In this episode - With all due respect to Jimmy Kimmel, what about the rest of us with sick family members priced out of healthcare due to Obamacare? http://fxn.ws/2wwSu8U What is going on at the DOJ? What are they hiding? https://www.conservativereview.com/articles/the-cnn-wiretap-bombshell-that-wasnt Why are people allowing themselves to be manipulated by the "Net Neutrality" crowd? http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/backers-of-heavy-handed-internet-rules-are-all-thumbs/article/2634936?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Examiner+Today&utm_source=StructureCMS Another misinformed liberal claiming "white supremacy" caused the Trump win. https://www.wsj.com/articles/ta-nehisi-coates-and-the-politics-of-contempt-1505861888 Sponsor Links: www.CRTV.com Promo Code "Bongino"
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
All the Sanders supporters love throwing bombs at me and I throw them right back.
I'm not here to pull any punches, right?
The Dan Bongino Show.
This is the great irony of conservatism.
Even liberals win under conservatism.
Get ready to hear the truth about America.
Are you suggesting you're that stupid that other people can run your lives better than you can even though the cost and quality of what they buy, quote, for you doesn't even matter to them?
On a show that's not immune to the facts with your host, Dan Bongino.
Hi, welcome to the Renegade Republican with Dan Bongino.
Producer Joe, how are you today?
Doing well on this Wednesday morning, Dan.
Man, the hysterical response amongst the liberal intelligentsia, and believe me, I use that term intelligentsia very loosely, to the Trump U.N.
speech yesterday is...
Is maniacal.
I mean, it's padded room stuff.
You know, I've actually seen padded rooms.
Those are real, you know.
I mean, maybe it's time to put the media and their liberal hack friends in these padded rooms.
They can jump back and forth.
They can bounce their heads off it.
They were pulling their hair out yesterday, screaming, clawing their eyes out.
It's just hysterical.
I'm not going to spend a ton of time on this yesterday.
I just wanted to hit two quick points.
Joe has a great cut.
Get that sucker ready.
What is this?
Terry Moran or Jim Moran or whatever?
Who cares?
Doesn't matter.
Moran.
Folks, funny inside baseball story.
So Joe gets to work at like one o'clock in the morning at WCBM for the morning show and he does some cuts.
So he'll email me and I get up about five.
I usually fall back to sleep, get up again about six or so.
So at five o'clock I listened to the cut he sent over and it said, Moran.
Trump speech.
So once in a while, Joe will put commentary in the cuts, like, listen to this moron.
So I'm like, Joe, what's the guy's name?
And it was, I swear, it was a who's on first moment.
I'm like, no, what's the guy's name?
He goes, Moran.
I go, no, I know he was like a moron.
I thought Joe spelled it wrong.
I'm like, I get it.
I go, what's his name?
Evan McMurray.
He goes, dude, it's Moran.
That's the guy's name.
I swear.
I thought he spelled moron wrong.
So no, there you go, Terry.
That's what I thought of your commentary.
But two quick things.
One, Major plot, it's big backslap to Trump for getting up there at the UN and calling out socialism for what it is.
On a very serious note, folks, this show and my life personally has been dedicated since I entered the political arena and the ideological activism realm to combating the dangers of socialism.
Socialism is the most dangerous political ideology right now on earth.
It has the potential to kill, to wipe out your economic condition, to starve you.
I mean, the evidence of failure is conclusive.
I say about socialism all the time, it has a 100% success rate of failure.
Every single place has been tried.
Don't tell me about democratic socialism, there's no such thing.
You're talking about big government and anti-states, not socialism.
Do your homework and then come back to me when you know what you're talking about.
Socialism, as evidenced in Venezuela, is deadly.
It is deadly.
And thank God Trump got up yesterday in front of a bunch of socialists, many of them, and a bunch of pseudo-socialists and fake socialists at the UN yesterday and said about Venezuela, folks, It's not that socialism failed in Venezuela, it's that it worked as intended.
That's the problem!
Because when it works as intended, you will starve or you will die.
Moving on quick before we get to the topical matters on the show today.
Play that cut, Joe, of this, of who I thought was a guy named Evan McMurray, he's actually Terry Moran, talking about Trump calling out the North Koreans, calling him Rocket Man and saying basically we'll obliterate you if you attack us.
Wait, wait, before you play it, just to get this straight.
The President of the United States is responding to a maniac in North Korea who has threatened to turn the United States into a heap of ashes.
So the President responded by saying, listen, you attack us, we're going to attack you back and we will annihilate you.
And this is how the kooks of the liberal media respond.
Play that cut.
Words totally destroying a nation of 25 million people.
That borders on the threat of committing a war crime.
Dude!
Dude!
Remember yesterday's show?
Dude!
The serial killers around the corner.
Dude?
Then there's other forms of dude.
This is one of those.
This is a different form of dude.
This isn't the serial killer around the corner dude.
This is you have your hand in your face.
Your friend just said something stupid.
You put your palm in your face and you go, Dude!
Dude!
Mr. Moron!
Are you serious?
So Donald Trump, this is how insane, now you wonder why absolutely no one with a brain takes the media seriously anymore.
Mr. Moran, I'm begging you as an average everyday middle class working man, just resign, find a new line of work.
Please, this is not for you.
That Trump is committing a war crime by pledging to defend the United States against the North Koreans who have a nuclear device, by the way, annihilating the United States.
What an imbecile.
Oh gosh, this guy really needs to seek a new line of work.
Try librarian, metal fabricator, picture framer, studio operator, commentary?
It's not your thing, buddy.
Okay, moving on.
Yes.
I didn't know where to start today, because there's really, again, always a lot of good material, and I don't like to leave stuff out.
So, you know what?
Let's start with this, because this is important.
I wrote in the title of the show, I titled today's show, The Big Distraction.
And I don't want to harp on the Trump-Russia thing, because it's not a thing.
It's made up.
It's fabricated.
And I understand.
I did get, I pay attention to the listener email.
The show's for you, folks.
If you don't like shows, I'll be honest with you, it hurts my feelings.
It's being serious.
I don't say this out of any sense of over-inflated ego, but we very rarely get a negative email.
But I did get one a while ago.
This guy said, hey, I'm really sick of the Trump-Russia thing.
I get it.
This is not about Trump-Russia at all.
Trump-Russia is not real.
It's fake.
It's a made-up story by the media.
This is about what the hell is going on in the Department of Justice.
You know, I worked inside the government, and one of the things that bothered me, and I kind of hit on it in a couple of my writings and my books and stuff, is how people who work inside the federal government, the Secret Service, the FBI, Department of Justice, Joe, they're under this impression that they own it, that it's theirs.
Mm-hmm.
Ladies and gentlemen, this isn't IBM, okay?
Stockholders actually own IBM.
Like, they own it.
Like, it's their money.
That's what a stock is.
It's an equity stake in a company.
The federal government is not owned by the people who work there.
You are employees.
Listen to me.
This is not an insult.
I'm not degrading your work.
I was a government employee.
I was a cop and a federal agent.
I'm not degrading your work at all.
Don't take this as an attack.
If you do, it's your problem, not mine, because that's not how I intended.
I'm just stating a fact.
This is a tautological statement.
You are an employee of the taxpayer.
You do not own the FBI, you do not own the Department of Justice, and you do not own the Secret Service.
I'm asking you as a taxpayer, again, I'm just a small part of the bigger, you know, 330 person country here, but a taxpayer nonetheless, what the hell is going on over there?
And you may say, all right, well, what are you talking about?
Get to the point.
You know, there's a narrative, and when I say narrative, I know usually when I bring it up, I bring it up in terms of disingenuous, lying, fake liberal narratives like Trump-Russia.
But there's an actual narrative starting to brew, even amongst some people on the sensible left, that are starting to wonder, Joe, if this Trump-Russia fairy tale that was totally made up, Is one of the biggest distractions in American history, meant to distract you from the fact that the FBI initiated an investigation through the Department of Justice, where they worked, where they're sheltered in the Department of Justice, into a presidential campaign based on fake information.
Folks, this is not a small matter.
I'm not going to spend a ton of time on it.
But I want you to spend a ton of time thinking about what I'm telling you.
Even a lot of leftists right now, again, just reasonable ones, are starting to think to themselves that did they make this whole Trump-Russia thing up?
Here's the theory.
Let me explain to you the emerging narrative starting to emerge from the water here.
Like Jason in Friday the 13th, the first one.
Or is that his mom or something?
At the end, who comes out of the lake?
Is it the mom or Jason?
Are you a horror show fan?
No, no, I'm not.
Here's how the narrative goes.
The narrative goes, the Obama administration, plain and simple, was spying on the Trump team.
That's it.
Through unmasking, through all kinds of different things.
Wiretaps, which we learned about from CNN.
You can listen to yesterday's show.
But, so Obama's spying on the Trump team.
Now, you may say to yourself, well, wouldn't that be dangerous?
Weren't they afraid of getting caught?
Well, the emerging narrative is, no, Joe, they weren't afraid.
They weren't afraid at all.
Now, why would they not be afraid?
Because who did they think was going to be elected president?
Hillary!
They were under no illusions at all that Hillary was going to expose them.
It was helping Hillary.
Now, to be clear, because I'm not a conspiracy theory guy, and I really detest that label, especially when it's applied to, you know, Mark Levin, who was correct the whole time and has owed a massive apology by CNN, by the way.
I'll be in for Levin tonight, by the way.
You want to listen in?
The theory is that they may not have been working together, but the Obama administration had a vested interest in continuing its policies and wanted to gather information on the Trump campaign.
The gathering of information happened through unmasking and through wiretapping, and they used the DOJ to do it.
Now, the DOJ can't just randomly initiate an investigation.
We're not a banana republic.
This isn't a third world.
They had to have something.
So what did they do?
Again, the emerging narrative is that they relied on the fake dossier.
Remember the dossier?
Yes.
The intelligence document put together by Christopher Steele and Fusion GPS on Trump, full of fake information, totally debunked.
So, Obama spies, Obama needs the DOJ and FBI, the Obama administration to start an investigation.
They can't start an investigation with no information.
They go and hire Fusion GPS, or work with Fusion GPS.
Fusion GPS creates a fake document, use fake document to spy on the Trump administration, then expect Hillary Clinton to cover it up when she wins.
Right.
Simple as that.
Yep.
Why is this a big deal, folks?
Because the information was fake!
The information was fake!
None of it was real!
The administration assumed Hillary would win and no one would probe any of this stuff!
You're talking about the Federal Bureau of Investigation starting an investigation into a major party presidential candidate opposing the White House on fake information!
Now, to wrap this up... Guys, I love Jeff Sessions.
I think he's doing a great job on a lot of issues.
But where is the DOJ on this?
Listen.
Unrecuse yourself.
I don't care what you have to do.
But the American public deserves some answers here.
And the big distraction, the theory, Joe, to wrap this thing up, is that the big distraction was the panic after the election, where they said, holy crikeys, man, we just lost.
Was that Crocodile Dundee?
Holy crikeys.
Yeah.
They didn't know what to do.
They're like, what are we going to do?
We've been spying on this guy.
The document's fake.
What do we do?
So the theory now is somebody said, let's invent this Trump-Russia collusion narrative, and that'll distract everyone and keep everybody focused on that thing right there.
And it'll keep everybody away from the misgivings and the misdeeds of the Obama administration.
Folks, really, I mean legitimately, really scary stuff.
Alright, moving on.
I don't want to spend a ton of time on that, but it's important.
Okay, story number two.
You know, I gotta be careful with this, and I'm not really afraid of repercussions.
It's my show, I mean, Conservative View lets me do whatever I want.
And I do whatever I want on my show.
But I really am, in many ways, sympathetic, but Jimmy Kimmel has really, really gotta stop doing what he's doing.
Yeah, I heard that.
Uh, Jimmy Kimmel's a late-night host, and you know, with all due respect to him and his situation, I do mean that.
I'm not just throwing it out there.
He's got a very sick kid who was born with some kind of a congenital heart problem, and I don't care if he's famous, a liberal, green, a communist, I don't care.
I don't, I'm sure most, not all the listeners out there, you know, no one would wish that on their worst enemy, and I'm sure it's emotionally ravaging.
I mean, once in a while I'll listen to Stern on SiriusXM, and I know he's friends with Kimmel, and he doesn't talk about it in detail, but says, and I'm sure I take him at his word, that obviously they were devastated, as they should be, at this hard problem.
But Kimmel last night came out again on his show, which is a major platform, I mean, he's got a big audience, and started bashing this Obamacare replacement bill, which I'm not a huge fan of.
Again, I think it doesn't do enough to repeal Obamacare.
But I have a quick kind of response to Jimmy Kimmel.
And his thing is, well, I can't say, and they call it like the Kimmel test now, as if Jimmy Kimmel, who really, frankly, folks, has very little policy expertise at all.
And I'm not doing the Ben Shapiro thing the other day.
I'm just saying he doesn't even understand the bill.
I mean, you don't need a PhD to read the bill and understand the basics.
He hasn't even done that.
He hasn't even like really read through it and doesn't understand the nuances of the bill.
So I say to Jimmy Kimmel, who's now insisting that this Obamacare replacement bill that Cassidy, a Republican senator from Louisiana, and Lindsey Graham have put out there, which looks like it may pass by the way, it's not great.
It's better than what we have now.
It doesn't repeal Obamacare, make no mistake, but it does repeal a lot of the taxes and does block grant a lot of the money.
Kimmel's problem with this is it's going to take away insurance from people with disabilities and would somehow impact him.
That's the Kimmel test.
Like, is it going to take away insurance from people?
And I say to Jimmy Kimmel, you know, using your platform, you know, Jimmy, if you're listening or anybody who knows you're listening, I mean, this is a serious question.
When you do your homework on this, and you responsibly critique these programs on both sides, have you ever wondered how many people have lost insurance and been priced out of healthcare who have sick family members and sick kids too, due to Obamacare?
Does any of that bother you?
This is a serious question.
I know you're a comedian and an entertainer and it's fashionable to rip conservatives and make us all out to be cretins and we don't care about people and we want to throw a granny off the cliff and we want babies to die and kids to die and puppies to suffer.
I know that.
But put that aside and I'm asking you to be reasonable for a minute and not be a fool.
Don't jump in with the liberal lemmings off the cliff.
And to think this through.
Have you ever considered the double digit, in some cases going to be triple digits at some point in the very near future, hikes in healthcare premiums precisely due to Obamacare because of community rating and guaranteed issue.
Have you ever considered how many people don't have insurance because of that, who are in equally dire predicaments with their kids, Joseph, who don't have millions of dollars.
I don't fault you for your success in Hollywood, but who don't have million dollar buffers to pay cash for the healthcare.
Does any of that bother you at all?
Or is this all about a partisan talking point outside of any policy knowledge at all?
I mean isn't it grossly irresponsible to use a multi-million person platform to talk about something you have absolutely zero expertise in or even a secondary or tertiary level of expertise in?
You don't know what you're, I'm sorry, you don't know what you're talking about.
You know absolutely what you're talking about about your kid.
Nobody knows that situation sadly better than you do.
And you have my sympathies and everyone else's.
But commenting on larger policy issues based on your individual situation without an appropriate level of knowledge about what you're talking about is grotesquely irresponsible.
You know, I have a platform on this show, nothing close to Kimmel's.
That's obvious.
We have a great audience.
It's pretty big.
We thank you.
But it's not Kimmel's audience.
It's not even close.
Joe and I don't do commentary on things we don't understand.
Matter of fact, Joe has sent me clips on stuff and he knows this about things.
Hey, you want to use this clip?
And I've said to him, Joe, I don't know enough about that.
I haven't read on it.
So we're not going to do it.
That's not what we do.
And when we're wrong, which happens a lot, by the way, we correct ourselves.
I don't talk about things I don't understand or don't know.
He doesn't understand this.
I have addressed on this show thousands of times the problems with Obamacare.
Community rating and guaranteed issue.
You cannot promise people who have a high risk of high healthcare costs the same rates for insurance as people who don't have high risk.
It's like saying I want to charge the guy who drives a motorcycle, drives drunk, never obeys traffic laws, been arrested a thousand times and speeds everywhere the same insurance rights as grandma who drives a Honda Civic and has never been in an accident her entire life.
That doesn't make sense!
It doesn't make sense.
It doesn't make mathematical sense.
It's not logical.
You're talking about an entitlement program and you're not talking about an actuarially sound risk-adjusted insurance.
That's not what insurance is.
That's what community rating is, folks.
It controls the prices for everyone regardless of the cost.
What else in your life is... What else in a free economy is handled that way?
What else?
What else is handled regardless of cost?
Your car insurance?
Of course not.
If you cost a lot to an insurance company because you've been in 20 accidents last year, you have to pay more.
Nothing else works this way.
Now, the rules of economics may not be cute.
They may not be nice.
You may say, what are you saying?
Sick people have to pay more?
Jimmy, somebody has to pay more.
And if you don't want people who are sick to pay more, who do you want to pay?
Well, I haven't really thought about that.
Of course you haven't.
Because you haven't, you're just using your platform to propagandize people.
Who do you want to pay?
And Jimmy Kimmel's answer is clearly everybody else.
Who, by the way, also have their own sick kids, and their own sicknesses, and their own trouble finding jobs, and their own financial problems.
Oh, we need the rich people to pay more.
Listen, I've already gone over that, okay?
Rich people already cover the overwhelming amount of tax flow into the country is paid for by people who are rich.
If you confiscate every dollar of their wealth, the billionaires in the country wouldn't be able to finance the government for one year.
The real money's with the middle class.
All I'm asking, Jimmy, and I'm going to wrap it up on this.
And by the way, guaranteed issue because I didn't mention that.
Guaranteed issue is the idea that not only should the guy with the motorcycle, who doesn't obey traffic laws, pay the same amount as grandma with the Honda Civic, that the guy with the motorcycle should be guaranteed an insurance policy almost at any time.
So what does he do, Joe?
He gets in an accident, he goes to the hospital, he goes, hey, I need insurance.
That's not the way insurance works.
And then he drops it, by the way, after they pay for his procedure.
I'm asking Jimmy one question.
I'm going to move on because I got a lot of great stuff today I want to get to, too.
Why not just be honest?
Why not just come out and say, yes, under this Obamacare replacement plan, people are going to lose insurance.
But to be candid, a lot of people have been priced out of insurance under Obamacare as well.
And I think I support Obamacare as is.
Obviously, I don't.
I'm speaking for Jimmy Kimmel here.
Don't take that as a soundbite.
That happened to me in the last election, by the way.
Someone took a soundbite like that and made it seem like I supported Obamacare, which was absurd.
But just say, hey, I support Obamacare and I think that the middle class in the United States should pay more for insurance to cover everyone else.
Just be honest!
I disagree.
I think that people should largely be responsible for their own condition.
I don't mind some form of a social safety net for people who can't.
But just be honest and say, I think you should pay more in premiums, I think you should pay more to the government, and that the middle class should finance the other middle class people's healthcare.
Because that's what you're doing.
Your neighbor's paying for your healthcare while you're paying for his.
That is exactly what's happening right now.
But again, people like Jimmy Kimmel, with all due sympathy to his situation, they don't want to do the hard work, Joe.
I get up at six o'clock in the morning and put together this show, and do my homework, and I go to Cato, and Heritage, and Breitbart, and Conservative Review.
You know, I go to Drudge, I go to Heritage, and I just said Heritage twice, but these are people who've done detailed policy, and now this is hard work to do this stuff.
Eh, it's not hard.
It's intellectually challenging, but you people do hard work.
You do real hard work.
But Jimmy doesn't want to do that.
And now you get people, you know, lemmings, liberal lemmings who watch Jimmy's show go, Republican plan, bad.
Obamacare, good.
Can you explain that?
No, Jimmy Kimmel told me.
Oh, Jimmy Kimmel, okay, it's got to be terrible then.
It's really a shame, folks.
That's where the intellectual, rigorous debate dies, on the Jimmy Kimmel show at night.
It's really sad.
The propaganda never ends.
All right, folks, have you signed up for CRTV yet?
If you haven't, I'd really appreciate it if you'd give us a look.
We have the best conservative content out there.
People are cutting to court, folks.
They're tired of paying $200 a month in cable bills for what, one or two shows you watch?
You want to pay less than $10 a month for better shows?
Well, you have them on Conservative Review.
We have the best conservative content out there.
We have the Mark Levin Show, Michelle Malkin Show, Steven Crowder Show, Steve Dace's Show, and we got a lot more coming in the future.
Use promo code Bongino, my last name, when you go to CRTV.com and you'll get $10 off.
Go to CRTV.com, promo code Bongino, sign up today.
We're building a great platform of conservative content.
You can watch it on your computer, you can watch it on your tablet, you can sling it to your TV.
Another story I found interesting that's creeping up again that comes up a lot and I know, I absolutely know I'm going to get some hate mail on this one.
This is one of those shows that whenever I bring it up I always get some nasty, even from conservatives who seem unbelievably misguided on the topic.
I'm sorry, I'm not trying to insult you, but I just don't think you understand the ramifications of what you support.
That's net neutrality!
There's a really great op-ed.
It'll be at the show notes.
I'm going to put it in the show notes.
Available at Bongino.com.
And if you subscribe to my email list, I will email the show notes to you.
It's very convenient.
Just go to Bongino.com.
It's a big subscribe thing.
But I'll put the op-ed there.
It's from the Washington Examiner.
It's a really terrific piece about the dangers of net neutrality.
Folks.
Net neutrality, just a quick summation of what we're talking about, and the reason this has come up again is because they are looking at getting rid of the Obama administration net neutrality platform.
What net neutrality is, folks, are taxes and regulations on the internet.
And so stop telling me it's anything else other than that because it's not.
It's not a bit is a bit is a bit.
It's an effort to government control with the content out that's coming over you.
That's what it is.
It's not a bit is a bit is a bit.
Because a bit isn't a bit isn't a bit when it comes to things like political traffic over the internet.
It's just not true.
Nothing you're saying about net neutrality is true.
And by the way, This throttling argument people make, oh, well, you know, if we don't do this, internet companies, ISPs, internet service providers are going to throttle stuff.
In other words, slow down content for certain websites.
There's no evidence of that.
The evidence people constantly put out, it's the same few cases every time, were just disagreements between wholesalers and retailers.
It had nothing to do with throttling content.
The reason your content is slow is because you're consuming a lot of content.
You're just making it up as an excuse.
I'm sorry.
So, why am I bringing this up today?
Because there's a great op-ed about this, about how conservatives, some conservatives, are still being suckered by this thing.
We gotta support net neutrality.
Here's what it's about, folks, to give you the kind of, the details you need to go forth and argue this thing.
They put the internet under Title II.
Title II was an old government basically bevy of regulations, a regulatory apparatus designed to regulate basically communications companies.
And they're sticking the internet under Title II in an effort to tax it and regulate it.
That's what net neutrality is.
It's got nothing to do with a byte is a byte is a byte.
That's just a guise given to people to sucker them into believing this thing is real.
But they throw a number out there in the op-ed piece.
It's a really good piece though.
So since this happened, and basically the government's trying to price control and tax the internet, internet service providers, Joe, that provide the internet, internet service providers, who can't appropriately price their product now, have now largely decreased their investment in providing the internet.
So this is fascinating.
Again, your argument is that when the net should be neutral, that we should get information bits to everyone.
It shouldn't be slowed down by internet service providers.
So let's let the government take it over.
That's your argument.
The government takes it over under the Obama administration and there's now a 150 to 250 to 200 billion dollar reduction in investment in actually getting the internet to people.
Guys, ladies, I can't scratch my head enough when it comes to things like this.
I just, I genuinely don't understand.
I get it why liberals get this.
What I don't understand is when I get emails from conservatives and libertarians who actually believe that the government is going to fix this.
Does, I mean really, does data and evidence bother you at all?
These companies have stopped investing, or I shouldn't say stopped, to be more precise.
They have slowed down investing in the actual internet you think you're advancing the cause of.
You're advancing the cause of a neutral, growing, flourishing internet and it's actually not happening.
Now in the PC Points, this is a 25% reduction in investment.
Why is that?
I'll give you an easy example that's used over and over in this getting incredibly ridiculous debate.
If you were to tell an airline, a seat is a seat is a seat, when it's not, Joe, a seat is not a seat is not a seat.
Right?
I mean, what do I mean by that?
People pay more for more legroom.
People pay more for first class.
People, if they could, would probably pay more for the exit row, too.
I mean, the emergency exit row, because there's more seat room, because people need to walk through the aisle.
But people, a seat is not a seat is not a seat.
Just like on the internet, a bit isn't a bit isn't a bit.
A guy downloading a 7 hour full HD 62 billion megapixel movie in his house is not doing the same thing as a guy who reads the Drudge Report.
That is not the real world.
Just like Jimmy Kimmel describing to you a world where the Obamacare replacement GOP thing takes insurance away from people is not the real world.
The real world is where Obamacare is taking health insurance away from people.
That's what's actually happening.
Let's not be disingenuous about this.
A bit is not a bit is not a bit.
A seed is not a seed is not a seed.
The reason price discrimination, I'm using air quotes because liberals love that term, Which is really a liberal terminology for price differences.
The reason price differences exist is not because they're discriminating against people.
It's because people are willing to pay more for more product.
If you're a Netflix user who wants to download, you know, 500 hours of content in one night or whatever it is, then folks, obviously that's not possible.
You get what I'm saying?
I'm talking about movies.
You want to keep watching movies and movies and movies and you never get off.
It's not the same thing.
It's not the same thing as your neighbor who's clicking on a New York Post article.
It's not.
I'm sorry.
It's not the same thing.
You pretending it's the same thing, it's just pretend.
And you're ignoring the fact that once you price everything the same, someone is going to pay more.
And who typically pays more?
The guy in the coach seat.
They say, well that's not possible.
No, it is!
By putting first class seats on a plane and enabling people to have a couple extra inches of leg room and a meal on a plane, Joe, and charging them double what the coach person pays, it's the ability to charge them double due to that price difference that enables the coach seat to be cheaper.
Once you wipe out the premium on the first class seat and the extra revenue, where does the revenue come from?
The coach passengers!
What part of this are you not getting?
All right, that makes sense.
So now, oh, we're not going to allow internet ISPs to price discriminate, price their product.
We're not going to allow price difference.
Okay, everybody pays more and then nobody gets the internet.
Again, it doesn't frustrate me when liberals do this.
I totally understand.
Liberals do not live in the real world.
They live in a world of rhetoric and emotions.
Nothing makes sense to them.
Nothing is real.
The Obamacare premium hikes are fictitious.
The Bill Clinton surplus was real.
The Reagan tax cuts hurt the economy.
They live in a world that doesn't exist.
Fine.
Do your thing.
That's great.
Just leave me alone when you do it.
What bothers me is when conservatives get suckered by this.
You actually think the government has a fix for this?
As if the government has ever fixed anything, ever, in American history.
Ever.
Outside of our military.
You know, it is.
It's disturbing, man.
It really is.
It's hard to believe that people get suckered by this.
I mean, it frustrates me, folks.
I know I'll get emails on it from people who will still insist that, number one, That throttling is real despite the fact that there are... Show me a case, an actual case.
I'm not talking about the wholesale resale disagreements.
I mean an actual case you can prove of someone whose internet service in their house was throttled due to the fact that the company didn't like Netflix and was stopping Netflix traffic.
Show me!
Even Netflix is having a hard time with net neutrality these days.
And then tell me again how the government's gonna fix that.
In case you don't know, Joe, airline prices went down after the government deregulated, not regulated, the airline industry.
And you think the government's going to fix the internet, the IT?
It's just insane.
It's absolutely insane.
All right.
Okay.
I got to get to this one.
This one's a doozy.
I teased a couple other stories yesterday.
I may get to them.
I may not, but they're good ones too.
But before I get to that, let me see, let's do My Patriot Supply.
Hey, you know, natural disasters are just piling up.
I mean, this Mexico quake, you got this unbelievably powerful hurricane in Puerto Rico.
Folks, it's time to really start thinking through your emergency management plan in your house.
You know, you have two floors, you have an emergency ladder on the top floor.
You know, do you have a firearm?
I mean, I'm not pushing it on anyone.
It's not my prerogative to do that, but I'm a Second Amendment supporter.
I think, you know, it's probably a good idea to do that.
You trained how to defend yourself, at least a little bit?
You physically conditioned?
You know, you ready in case civil order breaks down for a couple weeks?
You know, we always say, ah, it's not going to happen.
Folks, you know what?
Sadly, after watching all these natural disasters, the likelihood of you having to go two, three weeks, even a month without backup from the government, look what they're telling people in the keys right now.
Be self-sufficient.
Sadly, it's very real.
That's what they're telling people.
Go back.
You better have water and you better have food.
Get yourself a one-month supply of emergency food.
My Patriot Supply, I'll sell it to you for just $99.
That's it.
For a one-month supply of emergency food.
You can put yourself at ease.
Matter of fact, some guy emailed me yesterday.
He said, you know, the food's good for 25 years.
I said, the best day of your life isn't 25 years and you throw it out.
The guy emailed me, goes, why would I throw it out?
It's really good food.
I said, it's a good point.
25 years, just eat it.
So it's good for 25 years.
All you need is water to prepare it.
It comes in a nice little box.
Stick it in your closet.
Better to have it and not need it than to need it, God forbid, and not have it.
You have kids?
You have family members?
Pick up a couple boxes.
Go to preparewithdan.com.
That's preparewithdan.com for just $99.
Go pick up an emergency supply, one month emergency supply of emergency food today.
And they'll give you, by the way, I picked, like I said, I don't speak with forked tongue.
I bought my own supply.
I didn't ask them for any freebies.
I got a freebie earlier when they came on board.
But once you buy a box, they give you additional deals.
You'll see when you go on the website.
And I got a great deal.
I got $10 off a one month supply of vegetables and dried fruits, which matters to me.
Listen, like I said, better to have this stuff and not need it than need it.
And not have it.
Okay, I had to get to this one.
This is another story I put in the show notes today.
A really great op-ed by Jason Reilly, who's a terrific op-ed writer at the Wall Street Journal.
Jason happens to be black, so he writes about issues that affect the black community a lot.
He writes a lot about school choice.
He's a multi-dimensional guy, and he's very bright.
And there is a, now you being a, most of you, you know, being real sensible, reasonable people, You probably haven't heard of this thing, but there's an opinion piece on the left that's been making the rounds over the last couple days that is resurrecting the- Get rea- Ugh, Joe.
I'm afraid- Joe's got a great mane of hair.
I'm afraid you're gonna start pulling it out of this, but there's an opinion piece on the left written by a guy named Ta-Nehisi Quo- Quotes, excuse me.
And it's just another utter absurdity.
It's everybody's celebrating this thing.
It's this great piece of, you know, opinion writing out there that resurrects the idea that white supremacy won Trump the election.
It's back again.
Here we go, the follicle follies.
Here we go.
I'm ripping them out.
Well, one by one, here they go.
Joe will be bald by the end of the show.
Sorry, I think I'm in charge.
Women find bald men very attractive, so maybe it'll work for you.
I don't know.
But folks, this thing, I covered this after the election.
I'm remiss to bring it up again.
But this show is about fighting back in the ideological war, and sometimes we need a bit of a refresher course.
So let's go over again with Ta-Nehisi Coates.
I keep calling him Coates.
Let's quote Ta-Nehisi Coates, who says that this was the election and Trump's win was, Joe, quote, a commitment to whiteness.
That's what it was.
He's apparently the left still, as I told you yesterday.
Because sometimes I get emails from people saying, why do you keep bringing up that the left should abandon identity politics?
Stop giving them hints.
They can't.
Listen to me.
They can't.
They are incapable of letting it go.
Guys like Ta-Nehisi here, Coates, they have nothing else.
Do you understand?
Like if you built your entire life around the idea that the world is flat, right?
Yeah.
That once that collapses, you're like, oh my gosh, what do I do now?
I had a parachute for when I fall off, what do I do?
Your whole life, it's over, like their whole life is flat-earthism.
Their entire life is flat-earthism.
It is all identity politics.
They don't have anything else.
There's nowhere else to go.
There's nothing.
If you spent millions of dollars preparing to fall off the edge of the earth and now you realize it doesn't happen, the stuff you, the parachutes, all the equipment you have, the grappling hooks to get up the side of the earth when you fall off as the water, it's useless, there's nothing you can do with it, it's over.
They don't have anything else, folks.
So Coates' op-ed, all these liberals are celebrating, is going, you see, we were right.
Look, Trump's election was all about white supremacy and quote, the commitment to whiteness.
Riley just obliterates this piece because it's just dumb.
But of course, what is it?
A lie spreads around the world before the truth is even whispered, right?
So this thing will make its way around the kooky liberal ecosystem who will all believe again that Trump's election was a commitment to whiteness and white supremacy, which is silly.
So here are some numbers from the Riley piece.
We have to readdress this again.
It's a hair-pulling moment, I'm sorry.
But we do facts and data.
The liberals, Do kookiness.
That's it.
That's all they have.
Okay.
Who do you think, Joe?
Now, sometimes we do this and I quiz Joe and I actually get the quiz wrong because I sucker myself because these are such stupid talking points, but here we go.
I'm going to try this again.
Who do you think won a larger percentage of the white vote?
Romney or Trump?
I think Romney.
He did.
Okay.
You're right.
Now think about what I just said.
Simple question.
If this was a referendum on white supremacy, the Trump election, how is it that Mitt Romney won a larger percentage of the white vote?
I don't know if you know.
Folks, we didn't get this wrong.
Once in a while, we did a thing on a Cato piece.
We had to cut it out of the show because it was so stupid, the counter-argument.
We actually stupided ourselves out of it.
We were like, what?
Did that just happen?
We had to cut.
Remember that, Joe?
Yes, I do.
Joe's right.
Who won a larger percentage of the white vote?
Mitt Romney did.
So let me get this straight.
This election is a referendum on white supremacy, but the last candidate actually won a higher percentage of the vote.
Makes a lot of sense, Libs.
Ta-Nehisi, really good job.
Really, this is...
Although I don't have nearly the sympathy for this guy, because this is just dumb.
This is race baiting, as I do for Jimmy Kimmel.
This is Hollywood.
This is the entertainment intelligentsia mentality.
Just say something, no facts or data to back it up at all.
Say it, propagandize people, and move along.
What Rush Limbaugh would call, you know, the drive-by media.
It's a drive-by hit, that's all this is.
Okay, going on, moving on.
That's not just, that's not it.
Something more.
Who do you think won a greater percentage of the black vote, Mitt Romney or Donald Trump?
I think Trump.
Trump!
You're right again!
Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding, ding!
Armacost, two for two!
So, this is a referendum, the Trump election, on white supremacy, yet Trump got a lesser portion of the white vote than Romney and a greater portion of the black vote than Romney.
Great job, Libs.
This is thorough analysis by Ta-Nehisi Coates.
Nice job, pal.
Really, really good work.
Okay, one more here, Joe.
Who do you think, if you go three for three, I'll be very impressed, got a greater percentage of the Hispanic vote?
Mitt Romney or Donald Trump?
I think Trump did.
Oh!
Dude's three for three today.
Now here's like the third variation of dude in the show, right?
You had serial killer, you have when your friend does something stupid with a facepalm.
This is one when you want to celebrate your friend.
You go, dude!
This is a dude!
Nice job!
Three for three.
Who got a greater percentage of the Hispanic vote in a white supremacy election?
Donald Trump.
Folks.
I'm under no illusion that your psychotic liberal friends are going to have their minds changed by any of this.
But I just encourage you to read the Jason Reilly piece, where even the New York Times and liberal nutbag media outlets are starting to acknowledge that this had nothing to do with white supremacy, and everything to do with voters tired of the status quo.
And there's one more data point I want to point out, which is an important one, and it's a simple one.
If this election was a referendum on white supremacy and to quote Nahisi here, Tai Nahisi, a commitment to whiteness, then how is it that Barack Obama left office with a 57% approval rating?
How is it, actually I take that back, I'm wrong, a 59% approval rating when he was 57% on election day.
Does that make any sense to you?
So Barack Obama, Joe, he's black, right?
Right, right, right.
You sure?
Well, pretty much, yeah.
Okay, we can't, there's no abacus, we can't, we don't have a, maybe we need a science manual, maybe that's the next thing we need.
We have Steve's dictionary, Jay's abacus, maybe we need a science book, okay?
So to anyone out there who wants to send it, well, maybe we'll get a, Joe's gonna have a whole collection of props soon, but that wouldn't be a bad idea, someone to send a biology text.
First one wins, okay?
Old, new, we don't care.
But Barack Obama's black.
Yeah.
He's elected twice by pretty wide margins, right?
Popular vote, electoral vote.
Yep.
Okay, so this is a white supremacist country that elected a black president twice who left office with a 57 percent, excuse me, 59 percent approval rating.
And the guy who beat him got a higher percentage of the black vote, hispanic vote, and a lower percentage of the white vote in an alleged white supremacist election where there's a commitment to whiteness.
Again, Ta-Nehisi, don't let facts and data get in the way of your stupid, ridiculous, poorly researched, idiotic propagandizing argument.
Just keep doing what you're doing and dividing the country because that's what you do best and that's all you do.
Okay, uh, one last thing.
All right, I wanted to mention this.
I spoke about this story yesterday, so I'll give it a little, uh, give it a little air time here.
So, you know, liberals, they always... It's so easy with them.
You know, I always say about liberals, it's like, yeah, it is.
They don't want to help you.
It's not that liberalism doesn't help you, that it actively hurts you.
So, you know, liberalism is so-called, it's about so-called environmentalism, and they love the environment.
So Ryan Zinke, who's the Interior Secretary, Zinke has been, uh, They're trying to do controlled burns in our national forest to get rid of a lot of the underbrush, because when you don't do it... And there's a really good book out there, by the way, by a guy named Greg Ip, called Foolproof.
I've mentioned it a few times on the show, but he talks about this.
How our efforts to save the forest by stopping forest fires have actually caused worse forest fires, because all the brush builds up.
So the Interior Secretary's saying, listen, we've got to do some controlled burns.
We've got to get rid of the fuel on the forest floor to do some of this.
Of course the left is going absolutely wild about this because they want to cut down some trees, too.
God forbid, Joe, because they're overgrown!
There's a tinderbox in these forests!
So the liberals are saying, no, no, we're not going to do that.
And they're fighting it.
The Alliance for the Wild Rockies and Friends of the Wild Swan.
That's a real group.
They're suing to stop this in the Flathead National Forest, despite the fact that liberals, again, in an effort to save the forest, I kid you not, are actually incentivizing the forest to burn down even more by the buildup of underbrush and the overgrowing of trees.
Why do I bring it up?
Just to point out again, how to be a modern liberal, Is to ignore facts, is to ignore data, and to not only not help people, but to create a dangerous, potentially deadly situation.
Liberalism and socialism, there is nothing worse.
It is a cancerous virus spreading amongst people who do not want to accept the real world as it is.
They want to accept it only as it should be in their minds.
Alright folks, tune in to Levin tonight, Marc Levin's show.
You can listen at marklavinczo.com.
I'll be filling in for Mark.
It'll be a good show, and I will see you all tomorrow.
You just heard the Dan Bongino Show.
Get more of Dan online anytime at conservativereview.com.
