Tucker Carlson, Debate Host? with Darren Beattie and Riley Gaines
Tucker Carlson will be back, that much is certain. But what is the best path for Tucker to take as he returns to the air? Revolver's Darren Beattie makes a fascinating argument: The best step for Tucker, for conservatism, and for America would be for Tucker to host his own independent GOP debate. Plus, Riley Gaines joins with an update on the continued state-level success at protecting girls' sports from the transgender peril.Support the show: http://www.charliekirk.com/supportSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|
Time
Text
Checkmate for Tucker Carlson00:15:06
Hey, everybody, welcome to the Charlie Kirk Show.
This is Andrew Colvett filling in once again for the great Charlie Kirk, who is out on assignment this week.
We talk with the great, courageous, brave Riley Gaines, who's having a tremendous legislative impact across the country.
We also get her take on some of these, let's just say, not so nice former feminists that now support men over women, like Megan Rapinoe and others.
Brittany Greiner.
Oh, gosh, you're going to hear that clip in this episode.
We also talk with Darren Beattie.
We unpack the Tucker saga like nobody else is doing.
You're not going to want to miss it.
We got all the inside baseball for you.
We hear it all.
We hear the rumors and we lay them down here for you.
Buckle up.
Here we go.
Charlie, what you've done is incredible here.
Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campus.
I want you to know we are lucky to have Charlie Kirk.
Charlie Kirk's running the White House, folks.
I want to thank Charlie.
He's an incredible guy.
His spirit, his love of this country.
He's done an amazing job building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created.
Turning point USA.
We will not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries, destroyed lives, and we are going to fight for freedom on campuses across the country.
That's why we are here.
Brought to you by the Loan Experts I Trust, Andrew and Todd at Sierra Pacific Mortgage at andrewandTodd.com.
Darren, welcome back to the Charlie Kirk Show.
Fantastic to be with you.
Yeah, we're honored to have you.
One of the regulars on the Charlie Kirk Show, you are, you provide some of the best analysis.
That's why we keep having you back.
And Revolver.news is just getting stronger and better every single day.
So congratulations on that.
I want to talk about, we ended the last hour, Darren, talking about this newly released clip of Tucker Carlson, you know, behind the scenes, Media Matters for America, gets the clip.
And once again, it just seems to make him stronger, make him look more likable, better.
He's talking about, he's talking about pronouns in your Twitter bio, which I think our audience, based on the mountain of emails we just received, literally hundreds of emails saying, yeah, we support Tucker.
We love him even more now that we've seen this clip.
You had a piece in Revolver.
Checkmate Fox News, why Tucker Carlson is the perfect choice to host the GOP presidential debates.
Now, this is the other storyline that is kind of circulating around.
I think Washington Post broke the first story, and I think it's genius.
You know, Charlie, Turning Point USA, they've had a great relationship with Fox News for many years.
But this is a new era, is it not, Darren?
What is happening?
And why do you think this is checkmate for Tucker Carlson?
Well, it's a brilliant move along a number of different dimensions.
I mean, there's so much going on here from the kind of particular aspect of Tucker Carlson versus Fox News.
And then there's the most important element, which is sort of Americans being exposed to the kind of information they need in order to make informed decisions about critical issues.
And so these two elements really converge in Tucker potentially hosting this debate with Fox.
Now, I think it's this piece from Revolver.news, which has really gone white hot.
It's amazing how popular this piece is.
I think because the idea itself is so perfect and really struck a nerd with people because it just ticks all the boxes that you would want.
It's the ultimate way for Tucker to show Fox, I'm the guy.
I'm the star.
I'm the voice of the American people.
Because behind the scenes in all of this, and I don't want to dismiss Fox's perspective, because as cynical and loathsome as it is, it's not clear yet whether it's untrue.
But I'll tell you this: Fox believes that they are the star.
The network is the power.
And all the talent, even Tucker's talent, no matter how popular, no matter how beloved, is ultimately interchangeable.
Because the dumb, obedient cattle, the masses of Americans who are addicted to TV, they will keep coming back to the trough.
They'll keep lining up for another spoonful of cattle slop.
That's what Fox is counting on.
And that's why they think they have the leverage.
And they think, well, you know, people will be upset about Tucker for a while, but ultimately they'll come around because there's a lot of political stuff happening and people just won't be able to help themselves.
So Tucker can, of course, go and do his own thing.
He can do a digital thing.
It'll be immensely profitable for him.
He'll make more money there.
And in certain ways, I think he will have even more influence.
But I think it's important to be realistic.
No matter how much we want to prematurely pronounce the death of network television, there is still, for better or worse, I think worse, but we have to live in reality here.
There is still, for better or worse, a special kind of magic, a special legitimacy attached to prime time network television.
And I think to fully kind of analyze the special impact of what Tucker was, we have to appreciate the role of that prime time platform as a really significant force multiplier for Tucker's voice.
In fact, Megan Kelly put it great.
You know, Megan is actually, I'll be honest, a lot smarter than I gave her credit for.
When I hear her speaking in different types of venues, her analysis was spot on.
And it wasn't, you know, just catering to, because all the masses, they want to hear the people listening to this, they want to hear, oh, cable news is dead.
It's done.
It's irrelevant.
It's all digital now.
Now, it's way more true than it was five years ago, but it's not completely true.
And Megan illustrated it in the following.
She said, look, no matter how big a digital following is, Tucker Carlson's ability to get elected GOP officials and GOP hopefuls to sort of accommodate him, to want to please him, for them to be scared to death that he'll do a segment attacking him.
That kind of political influence that he wielded is very hard to imagine transferring into simply the digital sphere.
Even somebody like Rogan, who's probably the hottest person in media in many metrics, doesn't have the power to get politicians to bend to his will to please him in the way that Tucker had in his primetime slot.
So fast forward to the debate.
Here's why the debate is so brilliant: it recognizes this special quality and maybe the one area in which Tucker's influence might diminish, which is this critical comparative advantage of having influence over the political process.
For him to host the debate preserves that level of influence and it doubles down on it.
And it surpasses Fox.
If he can get Trump, and Trump is no friend of Fox News at this point, Fox News has stabbed him in the back a million times, and they intend to do so throughout the campaign, despite the fact that he's the clear frontrunner.
So if Trump says, forget this, I'm not doing a Fox debate, Tucker hosts the debate, and DeSantis is convinced that he can get a fair shake, which I think he would, you know, more than anyone.
I actually agree with that.
I will say that I think DeSantis and Tucker have communication.
You know, I've heard that through the grapefruit.
So there, and I do think there is a level of trust.
Get a fair shake and think about this: there's a debate with Tucker hosting it.
Trump is there.
DeSantis is there.
Tucker's not going in on Trump or in on DeSantis.
He's preserving this kind of elevated posture of, oh, I'm just, you know, asking both sides of the questions that the American people want answered.
It's such a win because people aren't going to be tuning into Fox News.
People are going to Tucker Carlson for a matter of critical importance pertaining to the future of the GOP and the future of the country.
So it's such a brilliant strategic move.
It's such an important move in order for the American people to have the questions answered that they actually want to be answered.
It just, as I said, it's one of those strategic moves that's just a checkmate.
It's all the way down.
Well, Darren, let me posit this idea.
This might be the only debate that both DeSantis and Trump might attend.
This could be the one.
I mean, because Trump has already said he's not happy with the RNC's process.
And by the way, going outside of the RNC is another power move, a big flex on all the people that are skeptical of the RNC under Rana's leadership.
I want to bring up one other point.
You're talking about network TV.
We've seen Trump now go to CNN to do his town hall.
A lot of people initially were saying negative things about it.
I saw a lot of chatter online.
Darren, is this not actually something that we could get behind?
There's a lot of chatter around CNN that they're trying to right the ship.
They're trying to come back to the middle.
Plus, to your point, Fox has stabbed Trump in the back multiple times.
Do you like this move?
Do you hate this move?
I like it a lot.
I welcome it enthusiastically.
And that's another one of these things.
You know, there are certain things that I think, you know, the base, the very engaged people who are really kind of active in the process.
And, you know, these are the great people.
You know, these are the people that really make things happen.
But sometimes they want to hear things that, you know, they want to hear, oh, CNN is so bad.
Trump shouldn't do it.
He should, of course, do it.
And keep in mind, all of the brilliant viral clips of Trump being Trump in the most brilliant and admirable sense of that term, just about all of them, if not all, have been exchanges with the left-wing media.
That's one of Trump's special advantages.
Darren, are you ready for a crazy nine months or what?
I mean, this primary is getting out of control and it really hasn't even begun yet.
Let me read you a truth from President Donald Trump.
Rupert Murdoch, worst Republican speaker ever, Paul Ryan, Rhino Karl Rove, the Wall Street Globalist Journal, and the rapidly disintegrating Fox News have gone all out over the last three months, pushing and promoting Ron DeSanctimonius, a man who, without the help and endorsement of President Donald J. Trump, he's speaking of himself in the third, would now be working at McDonald's or at a minimum be far away from Tallahassee.
Anyway, all of this rhino-globalist push from election undenier Murdoch has crushed DeSanctis in the polls.
Darren, we're talking about media.
He went straight after Murdoch and the Murdoch Empire.
He went after Karl Rove, Paul Ryan, who's on the board at Fox.
And he called Ron DeSantis DeSanctimonius and DeSanctus, all in one truth.
I mean, this is getting intense.
How is this going to play out?
Outline for our viewers the next nine months.
Well, you know, I think we have a little preview, but you know, DeSantis hasn't announced yet.
I think once he announces, then it's really going to be on and really going to be interesting.
But, you know, we have a little preview of that.
And I think, as I've said before, I think things could be very difficult for DeSantis.
I think he's been led astray.
I think the advice of his counselors or whoever they are who told him to run in this cycle was profoundly ill-advised.
I've said repeatedly that he should just wait it out and run the next cycle.
On that note, he hasn't announced yet.
If he were to about face right now, all indications are that he's going to run.
We've heard that inside and outside.
It's been reported broadly in the media.
If he doesn't, though, is there still time for him to save face with the base?
He could endorse Trump.
Is that what you would advise him to do, even at this late stage?
Because it feels like we've had this drip campaign that he's going to run.
He's going to run.
He's going to run.
And, you know, a lot of people are saying he should have just announced in January.
What's your advice to the DeSantis campaign at this point?
What would it be?
Well, I mean, you know, the best advice would have been not to put himself in this position in the first place.
If he ultimately decides not to run, that is going to look weird and clumsy.
But still, I think that's the better decision than going through with a primary process at this point.
It just simply doesn't look good for him.
And the sad thing is to see that all of this goodwill and political capital that he built up by being a competent and really commendable governor in Florida is just going to continue to hemorrhage that for no good reason.
There's no particular rush.
The people telling him and giving him this false sense of urgency that he needs to go in and step in and challenge Trump is totally ridiculous and really reflects his advisors' poor estimation of him, such that from their point of view, he's this COVID policy one-hit wonder.
And if we wait another four years, COVID might not be such a big deal.
It might not be present in people's minds, and DeSantis will be nothing versus, I think it's very possible he could continue to govern Florida very effectively.
He could build off of his successes as a governor and be in a strong position in another four years.
So I think this sense of urgency reflects an underestimation of his potential.
And so far, the fact that he's heeded that poor advice and he's displayed, I think, mediocre political instincts at best and certain missteps.
I couldn't agree.
Yeah, I couldn't agree with you more, Darren.
What happened with the Trump indictment news, with Bragg coming out slow on that, and really fumbling that initial communication with the press that day?
I think that was the beginning of what we've seen in the polls, this downward trend.
But so, you know, are you saying, and we've only got a minute left, Darren, I could speak with you for the whole hour.
Are you saying it's too late to do this gracefully?
Why I Love Strong Cell00:03:45
He's pot committed.
He has to essentially go now, that he's sort of teased it for a little while.
He has to go.
No, nothing is too late.
I'm simply saying it would have been better not to put himself in this position in the first place.
So now he has a choice between backing out as gracefully as possible and going in and subjecting himself to even more problems.
And I think it's better for him to bow out as gracefully as possible and position himself possibly for a run in the next four years.
Well, I think that's well said.
Darren Beattie from Revolver.news, a tremendous website.
Great friend of the show.
Thank you for your analysis.
As always, Darren, and we'll see you next time.
Thank you so much.
Are you feeling burned out and a little tired?
Look, I want to tell you about something that I've become a big believer in.
And if you do not know about it, you got to research it.
You could fact-check me.
It's NAD.
NAD is a precursor for your body to be able to create ATP, which is basically the life force of everything that you do.
And look, there's a lot of people out there that are promising energy and doing all this, but go do some research on NAD and go see actually how incredibly important it is for high performance to be able to go actually get it to the next level.
And so, what does NAD stand for?
Well, try to take a note here.
It is nicotinamide adenonide dinucleotide.
I did that pretty well, don't you think?
NAD.
It's a coenzyme that is central to metabolism.
Again, don't take my word for it.
Go watch a YouTube video or two or three or four and go fact-check me on it.
I've been taking NAD for quite some time.
And people say, Charlie, how do you travel 2,700 days in a decade?
How do you do the 300 days a year?
How do you do that?
Look, it's not only because of this.
I eat well and do other things as well.
But if you look at NADH, especially when it combines with CoQ10 and marine collagen, it boosts your body's cellular function.
I would never tell you guys to go do something I myself did not do.
And Strong Cell has been able to put together a scientific breakthrough in cellular health replenishment that combines NADH, CoQ10, and marine collagen.
When you combine them together, you get mental clarity.
And that's a must for me.
It's not just that, it's for vitality.
It helps your immune system.
It's all good stuff.
So go to strongcell.com forward slash Charlie today and see for yourself.
It's not a stimulant, it doesn't contain any caffeine.
I'm talking about overall health from the cellular level.
NADH has been called the anti-aging enzyme that helps with so many issues like brain fog, short-term memory loss, blood pressure, heart disease, blood sugar retention, and so much more.
And look, it's not a magic pill.
It's like, oh, I'm going to start taking this and I'm going to be super smart.
No, no, it's an additive, an amplifier on people that want to get better.
But I can tell you, it makes a big difference.
I've personally seen undeniable benefits from taking Strong Cell and engaging with NAD every day.
So I had to partner with them.
I vetted them.
I checked out their ingredient profile.
And do yourself a favor and give Strong Cell a try.
Visit strongcell.com forward slash Charlie today and use promo code Charlie and you get a special 20% discount on your order.
Don't forget your 20% discount by using promo code Charlie at checkout, strongcell.com slash Charlie.
Without further ado, I want to welcome Riley Gaines, who has just been blowing up lately.
Defending Women in Sports00:11:49
Riley, welcome to the show.
Well, thank you so much for having me on.
Well, we're just honored.
You know, we've had a front row seat both here on the Charlie Kirk show and at Turning Point USA to watching you really sort of rise out of obscurity.
You were Class of 22 UK swim.
You competed against Leah Thomas, the man masquerading as a woman and really cheating a lot of other competitors such as yourself at the national championship swim meets.
And you took a stand.
You were brave.
You were one of these lone voices calling out in the wilderness.
I know you're a Christian, so you understand that imagery.
You really were very isolated and alone.
I want to start there, Riley.
What is it about you, maybe your upbringing, your family, that made you stand out when so many other competitors, women that you were friends with, that you were competing against, they shared privately with you that they didn't agree with what was happening, but they stayed silent.
Why did you not?
I think what it is for me, I get called brave all the time.
I get called courageous all the time, but I don't feel brave.
I don't feel courageous.
I think what I think of as brave is our military, is our law enforcement, people who are actively putting themselves on the front lines.
And so when people called me this, it didn't feel right.
Taking a stance in the truth shouldn't be brave.
And that's when it kind of hit me.
We're just scared of different things.
The people who are calling me brave, they're scared of being labeled as transphobic or homophobic or I get called racist even, even though this has nothing to do with race.
They're scared of those labels.
They're scared of the cancel culture that we live in.
And while that is scary, what's scarier to me is not taking a stance in the truth, is lying.
And that's what they're asking us to do.
Denying objective truth, denying what it is to be a woman.
I mean, man and woman, it's the sheer essence of humanity.
And they're asking us to deny that.
That's scarier to me than being labeled any kind of name.
I can handle the names.
I can handle any kind of personal attack anyone wants to throw at me because I'm secure with myself.
And I think that is largely in part due to my faith, due to my support system, and due to the fact that I know I'm speaking for the overwhelming majority of not just female athletes, the overwhelming majority of Americans, the overwhelming majority of people across the globe understand that men and women are different in a way that makes men advantageous when it comes to anything that requires sheer athleticism or strength.
Yeah, I think that's well said.
And I remember from the first interview that you did with Charlie when you were lating that really terrible locker room scene during the national championships where Leah Thomas changed in front of you and that made a bunch of news.
Charlie had a visceral reaction.
I could see it.
You know, he was angry as a father.
I have a father of two daughters.
I am a father of two daughters.
And I mean, I was watching it, feeling this visceral reaction.
You mentioned your father was ready to get involved and make sure that you were protected in that moment, which is an emotion a lot of fathers feel, by the way.
I want to sort of pivot and talk about some of the legislation that you've been involved in, these efforts.
I know you met with Speaker McCarthy.
You've been traveling around the country.
You know, our team put together some stats.
It looks like there are so far 21 different laws passed by red states protecting girls' sports from transgender intruders.
Three new laws have been enacted so far this year in North Dakota, Kansas, and Wyoming, but not all of them are created equal, right?
Not all these laws are created.
What is it specifically?
So we're seeing wins.
We're definitely seeing wins.
We're seeing momentum on this issue.
Your advocacy is having real, real impacts across the country, Riley.
What are you specifically working on at the federal level?
And then we can maybe break down some of these other efforts as well.
Absolutely.
So at the federal level, we have people in the White House right now who are actively working to rewrite Title IX.
Of course, Title IX is a federal civil rights law that is supposed to prevent discrimination on the basis of sex among college campuses and universities.
They are trying to rewrite it to where it's no longer preventing discrimination on the basis of sex.
It's preventing discrimination on the basis of gender identity.
So what this means, men could join sororities.
Men could live in dorm rooms with women and women could do absolutely nothing about it.
Men would have full access to locker rooms, bathrooms, any sort of one sex protected area on campus.
Men could take academic and athletic scholarships away from women.
In this new rewrite, it's actually sexual harassment if you misgender a trans-identifying individual.
It's not sexual harassment for them to be parading around your locker room exposing the opposite genitalia, but it is sexual harassment if you misgender them.
So that's what the people, and it is insane.
That's what the people who honestly once prided themselves on fighting for women in our sex-based protections.
Of course, the left is the party that once embraced the idea of the original feminist movement.
We're seeing this totally flopped now.
It's now the Republicans who are fighting for women.
We have people in office.
We have a sitting Supreme Court justice who can't even define what a woman is.
And I think that's what kind of makes this issue so special is I've been in contact and formed alliances with even lifelong liberals who would consider themselves part of that original feminist movement, who are so frustrated that these people in positions of power among the left can't even define what a woman is.
How can you defend what you can't define?
And so the overwhelming majority of the general public, regardless of political affiliation, understands that this whole sports debacle, men competing against women, men changing in our locker rooms, they understand that's wrong.
While I think our politicians are doing a terrible job of voting accurately or representing their voters accurately.
We just saw in the U.S. House of Representatives in the last few weeks, not one Democrat voted in favor of protecting women and girls.
And people are fed up.
It's time to say enough is enough.
And I think the tides are beginning to turn.
I completely agree.
You know, I'll never forget, Riley, I had this conversation with a very prominent New York Times reporter, award-winning reporter.
And I was in DC at the time, and we were just sort of meeting for an off-the-record, you know, hey, what's going on?
Chat.
And for people who don't know, that's sort of my background, PR, communications.
I was meeting with him.
And, you know, I said, you know, what are the issues that you see as the weakness for the liberal elite right now?
And he pointed directly, and this is before all of this blew up with Dylan Mulvaney, all of this, Bud Light.
This was not even something that we thought about at that time.
He said, this issue is driving liberal elites mad in the city, right?
Their tribal instincts are kicking, and they're definitely, they still associate with the Democrat Party.
They feel tribally loyal to them.
But this issue specifically grates against their common sense.
It grates against what they see with their own two eyes.
I think it's a complete winning issue.
I think that we have to put people like yourselves out front and say that we are the party that's now standing up for women, for moms, for parents.
I completely think that this will have electoral ramifications so long as they continue their insanity.
I want to play a cut here.
Cut 58.
This is Brittany Griner.
I saw you commenting on this on Twitter.
Brittany Griner said that it's a crime.
She really said this.
It's a crime to ban trans people from competing in biological women sports.
Play Cut 58.
Where is that going to be on your radar in terms of advocating for athletes, all athletes, trans to be able to play?
Everyone deserves the right to play.
Everyone deserves the right to come here, sit in these seats, and feel safe.
I think it's a crime, honestly, to separate someone for any reason.
So I definitely will be speaking up against that legislation and those laws that are trying to be passed for sure.
Your reaction, Riley.
I think it's so disingenuous to have someone such as Brittany Griner, Megan Rapino, someone who is athletically successful because of the women's sporting category, come out and advocate for taking that away from other women.
It's ironic.
I mean, let's go back to Megan Rapino.
This is someone who once fought for equal pay for women, equal resources, equal access to these resources.
And now I want to mention both Brittany Griner, Megan Rapino, the 36 other athletes, including Sue Berg and a slew of others who signed on to this letter, Billie Jean King.
Of course, these athletes are at the end of their career or are done competing.
And majority of them, Megan Rapino, Brittany Garner, Billie Jean King, again, they don't have daughters to defend.
So they don't care.
They've achieved what they wanted to.
They've had their cake and they ate it.
So they'd rather virtue signal.
They'd rather be seen as kind and inclusive and whatever other term, tolerant, loving, accepting.
I mean, the list can go on.
But in reality, it's not kind to ask a girl to undress in front of a man.
And it's not inclusive.
Of course, it's not inclusive to ask a woman to step aside and smile and allow a man to take her spot on the podium or to take her opportunity or to take her scholarship.
That's exclusive to the very female athletes who Title IX was passed to protect.
And I just think it's so ironic and almost comical that Brittany Griner wants to talk about crimes because if we're talking about crimes, we sure can.
But and I also want to echo, I agree with what she said in terms of everyone has the right to play.
Of course, everyone has the right to play.
This just shows her incompetence and her ignorance on the issue because these laws that are being passed, they're not banning anyone from playing.
They're not restricting anyone from the right to competing.
It's just about ensuring people compete where it's fair and where it's safe.
Yeah, Riley, what would you say is the right solution here then?
Would you like to see, and we only have a minute.
I'll keep, if you have time, I'd like to keep you on the other side of the break.
But is the solution a separate league for trans athletes or should they compete in the same category as their biological sex?
I think in an ideal world in terms of finances, in terms of garnering enough people to play in these trans leagues, sure, that's an option that could work.
But in reality, I don't think it's something that's feasible.
I think competing with your biological sex is the really best way to move forward.
It ensures everyone athlete opportunity, chances for success, fairness, safety, all of those things that we strive for and support in competition.
I think I tend to agree.
I think it's at least it creates another piece to the argument that people that are advocating for these trans athletes can sort of wrap their head around.
This is Charlie Kirk, and we're saving babies at Pre-Born.
What are you doing today?
When you introduce a girl to her baby by providing an ultrasound, you're giving her the truth at the most important time in her life.
And more than 85% of the time, when she sees the baby and hears that baby's heartbeat, she will choose life.
And what better time than to do it than May, the month we celebrate motherhood?
$140 gives just five mothers a free ultrasound and saves babies.
$280 can save 10 babies.
And just $28 a month can save a baby a month for less than a dollar a day.
And a $15,000 gift will provide an ultrasound machine that will save lives for years to come.
Whether you want to save one baby or five or hundreds, that opportunity is a phone call or click away.
Maybe this month you could provide ultrasounds in honor of your mom.
The Downward Spiral Begins00:04:56
Check it out.
Pre-born is wonderful.
Go to preborn.org slash Kirk.
I am a donor and you should be as well.
Call 833-850-BABY.
That's 833-850-2229 or go to preborn.org slash Kirk.
Great organization, preborn.org slash Kirk.
Riley, really, really quick.
I just want to hear from you.
Have you heard from any liberal, progressive, Democrat lawmakers at all?
Have you gotten any phone calls saying like, hey, off the record, I support what you're doing?
There have been few at the state level.
One in Kansas, his name is Representative Marvin Robinson.
He was one to vote for the Women's Bill of Rights in Kansas, which is a bill that defines the word woman.
It's crazy we even have to do that, but this is a bill that defines the word woman as an adult human female.
He was the lone Democrat who voted in favor.
He was also the lone Democrat who voted in favor of protecting women and girls in sports in Kansas.
I actually called him first and just wanted to thank him for his leadership in going against the grain.
So we've been in contact.
There have been few others who have really stood up to this.
What we're noticing is it's more apt at local levels and then, of course, the state level.
And then we're not seeing that transition to the federal level quite yet.
So I think this is starting from the bottom and hopefully trickling its way up.
What we're seeing is culture affects politics.
And I think they see as the culture surrounding this is changing, the politics will also soon change.
You know, we've really lost something in this country where we don't have a sane opposition party.
We really don't.
We've really lost something.
I mean, at least if the Democrats had an ounce of sanity left on this issue and they gained control in one election and then lost it and gained it again or whatever, at least the country would have some stability.
I mean, it's just a tragedy.
This mind virus has completely consumed them.
I want to play some tape, though.
And this is sort of outside of the sports realm, but it's still in this issue.
I want to play this.
This is a new thing that when you think they can't get crazier, they come up with a new something, a new ism.
This is childism.
Never heard of it before.
Play Cut 59.
Do you know about childism?
This term hasn't trended yet.
And people aren't talking about this.
I think it's totally valid.
Childism is the idea of, well, sexism, racism, discrimination against your sex, discrimination against your race.
Well, childism is discrimination because you're a child.
Like, for example, if a student were to come up to me and say, hey, Desi, I'm non-binary.
Can you call me they?
And I told that student, oh, honey, you're way too young to know your gender identity.
This would not only be transphobic, this would also be considered childism.
Not only am I not respecting their pronouns, I would also be discriminating against them because of their age.
I'm saying they are too young to know what their gender identity is.
I'm a teacher.
This helps.
See what you did there, Riley?
So now, you know, we have age limits on driving.
We have age limits on consuming alcohol.
We have age limits on voting.
Oh, wait.
Are we going to get rid of that one next?
And now you have somebody on TikTok, and this video started to go viral saying that it is discrimination against young people if we tell them they are too young to determine their own gender.
Your reaction.
I mean, you hit the nail on the head.
Are we going to start saying it's discrimination to not let them drive a car, to not let a five-year-old own a gun?
Is that discrimination?
I mean, this is along the exact same lines.
I can't even believe someone with a brain could take this approach.
I don't even care.
If you have a brain, you should understand that there are certain things children should never be able to do until you reach that threshold of becoming an adult.
I mean, we don't even let people get tattoos until the age of 18, but if we're going to let them irreversibly change their gender, that is the most insane, absurd thing I've ever heard.
And just as you said, I want to be surprised.
I do.
I want to feel as if this is something that shocking.
And to a degree, yes, but I'm unphased at this point.
We're seeing things such as now trans age, which means you can identify as a different age.
We're seeing trans-abled, which is people who are actively disabling themselves so they can identify as trans-abled.
It just seems as if we are on this actively, I mean, we're actively putting one foot in front of the other and declining.
And we're doing this by the fate of our own hands.
We are taking the step-by-step into this downward spiral.
And it is, it's truly heartbreaking to see.
And again, I'm young.
I'm only 23 years old.
And so I don't want to sound like I'm some old buzzard here, but to see what our country went from, even just a mere four or five years ago, to where we are now, it just raises so many questions.
Is it the new administration?
Did COVID play a big part in this?
Finding Grace Amidst Decline00:02:34
I mean, why is this happening?
Why are we at the point where we're denying objective truth?
Why are we trying to say children can do absolutely anything they want under the sun?
I mean, that's criminal.
Well, it's a, you're right.
It's a collective psychosis that has impacted the entire Western world and doesn't show any signs of abating anytime soon.
But nevertheless, here we are.
I'm going to play another cut for you.
We've got it.
We're running short on time, but I want to get your take.
Dylan Mulvaney is trying to have grace for people like you, Riley.
Just really trying.
He's trying to find grace for people that are targeting him.
57.
Dare I say this might be, this is controversial, but the people that are targeting us right now, I'm trying to find grace for them because I know that this was, you know, planted from something else.
And I can only hope that they will see the beauty and the humanity and the importance of an identity and not trying to strip that away.
Grace is going to be my word of the week.
I decided.
All right.
One minute, Riley.
This is, you know, this person, we make fun of this person, and rightly so.
This person has 13 million followers.
I think on TikTok alone, I'm not sure.
This person holds a tremendous amount of influence.
What do you want to say to people like Dylan Mulvaney that think you're targeting them?
Again, calling out what is true, calling a spade a spade is not targeting.
It is just being unwavering.
It's unwilling to lie.
And that's the position I've taken this past year.
I'm unwilling to stand for anything other than the truth.
That being said, I always welcome grace.
I, of course, am a sinner, just as everyone else in this entire planet is.
So grace is something I always welcome and I'm very much in need of, but it's not for targeting Dylan Mulvaney.
I'm not someone who writes, right?
Yeah, we're running out of time, Riley.
But I gave you a big clip right at the end of the show.
Thank you for your time and for being generous with us.
Thanks so much for listening, everybody.
I hope you enjoyed that episode.
I know I did.
If you like what you hear on the Charlie Kirk show, please consider leaving a five-star review.
Tell Charlie how much you like his guest host, Andrew Colvett, producer Andrew.
Let him know how much you like it.
Leave a five-star rating and a review.
It really helps us in the charts.
It makes sure that other people get to see our work.
It means the world to us.
We'll talk to you soon.
Thanks so much, everybody.
For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to CharlieKirk. com.