic think tanks.
His policy team, working with national political director Annalilia Mejia, has instead consulted with environmental and immigration activist organizations, such as Sunrise Movement and the Center for Popular Democracy.
It has also worked with labor-funded groups, such as the Economic Policy Institute and the Democracy Collaborative, an international organization connected to leftist Jeremy Corbyn's Labor Party in Britain, and new think tanks like the People's Policy Project, founded in 2017 and funded by small-dollar donations.
These groups, regarded as marginal players among Washington insiders, could gain new prominence should Sanders run the table in the election.
Okay, so let's talk about who some of these people are.
Let's talk about some of these groups, because we just ran through a list of groups, and when you group them all together, it just sounds like, oh, people who are sort of outside the box.
Let's talk about who these groups are.
So let us begin with the Sunrise Movement, right?
It is mentioned here that he is consulting with environmental and activist organizations like the Sunrise Movement.
So who exactly are the Sunrise Movement?
The Sunrise Movement is this environmentalist group, and here's what it says on their website.
They stump for what they call the Green New Deal.
And they overtly link to AOC's ridiculous videos on the Green New Deal, in which she claims that she's going to make America basically run entirely carbon-free while she becomes a senator.
I mean, really, this is a video.
We played this on the show.
Sunrise Movement posts this video on their website.
Here is that ridiculous video.
I think there was something similar with the Green New Deal.
We knew that we needed to save the planet, and that we had all the technology to do it.
But people were scared.
They said it was too big, too fast, not practical.
I think that's because they just couldn't picture it yet.
Anyways, I'm getting ahead of myself.
By committing to universal rights like healthcare and meaningful work for all, we stop being so scared of the future.
We stop being scared of each other.
And we found our shared purpose.
I mean, this is insanity, right?
Her Green New Deal is basically free crap for everyone, up to and including free healthcare for everybody, free college tuition for everybody, free housing for everybody.
It's all because we're scared, guys.
You're doing it, Peter!
Imagine!
We were just so scared.
It was fear.
It wasn't like the realities of reality.
It was fear that stopped it.
So the Sunrise Movement, post this.
They post this, and here's what they say.
The Green New Deal is a 10-year plan to mobilize every aspect of American society to 100% clean and renewable energy by 2030, a guaranteed living wage job for anyone who needs one, and a just transition for both workers and frontline communities.
So, full government employment program, and we are going to be completely carbon-free by 2030.
If you believe this, boy, do I have a bridge to sell you.
I mean, my goodness.
Entirely carbon-free in 10 years?
Good luck with that, gang.
And by the way, who are the Sunrise Movement?
They're the same people who are taking children and put them in Dianne Feinstein's office.
Even Dianne Feinstein, who is very far to the left.
She's been my senator nearly my entire life here in California.
I'm not a fan.
But the one time I became a fan of Dianne Feinstein was during this little exchange where the Sunrise Movement, these obnoxious human beings, brought in a bunch of children and had the children try to scold Dianne Feinstein, which resulted in Dianne Feinstein being like, you can't vote, shut up, kid.
The government is supposed to be for the people and by the people and all for the people.
You know what's interesting about this group?
I've been doing this for 30 years.
I know what I'm doing.
You come in here and you say it has to be my way or the highway.
I don't respond to that.
I've gotten elected.
I just ran.
I was elected by almost a million vote plurality.
And I know what I'm doing.
So, you know, maybe people should listen a little bit.
The Sunrise Movement is so ridiculous that even Dianne Feinstein, who's as far to the left as it's possible to be in Congress, even Dianne Feinstein is like, you guys are, you guys are a joke.
Okay, so that's one of the groups that Bernie Sanders is counting on.
Another of the groups that Bernie Sanders is counting on is the so-called Center for Popular Democracy.
So if you look at their website, they have a list of their values.
Some of their values include, quote, We will only be free when we dismantle the criminal justice system that steals childhood, murders black and brown people, and locks up people for being poor.
Okay, that's another one of the advisory groups to Bernie Sanders.
They believe that the criminal justice system in the United States simply locks people up for being impoverished, murders black and brown people, and steals childhoods.
And they want to completely dismantle the criminal justice system.
They want every person who was formerly incarcerated to vote.
They want a nation that quote-unquote promotes peace and harmony around the world, and we will only be free when the U.S.
government ceases to instigate violence in other countries.
Right?
So they want, they believe that the United States is the great instigator of violence.
They say, together we will dream, together we will resist, together we will rise.
Okay, so another radical group.
And then, it turns out that this Center for Popular Democracy, The Center for Popular Democracy is also associated pretty closely with this guy named Gar Alperowicz.
So Gar Alperowicz, I'm trying to remember which of these groups he is associated with.
Gar Alperowicz has become sort of famous as this post-capitalist guy.
He was one of the founders of one of the groups that, the Democracy Collaborative, that's correct.
He was with the Democracy Collaborative.
So that's another one of these groups that gets named in this Bernie Sanders article, gets name-checked, the Democracy Collaborative.
Galil Perowitz is like a post-capitalist thinker, meaning that he is openly in favor of socialism, and by socialism, he really means nationalization, right?
He's pretty clear about this.
He says that it's kind of unpalatable to talk about nationalization of resources, but effectively, we should municipalize resources.
We should just have the government take over industries.
He had an article in The Nation called, Socialism is Closer Than You Think.
And here's what he writes, at the core of the traditional socialist argument has always been the judgment that democratic ownership of the nation's wealth and especially what Marx called the means of production is essential.
The question of ownership, however, has rarely been mentioned in conventional political debate.
The traditional socialist idea of nationalized industry is beyond the pale and the vast majority of progressives have so far avoided discussing alternatives to the statist socialist model.
So he doesn't actually reject the idea of nationalizing the means of production?
Of government ownership of the means of production?
Instead, he actually chastises Bernie Sanders for not being socialist enough in the nation.
This guy, this Gallup Hurwitz fellow, who, by the way, also is the leader of the Democracy Collaborative, which is one of the groups that Bernie is consulting.
In this article for The Nation written just a couple of years ago, Alperowicz says, despite his self-definition as a democratic socialist, Sanders has offered what is essentially a strong liberal or social democratic program of progressive taxation, financial regulation, single-payer health care, increased social security and income support programs, and environmental regulations.
Sanders explicitly disavowed government ownership of businesses in his major theme-setting speech at Georgetown University last November.
At the same time, says Alperowicz, new resources have become available to support the construction of a serious alternative system.
One that is socialist in content and vision, but also highly democratic and accountable in structure.
Okay, now here's the problem.
Once you suggest that people get to vote on how industry is run, it is not actually being run along the lines of the free market.
Now you are just talking about the government cramming down its own vision of how businesses should be run on business.
So you don't actually end up with a free market.
So in fact, it's not democratic because the basis of democracy is rights.
And you're saying there are no rights.
There is just what the majority wants.
So Alperovitz recommends as an alternative to state-run systems, what he calls worker-owned cooperatives, neighborhood land trucks, and municipal corporations, all democratizing ownership in one way or another, doing so in decentralized rather than statist fashion.
But if it's done without the help of government, then that is not socialism, that is just a bunch of people getting together and founding a company together, right?
When Facebook was founded, everybody who started Facebook got a share of the stock.
That amounts to like 23 billion dollars when Facebook went public, for people who started the company.
Is there anybody on the socialist left who calls Facebook a cooperative?
Or would have called Facebook a cooperative?
If you're operating in a free market situation, Through sheer power of consent.
That is no longer communism or socialism.
Socialism has to involve a state-compelled or state-sponsored component.
Otherwise, it is not the workers in charge of the means of production.
It is just, they're capitalists now.
If you own stock, socialists will call you a capitalist.
If you own stock in a company where you work, are you a socialist?
Are you a worker?
Are you labor?
Or are you capital?
In fact, that sort of division doesn't make any sense in that context, right?
I work for Daily Wire.
I am also a stock owner in Daily Wire.
Does that mean that I am a worker, or does that mean that I am a capitalist?
The only way to tell, presumably, is if not everybody owns stock in the company, and then you can make a stark division at that point.
But that is an artificial division even then, because not everybody owns stock even working for worker cooperatives.
I'll give you an example.
And this has become one of the big talking points.
You hear AOC say things like this routinely with regard to worker cooperatives.
She's like, if Jeff Bezos were great, he would just make Amazon into a worker cooperative.
Amazon is a publicly traded company.
If you want to own a piece of Amazon, you can do so right now.
Right now.
You can go over to the stock exchange and you can buy a piece of Amazon.
Okay, but just because you didn't go over and do that does not mean that Amazon is solely for the benefit of the capitalists at the top.
Everybody who owns stock is presumably a capitalist.
And all of the workers who, by the way, earn a salary, which means they're making more money off of working at Amazon, presumably, than most stockholders in Amazon.
Those people are earning money, too.
A salary is a piece of the money you earn from the company.
That is what it is.
In any case, we'll get into this in a second.
The point that I'm making is that without government subsidies, you're not talking actually about socialism.
What you're actually talking about is just a bunch of people who get together and form a company.
In many cases, you just call this an LLC.
We'll get to that in one second.
First, last week, I told you about this awesome podcast, The Cold War, what we saw over the weekend.
This podcast reached number one in history podcast number five on all of Apple podcasts.
So, Now you know.
It's not just me saying it.
It really is great.
The story is well told.
The setting is brilliantly descriptive.
It's a great listen.
It'll take you through major events like the Berlin Airlift, the Korean War, the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Space Race.
These milestones are tied together to give you a sense of the big picture, the apocalypse that never happened.
I've already released a couple episodes of this 12-part series, so you have some to catch up on.
Head on over to dailywire.com and you can start listening to this incredibly Important story.
It's really superbly told, especially when we're talking about collectivization versus free markets, individual rights versus the collective.
Okay, that was the battle of the Cold War and we should not forget it.
Go check it out right now at dailywire.com slash cold war.
Also go check out our daily wire app.
Also subscribe today over at dailywire.com.
We're the largest, fastest growing conservative podcast and radio show in the nation.
So what we're seeing right now with people like Gal Alperowitz is that, or Gar Alperowitz rather, is the attempt to paint as socialist free market activity in which people own stock in a company.
Okay, that's a free market activity.
See, I have a very stark division between socialism and not socialism.
Socialism is where the state collectivizes the means of production.
State ownership of the means of production is the core of socialism.
Okay, if a bunch of us at the company get together and found a company today, and we share the stock evenly, that's not a socialist cooperative.
Okay, that is, it isn't.
That is just us deciding to cooperate.
Socialism requires a state-inspired element.
Otherwise, you're just talking about a free market arrangement.
It is the violation of consent that socialism stands for.
If violation of consent were not required, I have no problem with any of this.
Nobody, you can't find a capitalist who would have a problem with a joint stock ownership company.
Nobody has a problem with that on the right.
So if you're declaring socialism in opposition to X, then you have to find what the X is.
If I don't oppose it, I can promise you this, if I don't oppose it, it's very difficult to call it a form of socialism.
Okay, in any case, the reason that I point this out is because these same people say, well, worker cooperatives, these are true socialism.
All true socialism has to be is worker cooperatives.
Okay, let's take an example.
Mondragon is the biggest worker co-op on planet Earth, right?
It exists in Spain, it has like 80,000 employees, and everybody in the company owns stock, and then they vote on decisions together.
There's only one problem.
According to The Guardian, 2013, Mondragon is exposed to fierce competition from developing world competitors with lower labor costs.
Its response has been to set up factories or buy companies in other parts of the world.
There are now 94 subsidiaries producing goods from Vietnam to Chile, Morocco, and Russia.
Workers at these are not co-op members.
Fewer than half of Mondragon's workforce are members, meaning there are also raw-blooded capitalists living off the labor of others.
So in other words, the rules of the market do not cease to apply when more people own stock.
Publicly traded companies, lots of people own stock.
Okay, this has been true for Mondragon for years.
It operates basically like a free market corporation.
It's just there are a bunch of people who own stock and they vote in the board elections, effectively speaking.
And here's the problem with the idea of forcing down worker-owned businesses.
If you force down worker-owned businesses, then why would I invest my own capital in a company where I don't have control over the decisions that are made about the use of that capital?
Why would I do that?
If you present to me a good business plan, then I will invest in that business plan regardless of who owns the means of production.
But if you present me a bad business plan, and this is really what Bernie wants, this is what people on the left want, they want any bad business plan to be greenlit by the government, sponsored by taxpayers, and then subsidized by taxpayers if the thing starts to go south or restrictions placed on other companies.
When they talk about worker co-ops, what they really mean is government-subsidized, sponsored, or mandated worker co-ops.
They do not mean through pure volunteerism.
Okay, one final group that Bernie has been calling upon is the People's Policy Project.
They talk extensively about various things that they want, including that the U.S.
should make a suite of reforms aimed at increasing leisure time.
They talk about a global Green New Deal, openly arguing the U.S.
should send hundreds of billions of dollars annually to the U.N.
Green Climate Fund.
Hundreds of billions of dollars annually to the U.N.
Green Climate Fund to help developing countries make clean energy transitions.
And that the policy of the United States would publicly fund early-stage green technologies and also would manage the government's equity stakes in all of these green technologies.
And they argue for a tax of 230 bucks per ton of carbon pollution.
Good luck with not destroying the economy of the United States with that, okay?
All of this is just the groups that Bernie is associated with.
Then you actually go to his website and you look at his actual agenda, and it's absolute lunacy.
I mean, absolute full-scale lunacy.
So take that Workplace Democracy Plan, right?
So he calls it a Workplace Democracy Plan.
His goal is to double union membership within his first term.
How's he gonna do that?
He's gonna mandate that companies have to deal with unions.
So you don't have a free market transaction anymore, right?
This is a violation of consent.
You are now mandating that a company deal with the union even if the company can hire people from outside the union in order to do work, which is a violation of basic free market principles and puts a bunch of people who are not in charge of the profitability of the company in charge of the company.
It would deny federal contracts to companies that pay quote-unquote poverty wages, outsource jobs overseas, engage in union busting, deny good benefits, and pay CEOs outrageous compensation packages.
In other words, federal contracts will only go to Friends of Bernie.
It will eliminate right-to-work-for-less laws, right?
So that's just right-to-work laws.
It would guarantee the right to unionize for workers historically excluded from labor protection.
So they want domestic workers to be crammed down as a unionized workforce.
So that means that if you hire a domestic worker, to take care of your ailing father, that you will have to deal with a union now in order to do that.
So he's pushing unionization forced down by the federal government.
He's pushing what he calls corporate accountability and democracy.
We will give workers an ownership stake in the companies they work for.
So he's talking about overtly seizing companies, or at least redistributing the ownership stake in companies, despite the fact that workers presumably signed up with the company with the understanding that they weren't getting stock in the company.
I mean, he is talking about completely reorganizing every facet of America's business life.
He says, while the corporate profits that presently go to a small number of ultra-wealthy families are at or near all-time high, wages as a percentage of our economy are at an all-time low.
And so he says, the establishment tells us there's no alternative.
The truth is we must develop new economic models to create jobs and increase wages and productivity across America.
He says, workers, basically companies should be forced to give ownership stakes in their companies and an equal say on corporate boards.
Okay, so let's say Daily Wire.
Again, I am a stock owner in Daily Wire.
I'm one of the co-founders of the Daily Wire.
Okay, now, Bernie comes along, he says, you have over 100 employees.
This means that 50% of your board has to be comprised of people you employ and you can't fire those people, presumably.
Do you think that anyone is going to invest in a new business?
Ever?
Why would I do that?
I'm handing over control of the business to people whose chief interest is in maximizing not the profitability, accountability, and competitiveness of the company, but in ensuring that the company spends most of its energy on the wage base.
Okay, that kills entrepreneurship.
Why would I invest in a company that I don't control?
Where if the workers decide to make a decision, Let's say that we have a choice.
The choice now is to invest a million dollars in a new innovative concept in which the workers may share or they may not share, or we can spend that million dollars on raises for everybody.
The workers very often are going to vote for the raises because they don't know they're going to be working at this company in five or ten years.
So why wouldn't they vote for the raises?
Okay, we don't have to speculate about this.
This is exactly what happened in Detroit in the 1950s and 60s when unions were largely running the major auto companies.
And then the minute that competition was available and the tariffs were lowered in the 1960s and 70s, the auto industry in the United States plummeted off a cliff.
When you place workers in opposition to capital, and then you suggest that the workers should control the capital, do you think anybody's ever going to invest in a company again in the United States?
This is not how investment works.
This is not how economics works.
It violates basic forms of consent.
Again, if workers want to get together and form their own company, they're perfectly free to do so.
It is a free country.
What Bernie is talking about is a complete reorganization crammed down by the federal government on nearly every business in America or at least on any business that is sufficiently successful to have a given number of employees.
And then there's Bernie's foreign policy.
Bernie's foreign policy is utter madness.
So he suggests that we are going to We are going to give over authority to the International Criminal Court so that we can have foreign countries judge American soldiers in war zones.
American soldiers will no longer be subject to American law.
They'll be subject to the vagaries of international law run from Brussels.
He wants us to, of course, rejoin the Iran nuclear agreement.
And his foreign policy, by the way, I will say his foreign policy page is incredibly short.
Why?
Because his foreign policy is basically, he just wants America's military to be incredibly weak.
That's all it says.
Then you have his plan with regard to churches.
Okay, so he has what he calls the LGBTQ part of this.
And he explicitly says he wants to strongly oppose any legislation that purports to protect religious liberty at the expense of others' rights.
So in other words, he wants your church to be able to be sued into the ground for not accepting same-sex marriages or transgender ideology.
That's what he would like.
This is on his website.
Bernie is a radical.
His full jobs plan.
We will enact a federal jobs guarantee Create 20 million jobs as part of the Green New Deal, which effectively means we're just going to pay people to dig holes and then fill them in again.
Barack Obama tried to do the same with so-called shovel-ready jobs.
Giant fail.
I mean, all of this is pie-in-the-sky nonsense that can only be accomplished, presumably, through massive debt and also through the seizure of the means of production.
It's the feature, not the bug.
He's not hiding the ball here.
If you think this isn't plenty for Donald Trump to attack, it is plenty for Donald Trump to attack.
Alrighty, time for some things I like and then some things that I hate.
So, things that I like today.
You know what?
I don't have any things I like.
Let's just do some things I hate.
Well, it is sort of fascinating when the mask comes off at universities and the push for racial tolerance, as it turns out, is merely just a push for racial quotas.
Good example of this happened yesterday.
Apparently, there is some public space at the University of Virginia, and a University of Virginia walked in and gave a public service announcement that in this public space, there were just too many white people, which is certainly one hell of a statement.
This is definitely accomplishing Martin Luther King's vision of a society in which we are judged by the quality of our character rather than the color of our skin.
It's people walking in and saying, too many white people in here.
This is working out beautifully for everybody.
Public service announcement!
Excuse me!
If y'all didn't know, this is the MSC, and frankly, there's just too many white people in here, and this is a space for people of color.
So just be really cognizant of the space that you're taking up, because it does make some of us POCs uncomfortable when we see too many white people in here.
It's only been open for four days, and frankly, there's the whole university for a lot of y'all to be at, and there's very few spaces for us.
So keep that in mind.
Thank you.
Okay, this is insane.
Multicultural Center, but only for not white people.
And if there are too many white people in here, get out.
Obviously, it goes without saying, reverse the races and this would be a national scandal.
But of course, we're all supposed to pretend that this sort of stuff doesn't happen and that racism is... One of the fascinating things is when people say things like, racism is not just racism, it's racism combined with power.
Therefore, because the structural hierarchies in the United States are such that white people are more powerful than black people, then that means that nobody who is of color can ever be a racist.
Okay, well, what about when it's the university and a representative of the university who is stepping into a position of power and explicitly saying white people out?
Like, wouldn't that be racism combined with power?
Or no?
Or no?
Okay, meanwhile, speaking of people saying idiotic things on the basis of intersectional identity, Ayanna Pressley got up yesterday, and she suggested that women are not equal to men in the eyes of the government, which is very weird, considering that women constitute the majority of college attendees, the majority of college graduates, that they are in prison far less than men, that they are actually the majority of the workforce at this point.
But according to Ayanna Pressley, who is sitting in Congress, Apparently women are not equal to men in the eyes of the government, which again, I'm gonna need some evidence of this one.
The American Constitution is sexist by its very design.
This country's laws have historically treated us like second-class citizens, depriving us of the right to vote, enter most jobs, and to own property.
While some of these injustices may cease to exist, we still face tremendous barriers to our full participation in society.
With tomorrow's vote, we have an opportunity to right this country's wrong and to take a stand in the name of equality.
I like that she is now linking bars on female property ownership, which so far as I'm aware have not existed for well over a century and a half in the United States.
I'm really confused as to how she is linking that with anything that has to do with today.
But this is what, by the way, so much of leftist thought is this.
So much of leftist thought is, here's a bad thing that happened two years ago.
Fast forward!
It's the same today, except without that thing, but it's the same today.
This is every Ta-Nehisi Coates essay.
Every Ta-Nehisi Coates essay is very passionate writing about something that happened in 1823, and then just fast forward to today and he's like, and now the current day equivalent is X.
And it's super dishonest.
Really, if you think that women are put upon as a general matter in American society, I would suggest that you have blinders on.
Yes, of course, sexism exists in American society.
Yes, of course, racism exists in American society.
But if the generalized idea is that women are victims in American society today, No.
Just no.
I'm sorry.
That's not correct.
That is not correct.
And especially if you're claiming there are legal barriers to women in American society today, that is certainly not correct.
So this is obviously sheer and undiluted nonsense.
But unfortunately, it is the way the Democratic Party is run these days.
And it's really ugly.
And it's on the basis of these sort of Crafted resentment that you're able to pitch a Bernie Sanders agenda, right?
If you declare that America is unfixable, if you declare that America is in essence a land of victimization, then of course you can argue on a moral level for the uprooting of that system.
See, the thing that Bernie and a lot of the left have to contend with is the fact that America is incredibly free and prosperous, that most people in America are doing incredibly well, that even the poor in America are rich by global standards, not by American standards, by global standards.
They're middle class or rich by global standards.
The poor people who live in the United States.
And so the socialists have an uphill climb to explain why we ought to uproot a system that has created more prosperity for more human beings than any system in the history of humanity and more freedom for more human beings than any system in the history of humanity.
That's a heavy lift.
So instead, what you see from people like Ayanna Pressley, And presumably from this University of Virginia rep, too, is they will say, sure, all this stuff is pretty good, but it is morally unjustifiable because of all the suffering that went before.
Therefore, we have to uproot the system.
Everything that is good is the fruit of the poisonous tree.
If we cut down the tree and we uproot the roots, then sure, we're going to lose some of that good stuff, but we will have built a better moral foundation.
This is why, in the end, the Bernie Sanders pitch has very little to do with his policy, and it has much more to do with his ideals.
This is the reality of the situation.
I can talk all day long to Bernie Sanders supporters about the fact that his plans are utterly unsustainable, that they are going to tank the economy, that they are, in my view, immoral and violent of individual rights.
But according to people on the left, this is a question not of individual rights, it's a question of the morality of the system in place.
And this is the beauty of the counterfactual for people who are on the far left.
The beauty of the counterfactual is that you get to live off the riches of capitalism, off the riches of individual liberty, off the basis of Enlightenment thinking, and then you get to bitch about how things would be better if we had never done any of those things.
It really is beautiful.
I mean, I was at a college campus fairly recently, and somebody handed me a pamphlet that talked about, it quoted various people, including, I believe, Martin Luther King, talking about some of the wonders of socialism and all this stuff.
And they said, well, look at all these great people who had great things to say about socialism.
And I said, yeah, you notice what they all had in common?
None of them lived under it.
It really, it is very, very easy to talk about the wonders of socialism, particularly government ownership of the means of production.
And never have to live under it, and then suggest, well, if we did live under it, then the prospective fantasy is so much better than any reality that could possibly exist.
The dream of utopia is always better than the reality.
The thing is, the dream of utopia ain't gonna materialize.
So when you hear politicians tell you to dream big, to dream big, what you should say is, okay, and now let's verify.
Now let's verify, because your dreams, I keep going back to this hook quote, this hook scene, but that really is what it is.
If you just dream hard enough, you can will the dream to reality.
No, sometimes you cannot.
And sometimes the dream itself is immoral if what it mandates means that you wish not to specify.
The hiding of the ball when it comes to socialism, the attempt to basically suggest that it's just gonna be a higher tax system, that pitch that Bernie Sanders is making, it obscures the reality of true government ownership of the means of production, which does suggest compulsion.
It does suggest tyranny.
It does suggest violation of individual rights.
And the only basis that people can push for on that basis is to suggest that the regime of individual rights is inherently racist, sexist, bigoted, homophobic, and rooted in historic injustice, which is why the New York Times pushes the 1619 Project.
It's why the study of history is really, really important, and it's why the pitch that Ayanna Pressley and The New York Times make, and Bernie makes, is so rooted in sort of a Howard's Envision.
Because if you can discredit the roots of America, then you never have to deal with the fact that America has also generated more prosperity and freedom than any country in the history of humanity, and it ain't close.
Alrighty, we'll be back here later today with two additional hours of content.
Otherwise, we'll see you here tomorrow.
I'm Ben Shapiro, this is The Ben Shapiro Show.
The Ben Shapiro Show is produced by Colton Haas.
Directed by Mike Joyner.
Executive producer Jeremy Boring.
Senior producer Jonathan Hay.
Supervising producer Mathis Glover and Robert Sterling.
Assistant director Pavel Lydowsky.
Technical producer Austin Stevens.
Playback and media operated by Nick Sheehan.
Associate producer Katie Swinnerton.
Edited by Adam Siovitz.
Audio is mixed by Mike Koromina.
Hair and makeup is by Nika Geneva.
The Ben Shapiro Show is a Daily Wire production.
Copyright Daily Wire 2020.
AOC's boyfriend goes viral for castigating his fellow white people as hopelessly racist.
We will examine the dangers of toxic effeminacy.
Then squad member Ayanna Pressley whines on the floor of the house, Elizabeth Warren takes money from a broke student, and President Trump teaches us all a lesson when the media asks him what lessons he learned from impeachment.
All that in the Mailbag.
▲
Export Selection