All Episodes
Previous Next
July 30, 2020 - The Ben Shapiro Show
52:56
Another Terrible Day | Ep. 1063
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Herman Cain dies of COVID, President Trump floats delaying the election, and Democrats and Republicans can't reach a deal on propping up the economy as more Americans join the unemployment rolls.
I'm Ben Shapiro.
This is the Ben Shapiro Show.
The Ben Shapiro Show is sponsored by ExpressVPN.
Your data is your business.
Protect it at expressvpn.com slash Ben.
Well, it is the saddest day in the Jewish calendar.
It is Tisha B'Av.
We'll get to that a little bit later on in the program.
I'll explain exactly why people like me are not eating or drinking.
And so it's not exactly a giant shock that this is just another terrible day in the calendar.
There's sort of a Jewish quasi superstition that Tisha B'Av is just going to be a bad day all around.
Apparently, that is exactly right.
We'll get to that in just one moment.
But as you may have noticed, a lot of uncertainty right now.
A lot of volatility right now.
Nobody knows what the next day is going to bring right now.
That might be one reason that you might want to diversify at least a little bit into precious metals.
I've been telling you since 2016, it might be worthwhile to invest at least a little bit in precious metals.
And if you're going to invest in gold, you should look at my friends over at Birchgold.
That was back when gold was $1,300 an ounce.
Now, gold is at a new all-time high.
Why?
Well, gold and silver tend to thrive on uncertainty.
While massive unemployment, a resurgence in COVID that is crippling local economies, an election around the corner, unrest on the foreign policy front. A lot of reasons why you might be a little bit, a little bit displeased with the current stability of your situation.
Another reason why you might want to take some of your money and put it in precious metals.
I'll tell you again, if you haven't reached out to Birch Gold to diversify part of your IRA or 401k into a precious metals IRA, or just purchase some physical gold or silver from them, take a look at Ask all your questions, get all of them answered, and then think about investing in precious metals with my friends over at Birch Gold.
Text BEN to 474747.
Get a free information kit on protecting your savings with gold.
Listen, I've got some diversification in precious metals because I practice what I preach.
I trust Birch Gold.
They've got an A-plus rating with the Better Business Bureau.
Countless five-star reviews.
Talk to them.
Have them help you safeguard your investments.
They're extremely knowledgeable and they want to help you preserve your savings.
Text BEN to 474747.
When you open an IRA and precious metals before July 31st, you'll be the first to get a signed copy of my new book, How to Destroy America in 3 Easy Steps for Free.
Again, text BEN to 474747.
Ask all of your questions, get them answered, and then think about diversifying into precious metals with my friends over at Birch Gold.
text Ben to 474747. Well the breaking news as of this hour is the death of a former GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain. I believe I've interviewed Mr. Cain on a couple of occasions. It really is obviously a sad and tragic story. He was a stage four cancer survivor actually. He died at the age of 74. His death was announced Thursday on his website by Dan Calabrese who edits the site and had previously written about his colleague's diagnosis. Calabrese said, Herman Cain, our boss, our friend, like a father to so many of us, has passed away.
We all prayed so hard every day. We knew the time would come when the Lord would call him home.
We really liked having him here with us.
We held out hope he'd have a full recovery. Survivors include his wife Gloria Etchison and his two children Melanie and Vincent.
Cain was among the highest profile public figures, according to CNBC, to have died from COVID-19.
Again, he's a 74-year-old survivor of stage 4 colon cancer.
And people are dunking on Cain on Twitter because obviously he attended President Trump's rally in Tulsa less than two weeks before being diagnosed with COVID-19.
He had posted about how he didn't want to wear a mask.
And this is a rationale for many on the left to dunk on Herman Cain because obviously If somebody whose politics you don't like dies of COVID, then you get to dunk on them.
That's the way this has been working for quite a while here.
If somebody posted skepticism on Facebook or Twitter about the extent of the danger of COVID, or if they posted skepticism about masks, then you get to dunk on them if they die.
It's basically the way that our garbage world works.
Now, here's the reality.
There are plenty of people who are dying of this who have been wearing masks and have been being careful.
And there are plenty of people in the media who've been quite Shall we say cavalier about the activities in which people should and should not engage, up to and including mass rallies, so long as they're for the public purposes that so many of our elite like.
So spare me some of the crocodile tears on behalf of Herman Cain from people who really are mostly just not happy with Herman Cain's politics.
Not even as much as his politics on COVID.
Mostly they don't like his politics generally.
It's ugly stuff.
It's certainly ugly stuff and very, very bad news.
Cain had been hospitalized in Atlanta July 1st, two days after being told he had tested positive for COVID-19, according to a statement posted to social media accounts at the time.
He obviously was in, like, chief demographic territory for risk.
This has been hitting black men harder than it's been hitting white men.
It has been hitting people with pre-existing conditions extremely hard, and it's been hitting people above the age of 70 extremely hard.
Cain filled all of those categories.
He didn't require a respirator and was awake and alert when he checked into the hospital, but it took about a month for all of this to progress.
Now, there's no evidence that he acquired this at the Trump rally.
The Trump campaign said that every attendee at the event had their temperature checked upon entry, masks and hand sanitizers were handed out but not required to use.
The July 2nd statement on Kane's hospitalization said there's no way of knowing for sure how or when Kane contracted the coronavirus.
The Trump campaign said after his diagnosis, he had not met with the president at the Tulsa rally.
So, obviously, sad and tragic news and honestly, the kind of dunking on people after they die of COVID is pretty...
It's pretty gross.
It's pretty gross.
It's especially gross because there's been so much focus placed on mask wearing.
Now, as you know, I have been an advocate of mask wearing since the sort of professional wisdom suggested that mask wearing was a good idea.
And there have been several studies that have shown that there's been some sort of minor benefit on an individual level from wearing a mask.
But if everybody does it, then the aggregate sort of effect is good.
That said, it's certainly controversial, not just in the United States, but abroad.
The fact is that the Danish, the Dutch government has already said that they have no plans to mandate masks.
A minister for medical care, Tamara van Ark, in the Netherlands, said that there was no evidence, actually, that they were effective.
He said, from a medical perspective, there's no proven effectiveness of masks.
So the cabinet has decided there will be no national obligation for wearing non-medical masks.
The head of the Netherlands National Institute for Public Health, a guy named Jaap van Dissel, added that the organization is aware some studies show masks can help slow the spread of the virus, but he argued the evidence is not conclusive and that masks can actually increase the likelihood of transferring the disease if not worn properly.
He said, we think if you're going to use masks in a public setting, you must give good training for it.
Health officials in Denmark are also finalizing a study to be released next month on the effectiveness of face masks to determine what the requirements should be going forward.
Danish health official Henrik Bungaard said, all the countries recommending face masks haven't made their decisions based on new studies.
He added, the only effective face covering might be a visor because the virus can travel through eyes and cloth masks might provide a false sense of security.
Dr. Anthony Fauci actually yesterday came out and said that the masks might be enough, maybe we should all start wearing goggles.
So, there's just not enough known about the mask wearing overall.
That doesn't mean you shouldn't wear it, right?
I've been, again, advocating for it because it seems to me if there's an incremental way to prevent the spread of the disease, then you should absolutely do it, even if the evidence is mixed on this thing at best.
With that said, to dunk on somebody because they weren't a fan of mask wearing after they died of COVID is pretty gross.
It's pretty gross.
Again, I assume there are a lot of people there.
We had 1,500 deaths of COVID yesterday in the United States.
I assume some of those people wore masks.
It turns out this thing is really, really transmissible, and it may transfer via the eyes, not just the nose and mouth.
So, before you start dunking on people, recognize that everyone can be dunked on.
Honestly, I think the dunking on people for dying of COVID is a way for people to dissociate from the possibility that they may catch it themselves.
If I did all the right things, he did all the wrong things.
That's why he's dead and I'm not.
The fact is the death comes for all of us, unfortunately.
And all of the protective measures that we are taking, none of them is a proof positive guarantee that everything is going to be okay when it comes to COVID.
This is very, very transmissible and it remains dangerous, particularly in the upper age range with preexisting conditions, as Herman Cain had.
Well, meanwhile, as I mentioned, there has been this massive spike in the number of reported deaths.
Yesterday, the United States reported at least 1,444 new coronavirus deaths.
That was the biggest one day increase in more than two months.
Some of that was backlogged.
Every time there's a weekend as the week sort of progresses, basically Mondays are really scanty and then Tuesdays they start to increase.
Usually Wednesdays are the high point and then they start to recede on Thursdays and Friday in terms of the deaths that are reported.
A huge number of those deaths came in Texas.
Texas has been lagging behind Florida and California in terms of death, but Texas reported over 300 deaths yesterday from COVID-19.
Again, it's not a great surprise considering we've had this enormous Increase in the number of diagnosed cases in the United States and death, as we know, is a lagging indicator.
Herman Cain's perfect example of this.
He was diagnosed with coronavirus a month ago.
He didn't die until today, apparently.
But obviously all this is bad news and it is placing the shaky economic recovery on even less firm footing.
Dr. Kavita Patel on MSNBC was saying another shelter-in-place mandate should be considered, which again would basically destroy the economy.
The chances that we are going to be able to shut this thing down, and that we're going to be able to shut it down until a vaccine is developed, I would say are slim and none.
All the other countries that have supposedly done an incredible job of this over in Europe are experiencing second waves now, like all of them.
They're all having to consider new shutdown orders if they don't wish to see this thing increasingly transmitted.
Many of these countries are saying we're not shutting down, even if there's a low level of consistent Outbreak.
The fact is that the lockdowns have not proved to be incredibly effective all the way through.
There's still a lot of factors here that have to be considered.
If people are social distancing while not locked down, that was happening since early May in places like Florida.
The spike really happened after Memorial Day and really after all these giant rallies in the streets.
It's very difficult to attribute exactly where this stuff is coming from.
That's what community spread means.
Community spread simply means you don't know where the virus is actually being transmitted.
But here was Dr. Kavita Patel on MSNBC saying we might have to consider a shelter-in-place mandate.
Would you be recommending a shelter in place in these hotspots at this point?
I think it's got to be considered, yes.
Now, I say that knowing the serious gravity with which the implications of that on working families, etc.
But Chuck, we got here because we're not taking it seriously.
We've had no national strategy, as you pointed out.
And on top of that, we are never going to do any sort of economic recovery if people just don't feel safe.
So I do think it has to be considered.
One of the things that bothers me a little bit about this is that we keep hearing this phrase.
We're not taking it seriously.
We're not taking it seriously.
There are certain things that suggest you're not taking it seriously.
If you are getting together in close quarters with people and you're taking no precautions, then you're probably not taking it seriously enough.
However, I will point out that again, the media was cheering on people in the streets by the millions.
That's not taking it seriously either.
So I'm just wondering what taking it seriously constitutes.
Is the only mark of seriousness that would completely shut down the entire American economy?
Because that has some pretty significant ramifications as well.
It's particularly true of young people.
Now, as I've been saying for literally months, basically since this began, to treat all Americans as equally susceptible to COVID is at the height of anti-scientific foolishness.
Herman Cain was particularly susceptible to COVID-19.
He was 74 years old.
He was a cancer survivor.
Plus he was a black man, which unfortunately for reasons that we really don't understand yet, the death rates, and this is true across Western civilization, there are death gaps between black and white. It's true in Britain, it's true in Canada, it's true in the United States as well.
So, when we talk about how exactly we trans people back into the population, One of the things the media are trying to do is on the one hand they're trying to say that you're not taking it seriously unless you want to shut down schools.
On the other hand, you can go out and rally in favor of George Floyd.
You can't have it all different ways at once.
The reality is if you want to treat the scientific evidence with the most plausibility, what you recognize is that people who are older and at more risk need to stay home.
They may be In shape for a shelter at home mandate.
If you're talking about people under the age of 55, in the United States, under 11,000 people under the age of 55 have died.
That's still a lot of people.
It is not a lot of people under the age of 25.
Under the age of 25, you're talking about, I believe, still triple digits.
So, that means people probably should be going back to school.
And not only should they be going back to school, it is actually imperative they should be going back to school.
It turns out that the CDC head, Robert Redfield, he suggests that the number of young people who are dying of suicide and overdose is now actually overwhelming the number of people who are young dying of COVID.
There has been another cost that we've seen, particularly in high schools.
We're seeing, sadly, far greater suicides now than we are deaths from COVID.
We're seeing far greater deaths from drug overdose that are above excess that we had as background than we are seeing deaths from COVID.
Okay, so that is something worth keeping in mind when we are talking about exactly what to do.
This is also true when we are talking about economic recovery, as we'll get to in just a second.
I do want to talk about the partisan nature of so much of what's going on right now.
As I keep pointing out, there's very little partisanship to how COVID affects people.
There is very little partisanship to how COVID is hitting states.
What we have seen is there's a lot of partisanship to the media coverage and to political response to COVID.
So to take a perfect example, everybody yesterday was talking about the number of deaths in Florida.
It was nearly surpassed by the number of deaths in California.
California continues to have more than 2,500 more deaths than Florida overall.
California continues to see a radical uptick in new cases.
There seems to be no trailing off in California.
You're starting to see a little bit of a trailing off in Florida, a little bit of a trailing off in Texas.
You're not seeing anything like that in the state of California.
In terms of deaths, California had 195 deaths reported yesterday.
Florida had 216 deaths reported yesterday.
But apparently we're not really allowed to mention that because California is a blue state.
Susan Rice, who is desperate to be Joe Biden's vice presidential nominee yesterday, she suggested that all of this is, of course, Trump's fault.
She was on The View, a repository of all stupidity in the United States.
And she suggested that if Obama had been running this thing, it would have been wildly different, which, again, the evidence just does not show this.
Here she was explaining that the Obama administration gave a Pandemics for Dummies playbook to the Trump administration.
Which, as we will see, is kind of weird since they really did botch the swine flu thing.
The difference is that the swine flu is not nearly as communicable or as deadly.
Everybody who knew anything about national security, global health, understood that a pandemic was inevitable.
I write about it in my book that we were just talking about briefly at the outset.
We prepared the incoming administration with a pandemic for dummies playbook and a tabletop exercise and so many other briefings.
So the fault here The tragic loss of 150,000 Americans and counting is on Donald Trump and his gross mishandling of this pandemic.
Okay, here's a lady who wants to be vice president of the United States, but let's look at the facts on this.
The fact is that the Obama administration, when it came to swine flu, they did not handle it all that well.
It just turned out that swine flu is not nearly as deadly in the United States as COVID has been.
I mean, the L.A.
Times reported that after the swine flu epidemic in 2009, a safety equipment industry association and federally sponsored task force both recommended depleted supplies of N95 respirators be replenished by the stockpile.
That didn't happen.
The first U.S.
case of swine flu occurred in California.
It was identified April 2009.
On April 25th, the World Health Organization declared H1N1 a public health emergency.
That was echoed by Obama one day later.
The WHO declared H1N1 a pandemic June 11th.
It took Obama until October to declare a national emergency.
So the fact is that, you know, that no one has a great handle on this.
And anybody who's pretending they have a great, like, you know, human beings have a need for control.
It makes sense.
We live in a very chaotic, difficult world.
Human beings have a need to feel in control.
But the fact is that when it comes to COVID-19, there just ain't that much control.
You do what you can, and that's pretty much all you can do.
In a second, we're going to get to the economic fallout, which continues to just be horrendous.
Meanwhile, Republicans and Democrats arguing over how to shore up the economy while Americans are still In many places banned from being able to work and as COVID-19 continues to tear through various communities in terms of case diagnosis.
We'll get to that in just one second.
First, let's talk about the fact that right now you're thinking, I need some life insurance.
Correct.
You do need life insurance.
If you are a responsible person, you need life insurance to make sure that your family is taken care of.
With everything going on right now, a lot of people are asking if it's even possible to buy life insurance.
The answer is yes, it is still easy to shop.
For life insurance, if you have loved ones, depending on your income, you probably should right now.
You could save $1500 or more a year by using PolicyGenius to compare life insurance policies.
When you're shopping for a policy that could last for a decade or more, the savings really start to add up.
What is PolicyGenius?
Well, it's an insurance marketplace.
It's built and backed.
by a team of industry experts.
Here's how it works.
Step one, you go to policygenius.com.
In minutes, you can work out how much coverage you need.
You compare quotes from top insurers and find your best price.
Step two, apply for your lowest price.
Step three, the Policy Genius team handles all the paperwork and the red tape.
Policy Genius works for you, not the insurance company.
So if you hit any speed bumps, they will take care of everything with you.
There's a reason they have a five-star rating across 1,600 reviews on Trustpilot and Google.
Shop competitively, get a better price, make sure you're saving money, and get the life insurance you need.
Head over to Policygenius.com right now to get started.
You could save $1,500 or more per year by comparing quotes on their marketplace, Policygenius.
When it comes to insurance, it's nice and vital to get it right.
Go check them out, Policygenius.com.
Okay, so the economy continues to plummet.
A bad headline from CNBC.
They say the second quarter GDP plunged by a worst ever 32.9% amid a virus-induced shutdown.
That's not correct.
The actual economy plunged by about 9.5% in the second quarter.
The annualized number, meaning if you extended it over the course of the year, it would look like 32.9%, but that's not correct.
I mean, you don't annualize quarterly GDP numbers.
It doesn't make a lot of sense.
Apparently, it was the worst drop ever, the closest previously coming in mid-1921.
Mark Zandi, the chief economist at Moody's, said the report just highlights how deep and dark the hole is the economy cratered into in Q2.
He said it's a very deep and dark hole.
We're coming out of it.
It's going to take a long time to get out.
And it's going to take longer if we can't get past COVID-19.
Now we still don't know whether the tailing off that we've started to see in Texas and Florida or the tailing off that we saw in New York is sort of a permanent tailing off or whether as people go back to work and as people get out there again, the thing's going to uptick again as we hit the flu season.
One of the assumptions of a big second wave during flu season was that there would be a tailing off during the summer thanks to climate.
That really didn't happen because it was so hot outside, everybody went inside and then air conditioning gave everybody the coronavirus.
So the assumption was it'll sort of tail off during the summer and then it'll crop up again in the fall.
That was true 100 years ago.
It was true during the 1918 pandemic because there was no air conditioning.
Where it was hot, people just didn't get it very much because they weren't in small areas with recirculated air.
That obviously has not been happening.
In fact, there's been a reverse correlation in the United States between places where it is really hot And a decrease in cases.
There's actually been an increase in cases in places where it's super hot because everybody's going inside and getting COVID.
So we still don't know what that means in terms of a second wave.
Have we already seen the second wave?
We don't know at this point.
The one thing that we do know is that more and more Americans are being added to the unemployment rolls.
Apparently 1.4 million Americans joined the unemployment rolls again this week, which is really scary stuff.
And many states still have some form of lockdown in place.
Obviously, Los Angeles, pretty much all the businesses are still closed.
There are heavy restrictions on what you can and cannot do in the city of Los Angeles, for example.
Well, this means that there's been a lot of debate inside Congress about what to do in terms of continuing to prop up the economy and make sure that people who have basically been barred from work by the government are not the ones who take it directly on the chin.
Republicans have been looking at some sort of measured response and Democrats have been looking at just blowing it out and spending on a variety of idiocies that make no sense at all.
Now, even the Republicans were looking at spending on kind of random garbage.
There was talk that President Trump wanted additional funding for federal buildings in the in the quote-unquote stimulus package.
Again, this is not a stimulus package.
A stimulus package is when the economy is slow and you just inject money in order to make the economy go.
It is not when the government has actually created mandates so that you cannot work.
Okay, that is a different thing.
If the government came and paved over my house, as I've said a million times, if they pave over my house, they have to compensate me.
This seems to me, effectually, a taking.
When you have the government saying to people that you cannot work, telling them they cannot go to work, when you have the government telling people that if they do go to work, they have to obey certain restrictions that make it nearly impossible for their business to do business, well, that is a taking, and just compensation is required under the Constitution of the United States, under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
So, it seems to me that this, Looks more like an eminent domain situation than like a stimulus package.
That said, the way to make clear that that is the case is to actually fill in the gap, not to just blow out the spending.
So there's apparently a big gap between Republicans and Democrats on exactly how to fill in that gap.
Nancy Pelosi says everybody's still really far apart on this new quote unquote stimulus package.
She says it's like trying to breed a flamingo and a giraffe.
Which is a hell of a take by Nancy Pelosi.
Again, we could come to some sort of reasonable compromise here, but she says that this is not going to happen.
Apparently in a meeting she said it's like a giraffe and a flamingo.
They're both at a zoo.
A dumb person may think they could mate for offspring.
A smart person knows that's impossible.
That's our bills.
They're unable to mate.
I mean, technically, I don't know enough about dogs.
Is that true?
Actually, lions can't mate with chihuahuas either.
This is all weird.
Why are we talking about mating animals?
said that the Democratic bill was a golden retriever and the GOP proposal was a chihuahua.
He said a golden retriever can't mate with a chihuahua.
You have a chihuahua.
We have a beautiful lion.
I mean, technically, I don't know enough about dogs.
Is that true?
Actually, lions can't mate with chihuahuas either.
This is all weird.
Why are we talking about mating animals?
How about we just talk about like what we should do?
Very strange stuff happening in Congress.
One of the nice things about American government is you always know you have the best and the brightest who are going to be handling your future.
It's very uplifting.
The gap is this.
According to CNN, Senate Republicans have already unveiled a $1 trillion stimulus proposal this week.
That would include a $600 federal boost to unemployment checks.
That expires July 31st.
Democrats are unifying behind a far bigger and different proposal.
Republicans need some Democratic support.
So what exactly are the payments?
So the Senate Republicans want a second round of direct stimulus payments.
They're worth up to $1,200 for individuals and $2,400 for families.
It would send an individual an additional $500 per dependent regardless of age.
The first round excluded dependents who are older than 17.
The size of the payments would scale down starting with individuals who earn more than $75,000 a year and married couples who earn more than $150,000 and phase out altogether for high-income individuals.
Again, that actually doesn't make tons of sense for the very reason that...
People of basically all incomes in the United States, especially if you're measuring based on last year's income before the pandemic, everybody's getting hurt and everybody has costs.
But put that aside, that's a lot of money.
They're talking about payments worth up to $1,200 for individuals and $2,400 for family, $500 per dependent.
House Democrats want $1,200 per family member, maxing out at $6,000 per household.
Senate, House Democrats want $1,200 per family member, maxing out at $6,000 per household.
$6,000 per household, which is an enormous amount of money and money that we do not have.
And would incentivize people not to go back to work, obviously.
One of the big problems with the last stimulus package is that if you're paying people $600 per week in unemployment benefits and supplementary unemployment benefits, then very often people are being paid more to stay at home than they are to go to work.
Which you really don't want, right?
I mean, when the economic recovery does happen, when people go back to work, you don't want to be paying them to stay at home.
On unemployment benefits, the proposal from the Republicans would extend the federal boost to unemployment benefits, but at a reduced amount.
It would call for cutting the weekly payments to $200 from $600 until states implement a system that replaces roughly 70% of laid-off workers' wages.
Basically, they're saying states have not been footing the bill, the feds have been footing the bill, states need to pick up the slack.
Democrats want to extend the $600 enhanced unemployment benefit through all the way through January.
All the way through January, just in time for Joe Biden's inauguration, is what Democrats are thinking.
Those receiving regular state benefits at that time could continue receiving the $600 boost as late as the end of March.
So just forever.
For all time.
So there's some pretty significant gaps here.
The House Democrats include no additional money for the Paycheck Protection Program.
So they just want to let businesses basically go under, and people can be directly supported by the government.
This is the House Democrats' way of achieving universal basic income, is what this really looks like, more than anything.
Also, House Democrats want to provide $100 billion in education funds.
It specifies that 69%, 59 billion would go to K-12 schools, 30% would go to higher education.
Again, I'm confused as to why we are blowing out the education spending when schools literally are not in session.
And as we will see, teachers are saying they don't even want to teach remote.
The bill for the Democrats also includes a $500 billion bailout to states and $375 billion bailout to local governments.
Which is pretty wild.
So they're just filling in bad governance from a variety of states.
So no wonder there's this big gap.
The answer is, you can have arguments over how much people should be receiving on a personal level or on an unemployment level.
When you start with all the goodies, the paying off states and all of that, you've gotten into territory that has nothing to do with filling in gaps created by COVID in the first place.
In just a second, we're going to get to some cultural issues that have been cropping up as of recently.
We'll get to that momentarily first.
Let's talk about something nice.
Let's talk about something nice you can do for your family.
Here is what it is.
You can have a beautiful portrait painted of your family by a professional artist and you can do so without spending an arm and a leg.
If you want a truly meaningful gift, you want to give somebody a truly meaningful gift, go try paintyourlife.com.
You can choose from a team of world-class artists and work with them until every detail is perfect.
Their user-friendly platform lets you order a custom-made, hand-painted portrait in less than five minutes.
You can send any picture.
Yourself, your kids, family, a special place, cherished pet.
Or you can combine photos in one painting.
It makes a perfect birthday, anniversary, or wedding gift.
We have a giant Paint Your Life portrait hanging above our mantelpiece.
It is of me and my wife and two of our children.
We need to order a new one now because we have baby number three.
At paintyourlife.com, there is no risk.
If you don't love the final painting, Your money is refunded.
Guaranteed.
Right now, it's a limited time offer.
Get 20% off your painting.
That's right, 20% off and free shipping.
To get the special offer, text the word BEN to 64000.
That is BEN to 64000.
Text the word BEN to 64000.
Paint your life.
Celebrate the moments that matter.
Most texts BEN to 64000 to get 20% off and free shipping.
It is a fantastic, fantastic gift.
Go check it out right now.
Text Ben to 64000 and join up with Paint Your Life.
Okay, so, meanwhile, teachers are now saying that they don't even want to return to online instruction.
Demonstrating once and for all the teachers' unions have little to do with helping students and a lot to do with helping teachers, the New York Times reports, teachers in many districts are fighting for longer school closures, stronger safety requirements, and limits on what they are required to do in virtual classrooms, while flooding social media and state capitals with their concerns and threatening to walk off their jobs if key demands are not met.
Clearly, the needs of the children are first and foremost in the minds of teachers who don't even want to do online education.
It is one thing to say you don't want to go into school because you're 70 years old and you don't want to get infected and die.
It is another thing to say you don't want to be on video.
You don't want to do a Zoom call.
On Tuesday, the nation's second-largest teachers union raised the stakes dramatically by authorizing local and state chapters to strike if their districts do not take sufficient precautions, like requiring masks and updating ventilation systems before reopening classrooms.
Already, teachers unions have sued Florida's governor over that state's efforts to require schools to offer in-person instruction.
Even as unions exert their influence, they face enormous public and political pressure because of widespread acknowledgment that you gotta have kids back at school.
Apparently many of these teachers are now upset that they even have to work at all.
So now they're saying that the teachers went above and beyond work hours laid out in emergency labor agreements.
Their members provided technical support to families and answered emails and text messages from students and parents.
Wow, that's rough considering you weren't in school teaching.
Well, actually, the representatives aren't doing any of that kind of stuff at all.
They're just caving to teachers who aren't actually teaching.
children. Well actually the representatives aren't doing any of that kind of stuff at all. They're just caving to teachers who aren't actually teaching.
That's it that is pretty incredible. LA, the nation's second largest school district, has already made the decision to start the year online because of Now, the union and administrators are engaged in long negotiating sessions via Zoom, with one of the sickest points of contention being how many hours per day teachers should be required to teach via live video.
Cicely Meyer Cruz, president of the United Teachers Los Angeles Union, said she understood the benefits.
She watched her own son engage with teachers online.
She argued that a full school day over video would not be feasible for either students or teachers.
She said, you're not going to see people engaged.
Kids will turn off to that.
Instead, they think that remote mental health counseling should be available to students.
So, basically, they just don't want—they want to be paid to do nothing, which is really exciting stuff.
Well done all the way around.
So, in other chaotic news of the day, President Trump decided that it would be a good idea today to tweet out and then pin to the top of his Twitter page a suggestion that Election Day should be delayed.
So the president tweeted out today, quote, Three question marks?
mail-in voting, not absentee voting, which is good, 2020 will be the most inaccurate and fraudulent election in history.
It will be a great embarrassment to the United States to delay the election until people can properly, securely, and safely vote?
Three question marks?
Okay, so mail-in voting is a bad idea.
It is a bad idea.
It is rife with the possibility of fraud, no less than Jimmy Carter has said something similar in years past.
However, the President of the United States does not actually have the power to delay the United States election.
That requires an act of Congress.
It's not going to happen.
Mail-in vot- Two things can be true.
Mail-in voting can be a bad idea, generally, because it's going to take weeks to hash out, because there's the possibility of fraud, for all the reasons that we've talked about before.
Also, The president floating that he wants to delay the election is like the worst idea ever.
It's a terrible political idea.
And now we'll get a full 48-hour news cycle on why Republicans won't denounce the president for saying this sort of stuff.
Now, the true answer is that the president can say whatever he wants.
Again, it takes an act of Congress to delay the election.
Nobody has any intent to delay this election.
It's not going to happen.
So you'll see that mentioned very low in a lot of the news reports.
But is that the kind of solidity that people are seeking in a time of great pandemonium?
Are people feeling solid?
Again, the great benefit to Joe Biden in this particular election is that all Joe Biden has to do is be barely alive.
That really is his key.
See, if he's too alive, then he makes a lot of gaffes.
But if he's dead, then he's dead.
So he has to be just kind of like barely alive.
Like barely alive is where he wants to be because he can just point to Trump being extraordinarily volatile.
And then when Trump says he's senile, all Biden has to do is just say, OK, I may be senile, but you're incredibly volatile and you're not senile.
So what happens when you get senile?
Trump's Twitter is like the worst thing that he can do right now.
It is a very, very stupid move.
It's going to be a two days news cycle, but it's really a giant nothing burger.
Meanwhile, remember that time the NBA was super woke and the NBA is going to lecture us all on social justice?
Incredible story from ESPN today.
An ESPN investigation has found that coaches at NBA's China academies are complaining of player abuse and lack of schooling.
According to ESPN, long before an October tweet in support of Hong Kong protesters spotlighted the NBA's complicated relationship with China, the league faced complaints from its own employees over human rights concerns inside an NBA youth development program in that country, an ESPN investigation has found.
American coaches at three NBA training academies in China told league officials their Chinese partners were physically abusing young players and failing to provide schooling, even though Commissioner Adam Silver had said education would be central to the program, according to multiple sources with direct knowledge of the complaints.
The NBA ran into myriad problems by opening one of the academies in Xinjiang, the police state in western China where more than a million Uighur Muslims are now held in barbed wire camps.
American coaches were frequently harassed and surveilled in Xinjiang, the sources said.
One American coach was detained three times without cause.
He and others were unable to obtain housing because of their status as foreigners.
A former league employee compared the atmosphere where he worked in Xinjiang to World War II Germany.
In an interview with ESPN about his findings, NBA Deputy Commissioner and Chief Operating Officer Mark Tatum, who oversees international operations, said the NBA is re-evaluating and considering other opportunities for the academy program, which operates out of sports facilities run by the Chinese government.
Last week, the league acknowledged they closed the Xiangjing Academy, but they refused to say whether Cuban rights were a factor.
We were somewhat humbled, said Tatum.
One of the lessons we've learned here is we do need to have more direct oversight and the ability to make staffing changes when appropriate.
The program launched in 2016 was part of the NBA's strategy to develop local players in a basketball-obsessed market that has made NBA China a $5 billion enterprise.
Most of the former employees spoke on the condition of anonymity.
One American coach who worked for the NBA in China described the project as a sweat camp for athletes.
At least two coaches quit in response to what they believed was mistreatment of young players.
One requested and received a transfer after watching Chinese coaches strike teenage players, three sources told DSPN.
Another American coach left before the end of his contract because he found the lack of education unconscionable.
He said, I couldn't continue to show up every day looking at these kids, knowing they would end up being taxi drivers.
Not long after the academies opened, multiple coaches complained about the physical abuse and lack of schooling to Greg Stoltz, the league's VP for international operations.
It was unclear whether the information was passed on to the NBA in New York.
The NBA would not make Stoltz available for comment.
Two of the former NBA employees separately told ESPN coaches that the academies regularly speculated about whether Silver had been informed about the problems.
I said if Silver shows up, we're all fired immediately.
Tatum said the NBA did receive a handful of complaints that Chinese coaches were mistreating players, but they did nothing about it apparently.
They immediately informed local authorities that the league had zero tolerance for that behavior, but they didn't report the incidents to the league at the time, or to Tatum, or to Silver.
Sure.
Sure.
Or alternatively, everybody decided to look the other way because they were making a bundle in China.
The NBA brought in elite coaches and athletic trainers with experience in the G League and Division I basketball to work at the academies.
One former coach described watching a Chinese coach fire a ball into a young player's face at point-blank range and then kick him in the gut.
The kid was apparently 13 or 14 years old.
So, good times with the NBA in China.
I definitely want to hear about human rights violations in the United States from the NBA.
I think that's what we definitely have to hear about.
These people are not hypocrites in any way.
In just a second, we're going to get to a big tech hearing that happened on the Hill yesterday.
There were some moments that were not so great, as always for Congress.
We'll get to that momentarily first.
Gang, if you haven't heard by now about my new book, How to Destroy America in Three Easy Steps, it is officially on sale, in fact.
It is the number two bestselling book on Amazon.com for the week.
It was number three on the New York Times bestseller list this week.
The book covers the disintegrationist philosophy that is now prevalent in the United States.
The philosophy that says to make any progress, we have to tear down every American system.
All the systems are racist and sexist and bigoted.
And homophobic, you can see that particular vision of the United States playing out in real time before our eyes as the cities burn.
How to Destroy America in Three Easy Steps details how this garbage worldview has gained cultural traction, offers suggestions on where we go from here.
You can get your copy right now at Amazon or barnesandnoble.com.
If you like the book, please hop in, leave a five-star review.
It keeps it higher on the charts so more people will see it and enjoy it.
You're listening to the largest, fastest growing conservative podcast and radio show in the nation.
Now speaking of China, now the fact is not just the NBA that is enthralled to China's So many of our Big Ten companies are enthralled to China, enthralled to China as well.
It's pretty incredible.
So yesterday, there was this big hearing at the House Judiciary Committee.
And it was participated in by the heads of Google and Facebook and Twitter and Apple.
And there was this amazing exchange in which various CEOs were asked about Chinese intellectual property theft.
And only one of these CEOs was actually honest.
So you had Tim Cook of Apple who basically denied that there was any intellectual property theft.
You have Sundar Pichai of Google who said, no idea, never heard of it.
You have Jeff Bezos saying that he's heard about it.
And then you have Zuckerberg who's like, yeah, of course that's true.
Because Facebook, it is important to recognize here, not all big tech companies are the same.
Facebook has been significantly more pro-free speech than any of the other outlets.
It is not particularly close.
Twitter is not the same thing as Facebook.
This is something that, as we'll see, Congress people don't know, because they don't understand how the interwebs work.
It is also true that Facebook has taken a pretty antagonistic view toward Chinese regulations in a way that Apple has not, that Google has not, that Amazon has not, and that is worthy of note.
You can see the contrast in this particular exchange.
Do you believe that the Chinese government steals technology from U.S.
companies?
I don't know of specific cases where we have been stolen from by the government.
I have no first-hand knowledge of any information stolen from Google.
Congressman, I think it's well documented that the Chinese government steals technology from American companies.
I haven't seen it personally, but I've heard many reports of it.
Okay, so amazing how only Zuckerberg is really willing to come out and just say, yeah, absolutely the Chinese are stealing.
Corporations are willing to make money virtually anywhere.
That is just an aspect of profit-seeking.
That is why the government really needs to be focusing on China, not on big tech so much.
Big tech, there's some problems inside big tech.
But the question is whether you really want your Congress people in charge of big tech.
The question is to who should be in charge.
When it comes to China, that's a very different thing.
Listen, the NBA, so long as the government is not shutting, like it's one thing for the NBA to be overtly participating in human rights abuses.
But for the NBA to participate in trade with China is not the end of the world.
I mean, again, that's perfectly legal.
It's why the government of the United States should really be focused in on shutting down a lot of the avenues of economic growth for China, which is indeed a geopolitical threat to the United States and to its neighbors, mostly.
Instead, we are focused in on attacking our domestic corporations.
Some of them are the biggest hirers in the United States.
And let's just be frank about this.
There are problems with a lot of these corporations.
There are.
I mean, Google is obviously biased against conservatives.
But the idea that you're going to put Congress in charge of all the big tech companies and that Congress can do this better seems to me bizarre.
Example, yesterday a representative named Sensenbrenner asked Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook about suspending Donald Trump Jr.
There's only one problem.
Sensenbrenner was asking about Twitter.
That's a completely different company.
It was reported that Donald Trump Jr.
got taken down for a period of time.
Why did that happen?
Congressman, well, first, to be clear, I think what you might be referring to happened on Twitter, so it's hard for me to speak to that.
But I can talk to our policies about this.
We do prohibit content that will lead to imminent risk of harm.
And stating that there's a proven cure for COVID when there is, in fact, none, might encourage someone to go take something that could have some adverse effects.
So we do take that down.
Okay, so I do love that he is attacking Zuckerberg for something that another company did.
The truth is, the worst of these companies is Twitter.
Twitter really is overtly censorious of views they do not like in a way that many of these other companies are not.
It is also true that, again, Google has been acting with a certain amount of political alacrity to crack down on conservatives.
Every mistake.
The problem is, they never let anybody inside their data, so it's very difficult to tell exactly which companies are discriminating against conservatives and which ones are not.
Again, I'll say that I don't think that Facebook is discriminating against conservatives because it would be hard for me to claim otherwise, considering that Daily Wire does very well on Facebook, right?
I mean, just on an anecdotal level, it's hard for me as the head of a company that gets good traffic on Facebook to say Facebook is cracking down on us.
I can say that when there have been sort of Weird instances of Google glitches.
They always seem to target conservatives over at Google.
So distinguishing between the companies seems to be something worthwhile.
According to the New York Post just a couple of days ago, Google said it fixed a bug that led to several conservative websites disappearing from its search results on Tuesday.
But a former engineer for the tech giant said the glitch may have inadvertently exposed an internal list that targeted certain news outlets.
Mike Wacker said it appears to have revealed the existence of another blacklist that disproportionately targets conservatives.
So the glitch is that sites on this blacklist disappeared from Google search results, but the existence of the list is very much by design.
And that raises a major question.
Why exactly does that list exist in the first place?
For several hours, Tuesday morning and early afternoon, users couldn't access a number of websites on Google search, including Breitbart, Drudge Report, Bongino Report, and the National Pulse.
Major newspapers like the New York Times and Washington Post were not affected.
We saw this, by the way, just maybe a year ago when Google decided they were going to put Fact checker evaluations of only conservative sites on the side of the Google page.
So yeah, Google's been a problem for this.
Representative Jim Jordan went after Google yesterday in this big tech hearing.
There's an email in 2016 that was widely circulated amongst the executives at your company that got public where Ms.
Ileana Murillo, head of your multicultural marketing, talks about the silent donation Google made to the Clinton campaign And you applauded her work.
She points that out in the email.
I'm just curious, if you did it in 16, I want to make, you know, in spite of the fact you did it in 16, President Trump won, I just want to make sure you're not going to do it again in 2020.
Okay, so it is true that Google has its biases.
Now the question is, is Google a monopoly?
So there are two sort of views of monopoly in law, in American law.
One is the consumer-based view, which is that so long as consumers are not being jobbed, there is no monopoly.
Monopoly is really based on whether the consumer is being overcharged or being exploited in some way that they don't know about through monopoly practices.
The other is whether a company is just very, very large.
I tend to toward the first vision, because there can be such a thing as a natural monopoly, where when you break up the monopoly, the consumer is actually harmed.
And that actually happened with Windows, and Microsoft was broken up in the late 90s.
The idea being Microsoft was too large, and then Apple ate Microsoft's lunch, so it turned out that it wasn't even a monopoly in the first place.
The answer to Google having its own bias is presumably for somebody to invest an awful lot of money in AltaVista or an alternative search engine.
Google didn't become a monopoly simply by dint of them being biased.
They became a monopoly by dint of being better at their job.
I mean, they expend an awful lot of money on market research.
They're an enormous company.
And the notion that Congress is going to be able to successfully Control big tech, I think, is a mistake, considering that most of the people in Congress literally don't know what an internet is.
So, worthwhile noting that.
Worthwhile just keeping that in mind.
Meanwhile, there's more controversy brewing over the Trump administration.
President Trump decided to tweet out again about an initiative that is called the AFFH.
The AFFH is essentially a rule created by the Obama administration that gives federal power over local zoning.
It's a bad policy.
It's been a bad policy for quite a while.
President Trump tweeted out about it with, I would say, probably the worst available take.
So the AFFH, again, is a policy that is designed to give the federal government a lever to re-engineer nearly every American neighborhood, according to Stanley Kurtz of the Ethics and Public Policy Center.
Imposing a preferred racial and ethnic composition, densifying housing, transportation, and business development in suburb and city alike, weakening or casting aside the authority of local governments over core responsibilities from zoning, to transportation, to education.
The AFFH's reach is so widespread because so many communities have become far too dependent on housing and urban development programs like community development block grants.
If a city or town wants federal housing funding, it would have to comply with AFFH.
The mandate's egregiousness was magnified because they were using what they call disparate impact.
Which means that if in fact the program is administered neutrally and the impact is disparate, like it impacts people differently, then that means that the program is somehow racist.
So that gave the government enormous power to basically deny housing and urban development funding to localities based on lack of preferred racial
So let's say that the country at large is 13% black, and a town received housing and urban development funding, and then they used the housing and urban development funding, and the town's composition demographically went from 13% black to 9% black, then this would cause the federal government to step in and rezone the entire town, which takes local control out of the hands of the locals, obviously.
It's a bad policy.
It's been a bad policy for a long time.
The Heritage Foundation points out that the AFFH rightly came to the sites of Ben Carson's HUD soon after change in administrations.
In 2018, Carson's Housing and Urban Development announced the withdrawal of the 2015 mandate's so-called local government assessment tools, in which communities had to report non-housing related information.
This would then be used by the HUD to judge the efforts to diversify the community.
If federal bureaucrats believed the community was not sufficiently quote-unquote diversified, the local jurisdiction would not get federal funds intended to provide affordable housing.
So, this basically required local officials to answer questions on topics like significant disparities in access to opportunities, disproportionate housing needs.
Local officials had to analyze and report data on issues like access to public transportation, quality schools and jobs, environmental health hazards.
In essence, it was the federal government stepping in and trying to control, in top-down fashion, exactly how towns were constituted, even if those towns were not creating policy to bar people on the basis of race.
I mean, a lot of this actually is barred by federal law.
Federal law bars the HUD from conditioning federal housing assistance on the type of conditions outlined in the new rule.
So it was a bad rule.
The Trump administration was right to cut against it.
But Trump tweeted out, I'm happy to inform all of the people living their suburban lifestyle dream.
You will no longer be bothered or financially hurt by having low-income housing built in your neighborhood.
Your housing prices will go up based on the market, and crime will go down.
I have rescinded the Obama-Biden AFFH rule.
Enjoy.
Okay, so simply saying that you want to bar low-income people from the suburbs, that's not what this is really about.
Okay, that's not what this is about.
It's about local control and people moving out to the suburbs wanting to be able to determine what the nature of their community is on a non-race-based On a non-race-based basis, right?
Obviously, you're still barred by federal law and state law from discriminating on the basis of race.
But it is true that one of the reasons people move out to the suburbs is because they want better public schools, for example.
And that means that they're moving out to the suburbs because, presumably, people who can live in the suburbs can afford to live in the suburbs.
And so, it is not unreasonable to say, I don't necessarily want to live directly next to a homeless shelter, right?
Zoning regulations exist in every city and town across the country.
Because people want to be able to control exactly the kind of neighborhoods they live in.
And there are certain factors that shouldn't be taken into account, obviously.
Racial segregation would be one.
But the notion that the federal government can, on the basis of disparate impacts, come in and control how zoning is done in every community in the United States is really bad.
Trump articulates that in a way that is not particularly good.
Now, in good news for the Trump administration, to his credit, they are doing something good.
President Trump is now extending Operation Legend to Cleveland, Detroit, and Milwaukee.
So this is giving more federal resources to local law enforcement to police high crime areas.
According to the Daily Wire, on Wednesday, the DOJ announced it was extending Operation Legend, which is an initiative in which the federal law enforcement agencies work in conjunction with state and local law enforcement to fight violent crime.
They're extending that to Albuquerque, from Albuquerque, Kansas City, Missouri, Chicago, to Cleveland, Detroit, and Milwaukee.
That is a good thing.
If you'd like to see the crime go down, that'd be a positive development.
The DOJ stated that Cleveland is currently experiencing a significant increase in violent crime.
Homicides are currently up more than 13%.
Shootings are up 35% over 2019.
Homicides are up in Detroit nearly 31%.
Shootings resulting in wounds are up over 53%.
In Milwaukee, homicides are up 85% this year.
Non-fatal shootings are up 64%.
Now, this is not the same as deploying federal agents in Unmarked cars with the military fatigues.
That's a completely different federal initiative, right?
That's protecting federal property.
This is sending more federal forces as an adjunct to programs that are anti-gang or anti-gun prevalence in major American cities.
The authority for this already exists on the books.
Twenty-five federal investigators from the FBI, DEA, and ATF are being sent to Cleveland, supported by a million bucks from the Bureau of Justice Assistance.
Forty-two federal agents are going to be sent to Detroit, and twenty-five more investigators are going to be sent to Milwaukee.
This is a good thing.
This is a good thing.
For all the talk about Trump not caring about people of color, this is specifically designed to crack down on crime that disproportionately affects people of color.
So the fact that Trump is doing that, that is in fact a good thing.
Of course, that's not going to be covered.
And if it is covered, he's going to be called a fascist for now using federal resources to help tamp down on crime.
Instead, everybody is going to focus in on President Trump saying a dumb thing about delaying the election.
Alrighty.
One quick note.
So I feel like it's a good time to do this.
So people wonder, you know, if it feels like the show is slightly off today.
That's because today is a fast day.
It means no eating.
It means no drinking.
Today is Tisha B'Av.
Yes, Tisha B'Av.
It's the 9th of Av, which is the saddest day in the Jewish calendar.
And just a quick note about Tisha B'Av, so for those who care about cultural diversity, Tisha B'Av is the commemoration of the destruction of not one, but two temples.
Not a great day in Jewish history, and as I say, there's sort of a superstitious belief in the Jewish community that, and based on the evidence of all the bad things that have happened on Tisha B'Av, this is a bad day just generally, so not a big shock, the news sucks today.
In any case, Tisha B'Av commemorates the destruction of the first temple in Jerusalem in 586 BCE, and the second temple in 70 CE, respectively.
People fast on the state and they fast in commemoration.
It's worthwhile noting that the The thing that is being commemorated is the destruction of the temple on top of the Temple Mount.
So as I've said many times on the show before, many in the media just get it wrong when it comes to Jerusalem.
They say things like the Western Wall is the holiest site in Judaism.
This is a lie.
The Temple Mount is the holiest site in Judaism.
It was usurped and then built over by Muslims, frankly.
I mean, that is the story here, is that Judaism, this is unfortunately a habit of medieval Islam, is to take religious sites that belong to other religions and then pave over them and then build a mosque.
It's actually not just medieval Islam.
It's happening right now in Turkey, where a church was turned into a mosque, turned into a museum, and turned back into a mosque now.
In any case, the Temple Mount was made into a religious site for more than one religion, but it was originally a Jewish site, obviously, which is why you have this giant flat area in the middle of Jerusalem.
There's a very famous Talmudic story in which Rabbi Akiva, maybe the most famous rabbi in the Talmud, is sitting shortly after the destruction of the temple in 70 CE, sitting with other rabbis, and they're all crying, and he starts laughing.
And they ask, why?
And he says, well, do you see the fox that is running through the temple mount?
And they say, yes.
He says, well, there's a prophecy that says that the temple will be destroyed and a fox will run through its ruins.
And now we've seen that and the good news is that eventually the temple will be rebuilt because that's the other half of the prophecy.
So the going Jewish notion is that one day the Tisha B'Av will be a day of rejoicing as opposed to a day of tragedy.
One of the other reasons it's worthwhile noting this is because whenever people try to eviscerate the history of Israel by suggesting that basically it was just a repository of European Jews recognize that the dream of Jerusalem has been on the table for some 4,000 years in Judaism and the bizarre notion Well, I think that the history of the world has shown that wherever Jews are, there tends to be a threat.
Jewish connection to the land of Israel or that if there is a Jewish connection, he doesn't like religion.
So obviously, Seth Rogen knows best or Seth Rogen suggested the Jews would be better off dispersed throughout the world.
Why would you put all the Jews in one place if you're worried about risk to them?
Well, I think that the history of the world has shown that wherever Jews are, there tends to be a threat.
And the history of Israel has shown that the fact that there is a Jewish state willing to defend Jewish rights in places that are not Israel has been quite good for Jews, generally speaking.
The the revitalization of the state of Israel is a glorious thing.
And as an Orthodox Jew, we pray every day for the restoration of a temple.
There is a way, believe it or not.
There is a way that that can be done without the destruction.
It's kind of controversial, but there's some opinions that say there's a way that can be done without the destruction of the Dome of the Rock, for example.
But bottom line is that if you want to know anything about Jewish history, study Tisha B'Av because the story of the Jewish people and the destruction of those two temples demonstrates the ever-present commitment and connection between Jews and the land of Israel.
It is not merely just a bunch of white people who arrived on quote-unquote Arab land.
That is complete revisionist nonsense.
Alrighty, we'll be back here later to do 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, executive producer Jeremy Boring, 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 Sajovic, 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.
You know, the Matt Wall Show, it's not just another show about politics.
I think there are enough of those already out there.
We talk about culture, because culture drives politics, and it drives everything else.
So my main focuses are life, family, faith.
Those are fundamental, and that's what this show is about.
▲
Export Selection