In this episode - The NFL “Take a Knee” protests have been a catastrophe. Look at these astonishing poll numbers. http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/shock-poll-nfl-now-least-liked-sport-core-fans-down-31/article/2636837?utm_campaign=Washington%20Examiner:%20Washington%20Secrets&utm_source=Washington%20Examiner:%20Washington%20Secrets%20-%2010/09/17&utm_medium=email Are the liberal claims of “systemic oppression” based on the real world, or based on a media-Hollywood-academia-fabricated world? http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/racial-politics-democrats-brought-the-coals-trump-fanned-the-flames/article/2636614?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Examiner+Today&utm_source=StructureCMS The Vice President takes a strong stand against the anti-American NFL protests. https://legalinsurrection.com/2017/10/pence-leaves-nfl-game-in-protest-after-players-kneel-during-national-anthem/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+LegalInsurrection+%28Le%C2%B7gal+In%C2%B7sur%C2%B7rec%C2%B7tion%29 A prominent Democrat just made the outrageous claim that “there have been more mass shootings than days of the year.” I debunk this nonsense in the show. https://www.wsj.com/articles/are-there-really-more-mass-shootings-than-days-in-the-year-1507487568 Another prominent Democrat admits that no law would have stopped the Las Vegas attacker. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/dianne-feinstein-talks-to-face-the-nation-after-las-vegas-shooting/
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.
All right, welcome to The Renegade Republican with Dan Bongino.
Producer Joe, how are you today?
All systems go, babe.
You got it, man.
Thanks to everyone who tuned in to Rough Cuts this weekend, our first version, Rough Cuts 1.
Yeah, tremendous number of downloads, especially for a weekend.
I said to Joe, we may have to switch over to Rough Cuts and make the politics secondary.
Just kidding.
Just kidding.
I love this stuff.
I enjoy what I do.
I would never give this up.
But it did do incredibly well.
I think far exceeded our expectations and I got Mm, I don't know, maybe 300 emails or so on it.
Yeah, it was a lot.
Wow.
So I read all of them.
I responded to most of them and I appreciate the feedback.
All right, let's jump right back into this.
So we had this big controversy this weekend with I mean, when I say controversy, I usually mean controversy on the left.
I'm not talking about like an actual controversy, I'm talking about liberal-generated controversy.
Right, fabricated controversy.
The vice president, Mike Pence, goes to the Indianapolis Colts NFL football game.
The San Francisco 49ers, they were playing the Colts, it was in Indianapolis, and the San Francisco 49ers, 20 plus members of the team, decided to do what they always do.
These guys are going to kneel at the National Anthem, basically crapping all over our flag, disrespect the the country, disrespect the anthem, and the vice president
leaves.
Applause, good job Mike Pence.
Appreciate you standing for something, nice work.
I think most Americans agree with you based on the horrendous polling the NFL's been getting
lately.
It's now...
Ain't no Pence on the fence, babe.
Yeah, and not in his skin.
Nope, he walked right out of there.
Good for him.
It is now the least favorably viewed professional sport out there, the NFL.
So good job, NFL.
Round of applause.
Well done.
You've now alienated large majorities of working class Americans, vets, police officers, civil servants.
Middle class workers, upper class workers and employees, lower income folks, and most importantly, diehard NFL fans.
So good job, NFL.
You guys are tremendous.
Nice work alienating your fan base.
I tweeted out about this, and of course the liberals go nuts whenever I tweet about this.
Some kooky, you know, victim card obsessed Looney Tune got back to me.
When I was in the gym, it was like 5 o'clock in the morning.
I'm trying to work out.
I got to deal with dopey liberals at 5 o'clock in the morning.
It's infuriating.
Trying to get my set of Zurcher squats in.
Folks, it's 5.30!
I'm doing Zurcher squats at 5.30 in the morning.
I can, I'm like this, for those of you listening to The Weekend Show.
I'm on rep 16 with 225 pounds and the crook of my elbow squatting this thing at 5 30 in the morning and I seriously am in such a state of oxygen deprivation that I'm like seeing stars.
I'm like this dude's trying to talk to me too by the way and I'm like I cannot even.
I'm not making this up.
This is not hyperbole for effect.
This is actually me.
I'm like, what?
Trying to respond to the guy.
He sees I can't breathe, too, by the way.
Nice guy.
But I don't know if he saw me doing this set before.
Point is, I had to deal with liberals.
Now, they are obsessed with it.
The liberals are, not all, but the good majority, especially the radical left, is obsessed with the fact that they are getting their collective butts handed to them on this NFL thing.
Folks, I did a show about this a couple weeks ago.
Remember this one, Joe?
That they are in a total panic.
Because the whole entire premise, listen to me folks, please, please listen to me on this.
The entire premise of liberalism is getting you to believe that looney tunes, wacko, fringe positions held by the looniest among us are in fact mainstream.
And they do it by fear.
If I were to tell you, I hate that I have to keep bringing this up, but it's so critical you understand this.
Because once you get over the fear, like I did a long time ago, and you start speaking out Joe, there's a sense of empowerment, like I'm back!
We're on the right side of this for once.
If liberals are at a meeting of a hundred people, and nobody knows anybody's political affiliation, but there's a couple liberal troublemakers in there, like the take a knee crowd that wants to crap on the flag, right?
Here's what they do.
Someone in the meeting, you know, the liberal, goes, ah, 2 plus 2 doesn't equal 4, it equals 5, and if you say otherwise, you're a racist, and everybody's like... 98 people in the meeting are like, what do we do?
If we say 2 plus 2 equals 4, they'll call us a racist!
Ode to Tamar.
What do we do then?
What do we do then?
Everybody freaks out.
Nobody wants to be called a racist.
I mean, it speaks to how far our countries come on race relations show that calling someone a racist is like the worst thing you could call them outside of maybe murderer or child molester.
And frankly, it's kind of up there with the two.
I mean, that's how bad it is.
So people, it's all fear.
Does that make sense, my example?
That you know it's not true.
Like the people in the crowd are like, wait, wait, two plus two, four.
Like this is not advanced calculus.
This is basic common sense.
You'll find you're not alone when you come up with the answer of four.
Most people in the room are going to know it's four and say, yeah, it's four.
Yes!
By the way, someone asked me this week on an email if you had a podcast.
That's how popular you're getting now.
I'm going to forward you the email.
I'll find it.
Oh my goodness.
I'm not kidding.
Yes.
Does Joe have a podcast?
Maybe you should start one.
The Armacost Hour or something.
Who knows?
Right?
We should put it under Conservative Review.
Maybe I'll pitch that to him today.
I just like being the second banana.
You could do it on music and stuff.
You're a cool cat like that.
But The point you made is right.
The minute someone speaks up and they see it.
So you're in this crowd of 100 people and some brave soul speaks up and goes, um, excuse me, I've taken basic math and I know that two apples plus two apples equals four apples.
They get up because they're the loudest.
Remember liberals, why are liberals the loudest?
They're the loudest in this meeting of people here because they own the media, they own academia, and they own the culture wars in Hollywood.
They have the loudest megaphone.
Folks, is there a louder megaphone?
You have the press, you have Hollywood, and you have the schools.
There's no louder megaphone.
So they're in this crowd.
They have the loudest megaphone.
You have nothing.
You have no sound amplification device at all.
And what does everybody start doing?
Half the people didn't even hear you say 2 plus 2 equals 4.
All they see is a couple of liberals on the stage with megaphones going, There's a racist in the crowd!
There he is!
And everybody's like, get him!
Get the bug spray!
Get the rain!
Rain!
Remember that show?
Rain!
And the bug falls over, the cartoon bug, and he's on his back.
This is how they work.
It is fear.
They operate strictly on fear.
Now it's critical you get that.
Because when everybody in the room starts to say wait 2 plus 2 equals 4 and I think so too all of a sudden the 98 people who know that happens to be a fact and the two who are just completely blind idiots typically the radical leftists in the room all of a sudden it becomes the reverse the two liberals who use the megaphone for power are now shouted down by the collective voice of the 98 people in a room and go wait that's the dumbest thing I've ever heard they rule by fear
And they rule by fear with fringe positions.
Men in the women's room, the United States systemically oppresses people.
People are like, wait, what?
What do you mean it systemically oppresses people?
I don't think systemic means what you think it means.
Look up systemic on like any dictionary online or in paperback or hardcover as or relating to a system.
So you're telling me you're a, Joe, just to be clear on this, I'm not sure if I covered this before, but it doesn't matter.
It's worth repeating again.
Again, you're in the room, you say something patently ridiculous, 2 plus 2 equals 4, you then shout down anybody who says, or you say 2 plus 2 equals 5, you shout down anyone who says 2 plus 2 equals 4, I'm calling them a racist, and then all of a sudden you hope that the mob stays quiet and doesn't realize that what you're saying is ridiculous, not the person who stood up.
They do this now.
The NFL is a perfect example.
And this is why they're going nuts and why every time you tweet about it, if you do, and you have a following, you will get attacked by everyone on the left at the same time.
Because once the veneer of popular support is gone, Joe, liberals have nothing.
Because it's a veneer.
It's an act.
It's an act.
They don't have popular support.
They're nuts.
And what's happening now is the NFL polling data is starting to come out.
Viewership is down.
Ticket sales are down.
Yep.
Merchandising's being hurt.
The brand is being destroyed.
Folks, unlike liberals, I will back up what I say.
This isn't the 2 plus 2 equals 5 show.
This is the 2 plus 2 equals 4 show.
You need the data?
Okay, go to my show notes today.
Again, always available at Bongino.com.
Please join my email list.
I implore you.
It's easy for me to get these articles out for you.
You don't have to search for them.
You can visit my website.
It's great, but I'll get them right to you.
Paul Bedard's Washington Secrets, another great email list I highly recommend.
Put out a piece this morning.
Just came out with a poll.
Credible survey.
Good survey.
Reliable company.
Joe, asking sports, asking people in general, I should say, about favorability, unfavorability ratings about the major sports.
So we're talking about major sports by viewership.
I mean, I personally like lacrosse and other sports, but we're talking about hockey, baseball, football, hockey, baseball.
Am I missing one there?
Basketball.
Oh, basketball.
Yeah, right.
Basketball.
Sorry.
How do I miss that?
Okay.
Favorable ratings for the NFL pre, you know, quote, take a knee, right?
Before this Kaepernick garbage.
57%.
Down to 44% now.
Folks, that's a huge, huge drop in one year.
Huge!
You went from an overwhelming majority of people who view the NFL favorably, 57% to 44%.
That's just a fact, libs!
Okay?
Stick with the 2 plus 2 equals 5.
I'm gonna be the one in the room that speaks up and goes, ah, I don't think so!
You can scream at your bullhorn to me in your social media all you want.
You think you're intimidating me, you're out of your...
Absolutely out of your mind.
You have no idea where you're going with that one.
Alright, unfavorable ratings.
The highest now amongst professional sports, the unfavorable rating for the NFL has now risen to an unbelievable 40%.
That is astonishing.
You asked 10 people, do you view the NFL unfavorably and 40% say yes.
Or how do you view the NFL, 40% I should say to be more precise, 40% say unfavorably.
Those are actually two different things.
I have to be very careful with this.
40%.
The highest among professional sports.
Even worse, Joe.
The NFL, in one of the dumbest, colossally dumbest, epically stupid business decisions in American history, Well, Joe, would you say, this is not a trick question by the way, because I know sometimes I set you up with these trick questions.
I'm not doing that.
Would you say that men aged 34 to 54 are a target audience for the NFL?
Yeah, I would, yeah.
I kind of would say so, yeah.
I mean, I say it's not a trick question because the question's so obvious that sometimes I ask Joe and he's like, wait, this can't be like, you'd have to be an idiot to say no.
Of course, men 34 to 54.
This is where it gets even worse for the NFL.
Of men 34 to 54, the favorability ratings were 73% pre Colin Kaepernick.
Take a knee.
They dropped to 42%.
That is a 30 point drop.
31 to be clear and absolutely precise.
31 point drop.
That's incredible.
Even worse, Joe.
The unfavorability ratings, 34 to 54, rose from 19 percent to, this is even worse, to 47 percent.
Almost half of your target audience thinks your product sucks.
Good job!
That's, I mean, again, these are just the numbers, folks.
Look them up yourself.
I will link the article.
I never say anything.
I can't back up.
Go look it up.
You think, again, You understand how this is all based in fear now?
Now this is going somewhere.
I didn't bring this up to talk about the NFL today.
I wanted to bring this up today to talk about a larger topic, and that's the propagandizing effect of the media and the fact that the liberals own the media, they own academia, and they own Hollywood.
They own, you know, the three musketeers right now of liberal stupidity.
And these three musketeers of liberal stupidity have the biggest megaphones in the room, and they enable fear.
They enable fear by telling you things that are factually incorrect, that don't align with the real world, and getting you to believe that what's happening in the real world isn't really happening.
And they suppress opposing thought by intimidation.
Now, I can prove this to you.
There was another interesting piece.
I don't like part of it.
It's by Tim Carney.
I'll put it in the show notes.
It's a good piece in the Washington Examiner, some portions of it.
Some I think take, I'm going to be diplomatic, I think some take a very Because I like Tim Carney, but I think he takes a very jaded view of the Trump administration and paints a picture that's not necessarily correct, especially as it deals with Charlottesville.
But it's a longer piece, and it's about racism in America, how Democrats started to basically do the coals and the fire, and he wants to put some blame on Trump for making the fire worse.
I disagree with that completely.
I don't think it frankly it mattered who won the presidential election.
The Democrats are obsessed with stoking the flames of racial division.
It just doesn't matter.
Trump's just a convenient target because he's not a focus group tested politician.
He speaks from, you know, he shoots from the hip.
You know what I'm saying?
And I think that just bothers the left because the left is used to intimidating people with their bullhorn and Trump just doesn't care.
So I disagree with Carney now, but he has some numbers in there and the numbers Point to the disconnect between the real world and what modern liberals think.
Liberals think, they understand at their core.
Let me rephrase this because I don't want to confuse anyone.
Liberals understand they are reasonably intelligent people.
They understand that their belief system That the world is systemically oppressing them, specifically the United States, that, you know, this is a horrible place, that capitalism is an imperialist endeavor, we should all pay higher taxes.
Liberals understand that their court, this is all crap.
That I know.
Why do I know that?
Because liberals say they believe higher taxes are a force for public good, yet they don't pay them voluntarily.
You know, conservatives, Joe, generally believe charity is a good cause, like me and my wife do, and we give money there.
No one forces us to do it.
Yet, when you ask liberals to voluntarily pay higher taxes, a claim they make, higher taxes will be a force for public good, they don't do it.
You know, when you make claims about, you know, things like Obamacare, oh, well, single payer's great, the government should run healthcare.
It's just fascinating that liberal politicians didn't even support Obamacare for themselves.
They worked around the Grassley Amendment to get an Obamacare exemption for themselves.
You know, liberals talk about things like, well, you know, it's important that we get a really vigorous, strong public education system for our kids and we don't have school choice.
Yet they choose to send their kids outside of the public education system when they get money.
Folks, liberals are a walking bunch of talking point hypocrites.
You know, we hate guns, we can't stand guns.
And yet most of them have armed bodyguards, like Michael Moore.
Remember that time?
I mean, they're hypocrites.
So my point that I'm trying to set up here is that they, at their core, they understand their entire worldview is complete garbage and junk.
Now how do I know that?
Let me read you a little quote from Carney's piece about some actual polling on racism in America.
Here's a quote.
Insofar as attitudes towards race can be measured, white racism against blacks is fading.
Support for interracial marriage has climbed from 4% to 87%.
The Economist reports that racially and ethnically motivated hate crimes reported to the FBI, Joe, fell 48% between 1994 and 2015.
Its article headlined, racist behavior is declining in America concluded, Americans as a whole are still moving away from bigotry.
Folks, there's more numbers in here.
I mean, I can read the entire piece to you.
I'm not going to do that.
I'm going to sum up what you need to know.
The point I'm trying to make here is that the real world data about the state of America and racism, let me be crystal clear on this again, because I know liberals have a tough time with facts and things like that.
And, you know, they love to mischaracterize what people say.
It's all they have.
I'm not suggesting, neither is Joe, because we've had conversations off the air and on the air, that racism doesn't exist at all.
I'm simply suggesting to you the state of race relations in America has gotten unbelievably better than it- I mean, obviously there was in the era of slavery and even in the year of Jim Crow, and now I think America largely, systemically, the system as we say, you know, is largely, thankfully, relegated racism to the dark corners of society.
Now, How do I know that this is true again?
So you have the polling data there.
When you ask Americans if they're satisfied with their lives, Joe, here's the number here.
This is interesting.
I found this in the Carney piece.
88% of black Americans say they're satisfied overall with their lives.
You may say, oh, well, okay, great.
Well, what's interesting about that is that's the exact same number, or, well, I shouldn't say exact, 89 for whites, but within the statistical margin of error, it's almost the exact same number, right?
Yeah, that is interesting.
Now, we'll contrast that, Joe, with this other figure.
This goes to show you the power of the media bullhorn to get people to believe through fear that what's real is not, in fact, real.
81% of black Americans will still cite racism as a significant problem in their lives.
It doesn't make sense, folks.
The polling data, the data on facts and statistics, the data says out there that 88% of people who are black will say that their lives, that they're satisfied with their lives.
Yet, and by the way, the data on race relations, on hate crimes, all of that has gone down.
The society's gotten better on race and yet 81% of people who are black will still say racism is a problem in their lives.
I'm not suggesting that they're lying.
Many probably are telling the truth about isolated incidents they've had.
But the idea that the country is a systemically racist place does not fit with the data at all.
You're just making it up.
It doesn't make any sense.
Now, There's a theory behind this that Carney puts out.
Before I get to that, let me just get to this because this is important.
We've got to pay for our show today.
Today's show brought to you by BrickHouse Nutrition.
These guys helped me get through a really, really busy week last week.
You know I love these guys.
They've been with me from the beginning.
Best supplement company on the market.
Last week we were all over Dawn to Dust.
That's their energy product.
Helps you get through the day.
Gives you 10 hours of steady, Time-released energy.
You don't get the crashes you get with coffee and energy drinks.
It's a terrific product.
It's called Dawn to Dusk.
Of all the products we put out there, I really get incredible reviews on email about this one.
People love it.
I send the reviews over to Miles who runs the company.
Go to BrickHouseNutrition.com.
That's BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan.
And give this product a try.
It's called Dawn to Dusk.
It's available over there.
Very competitive pricing.
They have a really, really good products.
They have foundation too, which is my favorite creatine product.
Talked about a little bit on rough cuts this weekend.
It's really good stuff.
It's great for crossfitters, working moms, CEOs, assembly line workers, people who need to get through really long days.
Go give it a shot.
BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan.
Okay.
Now you may say to yourself, Why is it then that liberals continue to do this?
To use their media bullhorn and academia and the culture to get people to believe that racism is a systemic problem.
In other words, Joe, we are a racist country and we can't get past it.
Why does the media, academia, liberalism, why do they in Hollywood and their culture, why do they keep telling people this?
Well, Carney has some numbers in here, which I had kind of known from experience, but not known the exact numbers.
And the theory's a good one.
Overall, Joe, 48% of Democrats will categorize themselves as liberals.
Black Democrats, only 28% categorize themselves as liberals.
Now, I noticed this when I was running for office in Maryland, that I would knock on doors in Prince George's County, which is a largely black county.
I noticed when I knocked on doors and was talking to Democrats, you can tell their voter registration, you just can't tell who they voted for, obviously it's a secret ballot, but when talking to them specifically about issues like abortion, religion, the role of God in the culture, the role of God in the country, Gay marriage.
Transgender bathroom usage.
Folks, this is not going to surprise any of you that regularly deal with people who happen to be minority.
I mean, whether you have friends or you work with people or you just... whatever it may be.
They are very conservative.
Black Democrats are only 28% liberal.
That is a far lesser population than the overall population of Democrats, where 48% are liberal.
What does that have to do with any of this?
Joe, the only way...
To hide the liberal bent of the Democrat Party, the liberal turn the Democrat Party has taken.
Redistribution, men in the women's room, this love affair with gay marriage.
The only way to hide that from black voters is to continue to propagandize them and make them believe that the system is racist.
Not that racism exists, we know that, but that the system is racist.
Does that make sense?
Yeah, it sure does.
The Democrats don't want black voters to see what the party has become.
It's an interesting theory he has in there, and I had only considered it, like I said, because I was knocking on doors and I noticed myself that it just didn't make sense.
It didn't comport with reality.
That I'm like, gosh, you know, black voters are largely pro-life.
There are a lot of Christian black voters who believe in a man-woman marriage.
None of this makes any sense.
This is why the Democrats need this.
They need, ultimately, 80-90% of black voters to be voting Democrat, to stay a quasi-national party, because they're not right now, into the future.
So the way they do it is by hiding, hiding the liberal turn the party has taken.
Hiding it under this veneer of institutional systemic racism.
And folks, the term systemic racism, the reason this is...
Again, it's a fear of facts.
The term systemic racism is a 2 plus 2 equals 5 term at that meeting I told you about.
It doesn't make sense.
People at the meeting are like, wait, let me get this straight.
Systemic means relating to the system.
So you're suggesting to me that athletes who are paid millions of dollars to play a game Are being oppressed by the system that enabled said athletes to make millions of dollars playing a game?
It doesn't make sense on its face!
That's a different argument than suggesting that said black athletes may have experienced racism at some point in their life.
Do you see what I'm saying, Joe?
No one's questioning that.
I don't know.
I'm not going to devalue your experiences at all.
You may be telling the truth about a whole bunch of things.
You may not, but I take you at face value that over the course of your life, I have no doubt you may have had a hard time catching a cab, you may have experienced racism in a job.
I don't doubt that these black athletes are telling the truth.
The problem Americans have with this, and the 2 plus 2 equals 5 moment, is when you take a knee to disrespect the flag and then you suggest to Americans that the entire system is somehow oppressing you while you're making 10, 20, 30 times, 100 times what the average American makes to play a game.
The media does this.
The media are the ones that do this.
They get people to believe these numbers.
And that somehow have convinced black Americans, you know, 88% were satisfied with their lives, but 81% say that this racism is a systemic problem.
Listen, these are hard things to talk about.
And liberals, by the way, I'm not even remotely interested in liberal feedback because they're not interested in a conversation.
They just fire back bombs at you.
But I'm talking to people who are genuinely interested in, quote, having a conversation about this.
Have you ever wondered why the disconnect?
You're a million dollar athlete and you're convinced the system's kept you down?
You think that has anything to do with the bullhorn of Hollywood, the bullhorn of the media, and the bullhorn of academia?
Now, I had another direction to go with this, because I saw these two stories, Tim Carney's story about how the polling on race relations, Joe, is completely disconnected from the reality.
And I saw another story.
I thought, gosh, this is fascinating.
These two stories are perfectly tied in.
The other one's in the Wall Street Journal.
It's about, quote, mass shootings.
I got an email from a regular emailer.
He said, you know, don't call it mass shootings.
You're right.
That is a, you know, I hate it that we have to get into word games, but you are correct.
That's a focus group tested talking point is attack.
A guy was an attacker.
He fired a weapon, but, you know, we don't call people, mow people down like mass drivers and, you know, with a car.
So but it's just again it's a democrat they want to it's a democrat focus group tested talking point they're always manipulating the language even the term systemic oppression is a democrat focus group tested talking point to get you to not not do any deeper analysis of what's going on I mean it's kind of like some some um some uh liberal silly lib this morning told me that I was mansplaining to her I by the way the minute you say that you're completely discounted as a fool so mansplaining remember people will die People are gonna die!
That's their thing.
I mean, it's a way to distract you from having any real conversation.
This is what they do.
They throw out fancy terms and hyperbolic language to get you to avoid the facts.
Because remember, it's the fear of facts that keeps Democrats semi-relevant.
Now, in this Wall Street Journal piece, They break down a quote.
I'll put it in the show notes again today.
The author breaks down a quote from a Democrat lawmaker, Chris Murphy, a senator from Connecticut, who said something so outrageous he should have been laughed off the stage the minute he opened his mouth.
But he said this weekend, Joe, Already, there have been more mass shootings than days of the year.
So, everybody in the crowd hears 2 plus 2 equals 5.
Say what?
Just like systemic oppression.
Like, wait, let me get this straight.
2 plus 2 equals 5?
The system is oppressing you and you're paid millions to play a game.
You're in the crowd again, another liberal gets up and goes, There have been more mass shootings in days of the year.
Again, everybody in the crowd, the 98 people in the crowd who know this is crazy, they're like, wait, wait, wait, did he just say two plus two equals five?
But they're all quiet because if you open your mouth, the liberals get up with the bullhorn through the media, their control over academia and the culture in Hollywood.
Joe and they scream, this time it's not racist.
They're like, you're a murderer.
You love guns.
And you're like, ah, what?
Oh, shh, everybody quiet now.
The liberals are talking.
Folks, they're just making this up.
Now, I love when you all email me and you say, where's the scam?
Well, here's the scam in this number.
Because remember, there's always some element of statistical manipulation.
Every time a liberal tells you 2 plus 2 equals 5, you just have to pick it out.
This one's a beaut, by the way.
So the FBI's official definition, Joe, of a, quote, mass shooting, using their lingo, is four or more victims in one location.
Pretty simple, right?
Pretty simple definition.
Four or more victims in one location.
Now, if we're not talking about the same thing, do you understand how it's completely impossible to have a debate?
In other words, if I'm talking about, because I love analogies, if I'm talking to you about the benefits of apples, right?
Apples are good for you.
They're good for your heart.
The more you... That's beans, actually.
You know where I'm going with that one.
But apples are so good.
They're great for your eyes.
They're great for your heart.
Oh, the pigmentation in the skin of the apple is so wonderful for you.
But Joe, say you're a new English speaker and you confuse them and you think I'm talking about oranges.
The conversation is totally irrelevant.
I'm telling you how good apples are and you go and buy more oranges.
Yes, I do.
Do you see how if we don't agree on what we're talking about, having any conversation is useless.
It's a waste of everybody's time.
Liberals do this on purpose.
This is intentional, Joseph.
They do this because they're afraid of facts.
They don't want you talking about apples.
They want some people to think it's apples, some people to think it's oranges, some people to think it's pomegranates, some people to think it's tangerines.
Because the facts are never on their side.
They want you to believe 2 plus 2 equals 5.
Nobody in the crowd is allowed to say 2 plus 2 equals 4.
So they do this on purpose and they confuse the terms intentionally.
So that when someone says something like this that's really dumb, there have been more mass shootings in days of the year, people are like, um, really?
Are you sure about that?
Now, here's the scam.
I just told you what the FBI definition was.
The, quote Joe, mass shooting tracker, which is a, I mean, this is unbelievable, like liberals, they can never get enough.
The mass shooting tracker, which is some liberal database they put together, defines it completely differently, of course.
This is four or more people in one spree, including the gunman himself and anyone engaged by the police.
So let's get this straight.
Let me get this straight.
This is how you define a, quote, mass shooting.
Again, liberals never ever stop the propaganda ever.
They can't get enough, right?
They define a mass shooting Let's say it's a robbery with a firearm.
So Joe, you're walking down the street.
God forbid some guy pulls a gun on you, right?
You're about to get robbed.
A police car pulls up, right?
The gunman shoots at you.
You get hit, right?
The police shoot at him.
Someone gets hit by a stray round and the cop gets hit.
That's a mass shooting to them.
Do you understand how many gang incidents would fall under this definition?
But folks, this is done on purpose.
This is not an accident.
This is done on purpose to confuse you, to make you to believe that there's this massive outbreak of mass shootings all across the United States despite the fact that regular street crime in many cases, as tragic as it is, is included in this definition so that when you're talking about apples, I'm talking about oranges.
Does that make sense, Joe?
Yeah!
Now how does this- why they do what they do?
They do it because they're- they're- folks, just to be clear.
Because this is a detailed show today, and I'm sorry, but it's really important we get these points out.
Yeah, we're cool, we're cool.
Their goal, Joe, is strictly confusion.
Right.
Just like on the race issue.
They don't want you to believe race relations have gotten better because they need black voters to vote for them.
And they know black voters generally don't like what the Democrats stand for.
So what do they push?
You guys are being discriminated against constantly, the Republicans did it, and we're going to help.
Secondly, they're confusing you on mass shootings because they want you to believe there's a massive outbreak of mass shootings in the United States and that Democrats have the answer by gun control.
So they lie!
You're talking apples, they're talking oranges.
You're talking four or more people in one space, they're talking four or more people in one spree, including the gunman who may have killed himself and the police.
A totally unreasonable definition.
But when you're looking to inflate the numbers, that's what you do.
Now, Why is this fascinating and how does this relate to the NFL story about how liberals rely on fear?
They rely on fear to confuse you and for you to confuse the statistics in the real world.
Again, racism is systemic.
They don't have any evidence anymore to back that up, that the system is racist.
Believe me, liberals and Republicans had data to back that up, you know, 50 and 60 years ago.
They don't have any evidence of that anymore.
So they lie.
So to do this, this is, let me just get to the numbers.
This is, this is interesting.
When there is a Pew research poll, Pew is very credible operation, Joe.
Yes, they are.
They asked Americans, right, if they thought gun crime, gun violence was higher now than it was 20 years ago.
An astonishing 56% of Americans said yes.
Hmm.
Folks, that is completely incorrect.
That is the 2 plus 2 equals 5 moment.
Just like systemic oppression keeps people down and we're millionaires playing football.
2 plus 2 equals 5.
56% of Americans in the room believe that gun crime is higher now than it was 20 years ago.
You want the real numbers?
Although we have upwards of 100 million new guns since the 1990s in the United States, Joe, gun homicide is down by half since the 1990s.
Folks, listen to me.
Those are just the facts.
If you're a liberal listening and you disagree with that, I don't know what to tell you.
You're having your moment, your bullhorn moment, where you're on the stage making an ass out of yourself.
Gun crime is significantly up.
It's such a huge problem.
Actually, it's been cut in half.
But no, but I said it went up.
Nobody cares what you said.
Nobody cares.
What you said is just not true.
Liberalism is entirely a, it is a system where people are, you're a living hypocrite.
We gotta control guns, but not my guns and not my bodyguards.
We gotta pay higher taxes, but I don't wanna pay higher taxes because you don't!
I have the numbers, you don't!
I want single-payer healthcare, but not for me.
I want public education only, but not for my kids.
You're a walking hypocrite!
And you are a walking hypocrite because you have been propagandized by the media.
Did I tie that together right?
Yeah.
This is my point in the beginning.
This is why this NFL thing is so unbelievably unpopular.
Because everybody gets what you're saying is garbage.
They understand what you're saying is just not true.
The system is oppressing me.
You're making millions of dollars to play football.
The system is not oppressing you.
When you're telling people, oh my gosh, gun violence is out of control, they do it through manipulation, and they do it through the media bullhorn, and they have actually 50% of Americans believing this, despite the fact that it's just not true.
It's just completely 100% made up.
Oh man, is it frustrating dealing with these people?
You know, I did get some comments, by the way, on Rough Cuts that people said, Joe, they've never heard me so relaxed.
I really do enjoy talking about that stuff.
I didn't get one negative comment, so I really appreciate it.
I enjoyed doing the show with you.
I thought it was fun.
It was fun.
Yeah, and you know what Paula said about it, Joe, too, with you?
She's like, you know, Joe is a perfect four.
I know you know politics.
You got to deal with it four hours every morning at WCBM too.
So Joe gets more politics than some politicians do.
But you know, this, that really wasn't your bailiwick, but Paula was interesting.
I was a little worried about it.
You know, our audience gets into our inner heads.
I was a little worried about it because you're as a second banana.
I'm like, is he going to feel uncomfortable?
Paula said, no, Joe was good because his, You know, you're, this is all, I love working out and stuff, she goes, his kind of, the fact that he, I don't want to say he didn't, you know enough, but that you didn't know as much as I did, you asked reasonable questions, she goes, that I was asking too, and that's my wife, who I talk about this stuff all the time to.
Like, you asked that question about rest periods between sets, she goes, you know what's funny?
She goes, I was thinking how exactly is he said that.
So it was pretty good and I think it's gonna, I think it's gonna work well.
So we'll probably add some more episodes, but I haven't even gotten into like the self-defense stuff and pying off and, you know, ways to, you know, better good self-defense tips.
And Paula said, she goes, you didn't even like scratch the surface of talking about diet and exercise.
And I love the Brazilian jujitsu and I have so many crazy stories from that stuff.
So we'll do more of that.
All right, today's show also brought to you by our buddies at My Patriot Supply.
Big fan of preparedness, you already know that.
And folks, the core, and I do mean the core of preparedness, is food and water.
It is.
I mean, listen, you need a weapon and a firearm to be able to defend yourself.
And that should be a core of your personal emergency plan as well.
But without food and water, you'll be dead in days, especially water.
But the food portion, gosh, can you imagine?
I mean, it's been said many times that we're only four missed meals away from complete chaos.
You have to ensure your food supply.
It makes no sense not to, folks.
It's better to have emergency food, right?
And never need it.
By the way, it's the best day of your life.
than to, God forbid, need it and not have it.
After everything that happened in Florida, in Texas, in Puerto Rico, Florida, by the way, where they had food, the food supply chain was clogged up for days with all kinds of problems.
Thankfully, they restocked.
Imagine if they didn't.
What are you going to do after two weeks, three weeks, you're out of food?
I mean, seriously, are we going to hunt squirrels?
Despite the listener who told me they hunt squirrels and they love them.
I've never eaten them.
I'm sure they're tasty, but I've never tried it.
And I'm not so sure with, I mean, they're quick.
They're tough to hit those little suckers, right?
You have to get a squirrel trap.
Get yourself a supply of emergency food.
Go to preparewithdan.com.
That's preparewithdan.com.
Thanks to everybody who supports our sponsors.
And for just $99, they will get you a month's supply of emergency food.
Our friends at MyPatriotSupply.
All you need is water to prepare it.
It's good for 25 years.
The best day of your life is cracking the box in 24 years, eating the food, not worrying about it, and then getting a new one.
All right?
Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.
Go to preparewithdan.com.
All right.
I was going to get to this tax story, but I'm going to get to this one tomorrow because this is going to require a little bit of a deeper dive.
Again, it kind of fit the theme of today's show, but I would be doing you a disservice and it takes a good 10-15 minutes to sum this up.
The gist of the story is this.
Again, how the Democrats dominate through the three musketeers of stupidity, you know, liberals, you know, liberal academia, Hollywood, the culture wars, and the media.
Those three entities, right?
How they get people to believe things that are just factually incorrect and do not comport with what people understand to be real.
One of them is on taxes as well, and there's a great piece by Phil Graham in the Wall Street Journal today that lays out some just unbelievable facts about who are really paying the taxes in the country.
And one quick thing I wanted to get to, I'll cover that story tomorrow, but I've been getting a lot of email about another podcast I listen to, which I think is really wonderful.
It's Econ Talk by Russ Roberts.
It comes out once a week.
It comes out today, actually, on Monday morning.
It's wonky.
I mean, Russ is a very, very, very bright guy.
He works, I believe, at the Hoover Institution out of Stanford.
He has some libertarian leanings.
He's super smart.
It's a far different podcast than mine.
It's about 45 minutes to an hour long.
And there was a podcast he did a couple weeks ago that I've been getting tons of email on from people who had listened to it and listened to it because I had recommended it.
Sorry, but if you hear a bang in the background, folks, there's people working all over my house, so my apologies.
I got the sound protection up, but sometimes it seeps through.
And the premise of the interview is with a French economist, and the gist of this guy's argument, folks, the French economist, is that the United States is in the very unique position of having It's collective wealth over the past couple of decades accumulate not only with the top 1%, but with the 1% and the wealthiest one, you know, 10% of the top 1%, right?
Like really, really wealthy people.
We're talking about moving decimal points here, right?
It's an interesting piece because as Russ brings up halfway through the podcast, it just doesn't seem to comport with reality.
Let me get this straight.
Over the last few decades, nobody's gotten any wealthier.
Matter of fact, the lower income categories, the middle class have lost ground.
And Russ brings up some great points.
Well, people have flat screen TVs, cell phones, better cars, bigger homes.
They may not be the biggest homes, Joe, but they're bigger than they were.
Right.
And I've been getting a ton of emails on this, on this show, saying, Dan, what gives?
I mean, the French economist, Gabriel, I think it's Zuckman, or Zuckman, is very convincing.
He is very convincing and he's along the lines of the Piketty critique about the rich and basically the benefits of capital superseding the benefits of labor.
The gist of it is the rich are getting richer and the poor and the middle class are stagnant.
First, let me give you just quickly two problems with this.
Number one, and Roberts hits on this, Household size.
Whenever you're measuring household income, folks, I'm sorry, but throw the study out.
Throw the study out!
Because household income does not measure individuals.
And even worse, it doesn't measure individuals over time.
In other words, an economic critique of household data that studies data but doesn't study it longitudinally, in other words, the same people over time, a frequent joke they make about stuff like that is there's a statistic in New York, Joe, that a person's hit by a car every eight seconds in New York.
And you're like, wow, he must be in a lot of pain.
It's not the same guy.
We're not talking about the same guy every eight seconds.
I mean, that's, right?
When you hear that statistic, it's not the same guy.
You're clear on that, right Joe?
Yeah.
That's the problem with using household data, but not studying the same group of people over time.
In other words, when you're studying people who make 15,000 to 30,000, is it the same people?
No, it's different people.
So throw it out.
It doesn't, what are you talking about?
You're talking about completely different people.
Were the poor people rich now?
I don't know.
You're not following them.
We're just following groups.
I don't trust any of that, number one.
Number two, household data.
This is why this study is all screwed up and doesn't comport with a lot of the other research in the area.
But again, the study saying that, well, the poor and the middle class have gone nowhere and the rich have got wealthier.
When you measure it by households, well, how many people are in the household?
Joe, that's kind of, as Joe Biden would say, a BFD, a big freaking deal.
Because if the household size amongst certain groups is increasing as the household size amongst other groups is decreasing, you're spreading money over different numbers of people.
You know what I'm saying?
So think about it, Joe.
If you're saying, well, The poor have not made any money over the last 20 years.
Their condition's gotten worse because they're making the same $100 they were making 20 years ago.
Well, which poor?
Well, the poor in Household A. Well, how many people were in Household A, you know, 20 years ago?
Well, two.
Well, how many people are in Household A now?
Well, a hundred.
There's a different number of people in the household.
Does that mean a hundred people are splitting up a dollar or two people are splitting up fifty?
And the problem with this research, Joe, is that household sizes.
This is why you get all kinds of screwed up data here.
And the guy, by the way, if you listen to the podcast, the French economist admits that they can't control perfectly for it.
They can't.
There's no way.
He admits it in some de facto fashion here that they have trouble with it.
If divorce, let's say, is higher in people who are poor or middle class, which is the case, and people who are poor or middle class divorce at a higher rate, and you have expanding or decreasing numbers of households, the data is going to be screwed up.
Because you don't know if it's one person making $100 or a household of 100 people making $1.
They could have been poorer or grotesquely richer.
Right?
If one person is in a household, Joe, making a hundred dollars.
Yeah.
Or let, no, let's say a hundred and that household, everybody leaves and now there's one person.
That guy was making a dollar 20 years ago.
That guy is now making a hundred dollars now because it's one person.
Right.
Does that make sense?
Yeah.
You totally screwed up the data by using household data.
One more thing about this too.
Roberts points out, makes an interesting point, looks like it's snowing in here because there's insulation coming down through my vents.
I got AC guys working here.
Roberts points out the critique on the consumption side.
He says if the wealthy are getting richer and the poor and the middle class aren't getting any wealthier, how come it is, how come the consumption data, in other words with the poor and middle class are buying, consumption's gone up?
And the guy, the Frenchman, I think exposes, the French economist exposes the whole game.
He goes, well, a lot of that was financed on the back of debt.
In other words, they weren't raking real money.
Finance on the back of debt, a lot of it was never paid back.
In other words, Joe, so you bought a house in the housing crisis.
You bought a house you may have lived in for three or four or five years, a house you could not afford.
You never paid back the mortgage.
The banks and the stockholders, who are typically the holders of capital, took the loss.
So I don't get your point.
Your point is that he's arguing that, well, consumption data can screw up the whole thing because it's basically debt that the lower income categories and middle class people took.
That they never paid back.
So what you're saying is basically rich people gave poor people and middle class folks money that was never paid back and you're using that as an argument that equality got worse?
Does that make any sense?
Folks, you gotta listen to all this stuff with a critical ear.
I'm sorry I went on a little long today for today's show, but this is important stuff.
And again, it just goes to show you how liberals are obsessed with painting for you a picture of America that doesn't really exist.
Hey, thanks again for tuning in.
Thanks for all the reviews on iTunes.
We're over 600 reviews now.
Really appreciate that.
And thanks to everyone who subscribed to my email list, available at Bongino.com.
We'll see you all tomorrow.
You just heard the Dan Bongino Show.
Get more of Dan online anytime at conservativereview.com.
You can also get Dan's podcasts on iTunes or SoundCloud.
