In this installment, Dan and Jordan make the classic mistake of listening to Tucker's interview with Milo Yiannopoulos about why people are gay. [Content warning: this episode contains a fair amount of slurs and disgusting conversation]
The extreme right wing that Tucker represents has decided that they've done enough demonization around trans people, and now it's time to fully commit to attacking homosexuality as a valid part of society.
They want to undo that progress and are setting their sights on that.
For anyone who hasn't followed his history, Milo Yiannopoulos was a blogger working for Breitbart who rose to huge levels of popularity in the era around the 2016 election.
He positioned himself as a gay man who supported the extreme right, which is his entire brand.
He was a troll and he talked all kinds of shit on LGBTQ folks in the same way that pretty much everyone in his world did at the time.
But he was a gay man, which gave him access to a different kind of trolling.
It created a very lucrative place for him to exist in that market.
He was different than the other guys around his political space because he was fun.
He was a sassy dude who did a ton of cocaine and he had a sense of humor.
He really wasn't all that funny, but he had the speech patterns that sound like someone who's saying something funny, and every now and then he landed a pithy line.
Because he was different from the stuffy right-wingers you'd find in his media, he was afforded a lot of opportunities that his peers didn't get, like being a regular guest on Joe Rogan's podcast and other shows that presented themselves as non-political at the time.
Milo was one of the first large accounts who were kicked off Twitter, and it led to him finding an important role in the pretend free speech activism that was popular around that time.
He would plan speeches at college campuses and then monetize the outrage that was created by the student body not wanting him to be there.
Among his contemporaries, I find Milo a bit more fascinating because beyond his need to incite outrage, there's not really much to him.
There isn't much to him past this troll shit.
And everyone just, if they just ignored him, his act wouldn't work and there would be no money for him.
And I do suspect that Milo's always known that, which is why he had to be more sensational than his peers.
He had to do things that would guarantee backlash because as people started to catch on that he was just trying to elicit a response from them to get paid, it would become harder to create that response.
By being even more extreme than the people around him, Milo was trying to make sure that what he did caused outrage, even among the people who might ignore some of the other guys in that media space.
And being a gay man helped him out considerably in that.
He was able to say flagrantly homophobic things that his heterosexual peers would probably have a tough time pulling off.
And because he was gay, he never really needed sources.
He could say something sensational about gay people.
And if he needed to back up where he was getting this from, he could always just appeal to his own authority as someone who was gay.
He was doing really well in late 2016 when he was poised to release his autobiography Dangerous, along with a bus tour of public incitement events to promote it called The Dangerous F Tour.
In the lead up to the book's publishing, some videos of Milo's podcast appearances went around social media and kind of destroyed his career.
They featured him discussing gay relationships and included him arguing that relationships between older men and 13-year-old boys were totally fine if the 13-year-old is emotionally mature, which many people interpreted as him condoning pedophilia.
Later, Milo would go on to explain that a lot of this stuff was based on him trying to rationalize his own past as a survivor of child abuse and that he was raped by a priest at age 13.
At the time, he did these podcast interviews.
He didn't view that interaction as abuse and thought of himself as the instigator of the sexual relationship.
And that perspective informed what he was saying in those interviews.
I think it's important to let people who have experienced trauma understand that trauma how they feel is appropriate.
It's not for me to demand that you take on my definitions of the things that you experienced in your life.
So I think that if Milo had just said in these interviews that he had sex with an adult man as a 13-year-old and didn't consider it to be abuse, there wouldn't have been a problem.
It would have been one person discussing their perspective, which you're welcome to agree or disagree with.
But if he expressed himself like that, then it wouldn't have been heard as something that, you know, he felt it should be universalized.
He wasn't just speaking about his own experience, though.
Instead, he was making prescriptive statements that minimized the impact of adults having sex with children, and that basically destroyed his career forever.
Almost immediately, his publisher dropped him in his autobiography, and he had to resign from Breitbart and stop getting money from the Mercers.
He became a wholly toxic presence, and most of the right-wing fans who liked his provocative antics in the past, they just couldn't justify this.
It was a bridge too far.
His career fell apart, and by 2021, he was trying to rebrand as a formerly gay man, which probably sucked for Milo's husband.
Ultimately, he probably made the right choice for his career because there was nothing left for him as a gay man in the media space that he helped create.
Coming out as straight was probably meant to be a big provocative spectacle for Milo to get back on top in the attention economy, but I think that most people just laughed at him.
Beyond anything having to do with the person's sincere or private sexual orientations, it just seemed like a cry for attention.
He would then go on to intern for Marjorie Taylor Green before teaming up with Nick Fuentes on Ye's 2024 presidential campaign.
And then that all got ugly.
Yep.
Along the way, one thing has become very clear about Milo, though.
He holds grudges and he fights dirty.
He released a bunch of secret recordings and private texts from figures in the right-wing media like Paul Joseph Watson and Dave Rubin.
So most figures in this space, they probably don't want to associate with him all that much.
He's dangerous now, but kind of only to them.
He knows a lot of their dirty laundry for personal lives and financial models.
So no one in the right-wing media can really crush him, but no one wants to hang out with him either.
Milo sucks, and I think he's one of the saddest figures in the modern attention economy.
But I want to make sure that I say one thing clearly at the start of this episode.
A lot of people like to dunk on him about how he's still gay and just pretending to be straight to create a new space for himself in the media.
And I think that's a fruitless attack.
If he wants to say he's straight now, I don't think it matters.
There are so many other things to criticize and make fun of him for, and in and of itself, there's nothing inherently wrong with having shifting sexual attraction.
If anyone else wants to make fun of him for that stuff, I'm not judging them.
But I'm going to try to leave that out of my critique as much as possible.
Well, I mean, and it's not, it's not even about, okay, in that kind of situation, if it were to matter, it would be because it's a genuine expression from a person to another person trying to communicate with them.
In Milo's case, whatever it is he's saying he is at any given point in time is only to exploit you.
I think part of the reason that I'm far less likely to give him the benefit of the doubt on that just simply is because he came on with that kind of agreement that if you don't look at me, I don't exist.
You know, so his even initial burst onto the scene is purely like, I don't have anything.
I don't make anything.
I don't do anything that exists outside of you paying attention to me.
Of all the great memes and clips on the internet, Fat Kid Falls Off Bike being, of course, the top of the list.
Really, in the last 13 years, 13 years this week, almost nothing created on this planet has surpassed in popularity or sheer hilarity an interview that took place on Ugandan television in December of 2012 on a show called Morning Breeze, the morning show of Kampala Uganda, in which a trans activist, a woman who now identifies as a man, came on and was asked a series of questions by the host.
And if you don't know what we're talking about, here is a two-second clip that reveals the essence of the conversation.
I think there have been some funnier memes, but whatever.
So Tucker is starting the show on this note because Uganda is a country with a government that's very hostile towards homosexuality, which is what Tucker wants for the United States.
And so his Opening volley in this is to be like, they're not so bad.
You know, I was, whenever he started talking, I uh I heard him say about the culture that we have created, you know, top of the list, fat kid falls off bike.
Countless studies have been done trying to isolate genes or possible variables in nature versus nurture debates.
Why does Tucker think that people in this country aren't allowed to ask that kind of question?
If you're asking it and you're actually interested in hearing other people's answers, no one gives a shit if you're curious about how people engage with their own sexuality.
Whenever you hear someone like Tucker say that asking a certain question is forbidden, it's important to understand that this is a signifier, that what he's talking about isn't a question.
He doesn't care about the question of where does homosexuality spring from.
He's already got an answer and he doesn't like that most people in our country don't like that answer.
He thinks that homosexuality is illegitimate and a sin.
So when he asks, why are people gay?
He's not really interested in exploring possible answers.
He just wants to make the way he's calling gay people sinners come off like a question that society won't let him ask because it's such a dangerous mind-expanding question.
Tucker has created an imaginary arguing partner here where he asks why people are gay.
They say they were born that way.
Then Tucker asks a follow-up and the person gets mad and tells him to shut up.
What if that person is just Tucker's fantasy of what someone he disagrees with is like?
What if it were possible that someone in that conversation wouldn't crumble after a basic rebuttal and could be like, well, here's, you know, here's what some people believe.
It's almost as if Tucker has created a fantasy of a person to argue with solely to justify his insane position that no one is allowed to ask questions about homosexuality.
So we have created a situation where the people we are most afraid of are inside of our own heads, and the people who reinforce those people are the people that we talk to all the time, leaving the people who we are actually afraid of completely out of the equation entirely.
If you watch the whole interview, and actually it's worth watching because it's really revealing both about Uganda and about the West.
The first thing you notice is how polite everybody is.
That tone, why are you gay? continued throughout the entire interview, which lasted over an hour.
Just watched it.
And the morning show host, whether you like him or dislike him, was just unfailingly polite to the guest who was him or herself also unfailingly polite.
And they were just sort of talking past each other.
The trans activist couldn't really explain why he or she was gay or whether gay was different from trans or what was good about being gay.
That was another question the host asked.
Why would you want to be gay?
And the trans activist just didn't really have an answer.
Tucker is representing himself as a person who's watched this whole interview on the Ugandan morning show.
And if that's true, then he's lying about its contents.
He's either lying about having watched the whole thing or he's lying about what happens in it.
It's true enough that the interviewer and the trans man human rights activist on the show have a mostly polite exchange throughout, though they aren't on the same page.
And he's right.
They kind of talk past each other a little bit.
What Tucker seems to have missed is that there was another guest on the show who was an aggressively anti-gay pastor who makes horrible accusations about gay people and won't shut up, even when the host is asking him nicely to show his guests some respect.
About halfway through the interview, this pastor shows up at the studio and has brought a bunch of vegetables that he uses as props, yelling about how gay people use them for sex.
The pastor comes off like an asshole, and the activist comes off as a person who has to put up with a lot of assholes who doesn't want to engage in schoolyard bullying.
Also, the activist guest doesn't fail to answer these basic questions.
He does a fine job of explaining the difference between trans and gay.
It actually explains that he's not gay as he is attracted to women.
I get that Tucker doesn't like these answers or refuses to understand them, but he's just lying if he says that they weren't articulated in the interview.
Yeah, you know, sometimes I stop and I think, you know, I pull back and I go, what is it with these weirdos obsessed with other people's flesh tubes that fill with blood when they see stuff sometimes?
This is a launching pad for him to talk about the morning show thing, but it's really to get to a law that was passed in Uganda that he wants people to, you know, be a little bit softer on.
But the host was coming from a position of total certainty that this is just weird and wrong.
And that is the consensus in a lot of the world.
And it's certainly famously the consensus in Uganda.
And the consensus in the United States across both parties and pretty much the whole educated population is they're horrible because they think homosexuality is wrong.
And we know this because about 10 years later, in Uganda, the legislature passed almost unanimously with only, I think, one dissenting vote, a law against something called aggravated homosexuality.
Aggravated homosexuality, as of 2023, is a death penalty offense in Uganda.
Well, if you read it and you can because it's online, the Ugandan government defines aggregated homosexuality as gay rape of children, gay rape of the elderly who can't consent, people over 75, gay rape of people who are mentally deficient, and the intentional transmission of deadly diseases to another person.
So it's rape and murder, effectively, are against the law.
So the thing that Tucker is failing to point out here is that the law he's trying to sell his audience on is called the Anti-Homosexuality Act of 2023.
It's a broad attack on the rights of LGBTQ Ugandans, and Tucker fully understands that.
He's trying to put a good face on it because he wants the U.S. to pass a similar act.
Tucker is trying to present the image that this law is just making raping children illegal, but that was already illegal.
All of the things that he's saying that this law accomplishes were already illegal.
The category of aggravated homosexuality in this act, it does include things like abusing children or the elderly, and those things should be crimes, but legally categorizing them as kinds of homosexuality is already a dicey thing to do.
And this bill is pretty unnecessary.
But what Tucker is conveniently ignoring is that according to the act, which you can read because it is online, as he points out, the definition of aggravated homosexuality also includes, quote, serial offenders.
This is because the act makes all homosexual activity a crime.
But if you're only caught being gay once, you can get sentenced to life in jail.
Just attempting to commit a homosexual act can get you up to 10 years in jail.
Aggravated homosexuality gets a person the death sentence.
And Tucker's trying to present the picture that it's just for things like people who abuse children.
In reality, if you're just consistently gay, you will be considered a serial offender, which counts as aggravated homosexuality, and you could get executed.
For instance, if you attend someone else's gay wedding, even if it's an informal commitment ceremony, you could go to jail for 10 years.
That's not just for getting gay married.
That's for going to the wedding.
You can go to jail for taking any actions that are considered to be promoting homosexuality, which would include engaging in human rights activism, like the person on the morning show interview Tucker didn't watch was doing.
You can go to jail for leasing or subleasing your house or apartment to a gay person.
This is what Tucker is trying to sell his audience on, by pretending that it's all just about making abusing children illegal.
He's doing this because he's a liar and a bigot, and he knows that it would be too hard for him to just argue in favor of sending gay people to jail for life.
He knows that most normal, everyday people don't want to live in that kind of world.
So if he wants to sell this to the audience, he's got to lie.
I don't know how many times you can get into a situation where you go, well, these people who I nominally trust are telling me that it's only the bad ones.
And then five years later, you go, but it's everybody.
And then they go, ah, well, it's only the bad ones again.
Tucker constructed the fake version of this law partially because it's the easiest way for him to support it without doing the really hard bigot work and because he can then use it to attack people who are against the law.
If this really is just about making abusing children and spreading disease illegal, then how could Ted Cruz be against that?
The only explanation is that Ted Cruz must be in favor of child abuse and spreading diseases.
This is a very simple rhetorical trick, and Tucker knows that he can get away with it because he knows his audience are either bigots who get what he's saying or they're too stupid to consider that he might be a liar and is lying to their fucking faces.
There's no other real explanation for who could be in his audience at this point.
Yeah, you know, it's it's fucking crazy because while it's okay, all right, so you can see the pipeline, right?
And it keeps going back in America.
It's the like, oh, this is a reasonable bill.
It's just, it's just for escaped slaves.
It's not just for, it's not for all black people.
It's just escaped slaves that can be grabbed from their homes, ripped towards there, and then be forced back into a life of slavery because they're property.
No big deal.
It's just this.
And that takes you to the next guy.
And the next guy's like, well, we got to get them all into slavery because they're all not people.
And then you got the next guy who's like, well, let's just kill.
Right?
The pipeline has been the exact same.
This is the gay pipeline.
This is the, no, it's just the ones who are doing this.
To the, well, I mean, it's all of them.
To the, well, we got to kill them.
Right.
But all of that, these people create this pipeline.
But who the fuck is getting caught in it and not being, you know, not as an audience.
You know, you're a fucking person, right?
Like, grow the fuck up and look at where you're at.
I think that unfortunately, a lot of people have probably gotten caught in a confidence game of Tucker and believe him to be a straight-up actor in the space.
And so that's bad.
I think that people are a lot of times busy or don't have the wherewithal to actually look stuff up themselves.
So, like, you would have every reason to think that everyone is overreacting and this is a bunch of bullshit.
If you believe him, crazy.
If they just took that affirmative step of like going to check and read this stuff for themselves, I think that it would poke some holes in his sincerity disguise.
And then finally, Joe Biden in October of 2023, spun fully into a frenzy at this point, watching taking the lead of the World Bank, announced that Uganda would be expelled from the group of sub-Saharan African countries that benefit from tax breaks under the U.S. African Growth and Opportunity Act, AGOA, because of the country's quote, gross violations of internationally recognized human rights, which violate the AGOA eligibility criteria.
So that was 2023.
So bottom line, no more money for you.
What happened next?
Well, Ugandan starved.
Next year, there was a famine.
unidentified
Not to laugh at famine, but it's almost unbelievable.
So you ban you ban gay rape of children and the elderly and the mentally disabled, and we're going to starve you out.
And boy, did they.
The United States shut it down.
International aid institutions followed suit.
And the next year, Uganda had a famine that is still ongoing.
50% of children in Uganda today suffer the symptoms of malnutrition, stunted growth, anemia.
50%.
Half of all Ugandan kids are starving.
And of course, Uganda's never been a rich country.
It's had a lot of turmoil.
Edi Amin was from there.
Uganda has some problems for sure.
But the year after the West collectively withdrew aid from Uganda, billions in aid, they have a famine, and it's all because they banned gay rape of children.
Okay.
So I guess the point here is our values are pretty clear.
We're for this and we're totally against questioning it.
We have been told for the course of my life that you're born gay.
It's like handedness or eye color or height.
It's just something that you're born with.
God created you that way.
You are unique.
Your iris, your fingerprints, your sexuality, they're all unique to you.
And that's something not to be embarrassed of, unless you're a white man, in which case, of course, slink away in shame, be denied admission to college or a job.
But for everyone else, your immutable characteristics are something that you celebrate, that you should be proud of.
They not something that you chose.
They're not something you can change.
And this is the story that all of us have been told, and most of us, me included, sort of kind of believe that.
Okay.
And if that's true, of course, you could never, ever show bias against someone on the basis of his immutable characteristics because that's wrong.
I think Tucker could make it a lot less obvious how white supremacist he was if he just cut out the asides he makes like that one.
All civil rights legislation protects him as well as all the groups he hates.
You can't deny someone a job because they're white or because they're straight in the same way you can't do that if someone is black or gay.
Tucker wants to pretend that white people aren't a protected class as it relates to civil rights because to him, the protection of other groups' rights comes at the expense of his group's monopoly on power.
Tucker doesn't feel like all groups deserve the same protections under the law.
He feels like his group is entitled to everything and any move away from that is an undermining of his rights.
It's fine that he feels that way.
I mean, most bigots do, but we as a society need to move past the point where we take that kind of shit seriously.
This isn't a political perspective.
It's something Tucker should be working on in therapy.
Also, I'm pretty certain that if scientists were ever able to find a gay gene and definitively show that sexuality is something you're born with, Tucker wouldn't all of a sudden start liking gay people because it's the Christian thing to do.
But no one has put this in clearer terms than the former mayor of South Bend, Indiana, the former transportation secretary, and as of today, the leading candidate for the Democratic nomination in 2028, Mr. Pete Buddhajudge.
Here he is.
unidentified
I can tell you that if me being gay was a choice, it was a choice that was made far, far above my pay grade.
And that's the thing I wish the Mike Pence's of the world would understand.
That if you got a problem with who I am, your problem is not with me.
I'm just saying, I'm just saying from the perspective of a person who's like, hey, the people who don't want to hate gay people were slightly cooler with it back then.
And that was a fucking Obama, you know, like fucking, hey, buddy.
The point about politicians staying out of our bedrooms is a good thing to think about.
In the past, this was a saying that was about getting rid of laws that made it illegal to be gay.
Whatever two adults wanted to do in their bedroom wasn't the government's business.
But Tucker wants the government in your bedroom.
He's glorifying the Ugandan Anti-Gay Act, which is explicitly the government being in your bedroom.
He's trying to conflate politicians telling you what you can and can't do in your bedroom with a politician being openly gay.
Pete Buttigiege being openly gay does not impact my freedoms at all and has absolutely no effect on what goes on in my bedroom.
The idea that some people might like him because he's the first openly gay cabinet member in U.S. history has no impact on what goes on in anyone's bedroom.
On the flip side, legislation like the law in Uganda has a huge impact on bedrooms.
What happens in your bedroom could get you life in prison.
Tucker very much wants the government to be in the bedroom.
There are a lot of rewards in store for someone in the Democratic Party, an ambitious politician, someone who really only cares about the goal, which in Pete Buttijudge's case has always been becoming president.
Is it bad to come out of the closet and announce that you're gay?
No, no, no.
That's like the only way you're going to get to the White House.
And to be clear, Tucker is very much a creep, and he's very much obsessed with gay sex.
People who are in favor of human rights, which apply to gay people, generally aren't that interested in the sex side of things.
Your sexual habits don't dictate what rights you're entitled to.
And being gay isn't just something that's defined by a particular sex act.
The thing that really sticks out to me about this, beyond the explicit hate, is how dumb this all sounds.
I feel like Tucker comes off like a guy who should have been part of a panel on Donahue when I was a kid, not a thinker and one of the biggest talk show hosts in the world.
He's very lucky that media has completely collapsed as a professional industry because this low-effort bullshit wouldn't have flown in a competitive industry.
And since apart from moral concerns or the concerns of human happiness, does this actually make you happy?
And what does it mean to live as a gay person in the United States?
What exactly does that look like?
Like, what's your life like?
How many people do you have sex with?
How are those unfair questions?
Since you're the one throwing it in my face and telling me I'm not allowed to be against it, maybe I'm allowed to ask the questions I don't really want to ask, don't really want to know the answers to.
But since you've made it the North Star of our moral system in the United States, since you're willing to starve an African country because they disagree with it, maybe it's time for me to ask those questions because you pushed me to.
On this and a lot of other issues, if you just back off a little bit, we could just return to the status quo of, say, 1985 where, yeah, they're gay people.
The question Tucker comes up with when he's like thinking of the hard questions that he's being pushed to ask is, how many people are you having sex with?
That's a little telling.
Tucker's obsessed with the sex part of this, and it really shows.
He's uncomfortable living in a world where homosexuality is normal, and it makes him really mad.
He has to come up with this entire framework of how the gays are shoving it all in his face and trying to make his kids gay at school to justify why he's the good guy and how him resorting to very old homophobic bullshit is actually him asking important questions that everyone's so afraid to ask.
It's so funny too, that Tucker wants to go back to 1985, Jesus Christ.
There may be a lot more acceptance of Lgbtq folks now and there are certain legal protections that have been recognized, but all in all, I think pop culture was way more gay in 1985 than it is today.
Two of the top three songs on Billboard 100 for the year were by WHAM and the other one was Madonna.
If Tucker's real problem was that he's having gay stuff shoved in his face all the time now, that would not be solved by retreating to the 80s.
However, if his problem is that there aren't enough sodomy laws on the books these days and you can't discriminate in workplaces and housing, then maybe going back to 85 would be up his alley.
George Michael got caught in a in a fucking park and everybody went ape shit and it's like well, he could have just talked to a guy if we lived in a rational country, instead of having to like touch people's hands at a park.
Uganda, you know, made this crime punishable by death.
You made their law punishable by famine.
So who's more serious about it?
You are.
Since you did all of that, how about we just slowly, in a non-hysterical, obviously non-hateful way, ask, what are we looking at?
Why are you gay?
Why is that a good thing?
What is it exactly?
And there are a lot of people we could ask about this, but we thought, believe it or not, the most articulate person we know to answer these questions is Milo Yiannopoulos, who is very famous to be able to do it.
Because we hate conservative provocateur running around the country, making the case against liberals as an open, in fact, flamboyant gay man in the part of the shtick, right?
Tucker also painfully gave up the whole right-wing game there, too, where he very clearly admitted that the whole point of boosting Milo in the past was because he was a token gay man that they could use to deflect criticism of their ideology being very anti-gay.
Now, before we get into this, some of you Tucker Carlson listeners out there, some of you in Tucker Nation, you might have heard that Milo got canceled for saying some iffy things.
And then literally one day he was canceled, really destroyed as a person in a sort of non-scandal that, like so many of that period and of this period, sort of took him right off the stage.
You never heard from him again.
But during the period when he was flitting around America on his dangerous faggot tour, spreading whatever it was, libertarian economics or something to the kids, it became obvious that this guy was actually really smart.
Did he?
Even for those of us who were never that interested in the dangerous faggot part of it, if you listen, you thought, well, this guy's not dumb at all.
He's actually very thoughtful.
Very thoughtful, high IQ guy who thinks about things.
So over the last couple of years, during text conversations, I became aware that Milo had decided that he didn't want to be gay anymore.
I don't know, that's kind of interesting.
I didn't know you could decide you didn't want to be gay.
And then you read about it and turns out there's a whole industry movement and laws designed to prevent you from deciding not to be gay.
I'm almost impressed by the way that Tucker is trying to present the question around conversion therapy.
The government wants to pass laws to make it so you can't stop being gay.
All of these people want to not be gay, and the conversion therapy people are willing to help, but the government doesn't want them to not be gay.
This is obviously stupid shit, but it's important to understand that adults can make whatever health choices they want for themselves.
If an adult wants to go to conversion therapy kind of thing and see if torture will change their sexual orientation, then that's their choice.
It may not do anything, and the people running it are probably scammers, but whatever.
They're adults.
They have the right to do that.
This whole conversation is mostly around children whose parents make their medical decisions for them.
A gay child could have parents that are super against their child being gay who make the decision to send them to a conversion therapy place against their will, and that's a huge problem.
Cornell University recently released a meta-analysis of 47 papers involving conversion therapy, gauging its effectiveness and potential danger.
Of them, 34 stayed neutral, while 12 found that conversion therapy was ineffective and linked to increased depression, suicidality, increased social isolation, and difficulty forming intimate bonds.
Only one study claimed that it was effective, and that study was done with all highly religious participants and even says that its findings, quote, cannot be generalized beyond the present sample.
Yeah, I mean, whatever you just have an abuse factory, I suppose people who like to manufacture abuse are real mad that you don't allow them to make abuse anymore.
Man, it's, I think, I think that there's a very, very fucked up angle that Tucker is embarking down with this, like, super support of conversion therapy.
Well, sort of and personal, but you know, it's occurred to me, particularly when I have interviewed Republican politicians, particularly neocons over the years.
Homosexuality comes up, I've always wanted to say in a Ugandan accent, Are you gay?
I mean, the first thing, if you start with that, my first response is, Jesus Christ, go back to school, go back to fucking college, get the fuck out of here.
You understand that we're talking about a fictional conversation that you're just choosing to make up some bullshit on your own as a way of distracting from the fact that you don't want to engage with the reality of the situation, which is that that man wants you dead.
In almost every case, and in certainly in every male case, it is a trauma response.
It is not a sexuality.
It is not part of what you are or who you are or a component of your personality or a function of.
It is a set of behaviors that emerges in people with a number of very easily identifiable common etiologies.
One of them is, for instance, among gay, excuse me, among black and Jewish Americans, they report statistically significantly higher rates of homosexuality.
Why could that be?
Overbearing moms and absent dads, or in the Jewish case, nebbish fathers.
And, you know, like Jewish, my Jewish friends always call their marriages are like lion taming, you know, where you have a sort of nebish, scholarly, bookish dad and a larger-than-life mom who, you know, one day decides she's going to be a rabbi.
You know, that, or in the black community, of course, it's the fatherlessness.
And it's why, why, if you're born this way, if you don't have some other better explanation, could it be the case that there are more gays among black and Jewish populations?
Well, something's going on here.
Why are we getting more trans and more gays and then less gays?
Well, this was Freud's position, which was kind of conventional wisdom for the better part of 100 years, that this was a response to the environment, particularly to the relationship with the mother that a young boy has and a relationship with his father.
I mean, this was, this was like people just assumed that was true when I was a kid.
They were not gay haters or homophobes.
That just, that was a state of knowledge on the subject.
And that's where things can get really messy for me and this interview.
I do not believe that abuse and trauma necessarily can change your sexuality, but I do believe that it can mess you up a bit and make things unclear.
If your primary definition for what a gay person is is just a guy who has sex with a guy, then that's going to include a bunch of people who aren't gay.
Some of them are heterosexuals, experimenting, some are bi, some are people who have suffered trauma and are acting out, but most of them are going to be gay.
What Milo is trying to do is invalidate the existence of gay people by cherry-picking an example of someone who suffered some trauma, which led to them having sex with men.
That person, who happens to be Milo, did all the things you expect a gay person to do, but they aren't gay.
Therefore, no one is.
I'm perfectly willing to accept Milo at his word that he's not gay anymore.
I truly don't care, but I do take issue with someone trying to very obviously project their own battle onto everyone else.
All of the gay people in the world aren't wrong about being gay.
Milo was.
This is a personal thing that is not universalizable.
And that's the trap that he falls into over and over and over again.
Yeah, I think that I'm fascinated by how angry it can make someone.
Right?
So this next clip is Milo making a statement about the United States and introducing a concept that is built on the old F slur that explains, I think, maybe what he wants to put on a t-shirt, maybe he wants to sell a shirt with this on it.
Now you see the terminology in the medical industry has begun to change as well because, you know, now gay people are sort of saturated everywhere.
You know, like when you get a, it's kind of like America, you get a whole country full of people who are very similar, but all think they're really, really individual.
I mean, so you can really see Milo turn on like a light switch as soon as he was able to start talking about something that he hopes will offend people.
It was a lot of that weird mid-Atlantic Thurston howl ass droning.
He was just droning on.
But then as soon as he could start dropping F-slurs and doing impressions of black YouTubers, he got a little life in him.
It is almost kind of confusing the situation that he's placed in, wherein he is where he is because of that asshole, but he's also being asked to not engage in the thing that got him there.
So they start off with this, you know, you were born this way, Heiny, you are born this way, Heiny, you are beautiful, whatever you are.
No, you're like that because you got raped by a priest.
Or you're like that because your mom was overbearing and your dad wasn't around.
Or you're like that because you failed to form a platonic, stable attachments to other men as a child.
For some reason, maybe you didn't have a good male role model or whatever.
But there is a relatively small number of identifiable and repeated etiologies that mark somebody out as being, you know, vulnerable to this.
And you look into the histories of gay people, they will all deny it.
They're saying, well, that's just me.
But it's not.
And they know, they know, because I knew and they know.
And I talk to them privately when there's no cameras that I could squeeze it out of them.
Eventually, that you get there.
Yes, there's something about their sexual activity they know isn't right.
And it's not just in the technical sense that the sex is sterile and therefore can never be part of the holy sacrament of marriage because it can't be co-procreation with God, right?
Yes.
Co-procreation with God, meaning you make a physical body with your wife, but then God puts a soul in.
This all just feels like Milo talking about himself, as if he needs to explain to the audience why he was gay for a while.
This is a really dumb mission to take on because people in Tucker's audience aren't going to believe that he's straight all of a sudden and are always going to think of him as gay.
Meanwhile, the people who hated Milo were fine with his sexuality.
They just hated his politics and how much of an asshole he was.
He still has the same politics and he's still an asshole.
So that group isn't going to like him any more or less now.
Also, I'm glad we're having a non-hysterical conversation about homosexuality where we're arguing that Lucifer is mad because angels can't have babies and that's why gay sex isn't fun.
I like that comic book version of Christianity where it's like, oh, well, everybody knows that the angels are bummed out all the time because they don't get to fuck.
If you, it is, it is the rule of projection that if you start projecting something that seems reasonable, the longer you go on, the more likely you are to see just be talking about you.
Because I'm responsible for this being that loves and laughs and they do, you know, and requires regular, not just maintenance, but affection and to be tended to and loved.
Like I love dogs.
I'm like, I used to be more of a dog guy, but I live in a house on the National Register of Historic Places, so I can't have dogs.
And I got a cat one day, you know, just because just because somebody found it in an engine, I was like, I'm so alone.
So, you know, I said, sure, I'll give you the, give it, give it a, give it a, give it a damn kitten.
And at that point, I wasn't sure I was going to drown it, wear it, or, nurture it.
Um, but, but I was just like, oh, okay.
And being responsible for shaping the personality, which anybody who has animals who loves animals knows that is 100% real.
Um, responsible shaping the personality, nurturing that, that being into either being a parent itself or just into being a companion or to being the best that it can be, right?
It's bringing something out in me, you know, that wasn't present when I was having a lot of what most people would regard as, well, what homosexuals would regard as very desirable kind of sex, you know, with a particular kind of person or whatever.
If I understand that clip correctly, Milo was saying that having a cat has made him want to be a dad, and those aren't feelings that he ever got from having sex with men.
Awesome.
I don't know why this is a conversation that makes sense or needs to happen.
Yeah, that's because they've human beings have spent several, what, tens of thousands of years breeding animals into such that they can't survive on their own without me.
I mean, well, hey, listen, the rules, all bets are off since now I know angels are trying to fuck all the time, but because gay people exist, they're sad.
You get to the heart of it if you're sort of one-on-one with the gay, but they won't just talk about the emptiness of their life or the fact that the sex is sterile or whatever.
They will know that there's something not quite right.
You got to get it out because if you don't do a line or have a smoke or do something, if you don't, if you don't get it out, it's just going to be all that you can think about for the rest of the day.
It's just driving you crazy because it floods your mind.
But this is a common theme in this interview, and I think in Milo's life, where he takes something that applies to himself and his story, and instead of dealing with his feelings about it in a healthy way, he just accuses all gay people of being like him.
So I wonder if it's even possible for him to actually engage with what it is he's doing, right?
Like, regardless of whether or not he truly believes or doesn't believe any of this stuff, he is in an environment that has reinforced over and over and over again that his entire existence is wrong and it's a crime against God, right?
And he's played into that in order to get the advantage that he wants out of that, even though probably he believes that he knows it's not the case, right?
There are things about maybe Alex Jones that remind me of him a little bit.
Just in that kind of like just assisting manner, you know, like a bit of a bruiser, but with a heart, you know, like, you know, like, you know, like he's a bad guy with a heart of gold.
It reminds me a little bit of the good bits of my dad, right?
But there was another section which Alex does not have, which was that, you know, he was a bad guy, and I saw him do really bad things to people.
I would come down, I told this story before, but I would come down sometimes, the kitchen door would be closed, and I would hear, you know, Nikki, Nikki, I'm giving up a life of crime.
I'm turning over a new leaf.
I'm not going to do anything that's going to give me any more than 18 months.
unidentified
You know, it's funny, but it's all about goals, Milo.
And then my mother left him and married a new guy.
And he was very like sort of a nice guy now, but he would go through all my stuff.
Like if I had papers, you know, if I was reading something for school or whatever, he would like, when I was out, go through every page and just sort of leave it like this.
It's just that I knew that he'd been in there, you know?
And that kind of like invasive, like, like just horrifying, like, it was just for a very sensitive, artistic child like me.
We were only on my way then, you know, had a much larger than life grandmother who was like, you know, egging this stuff on.
And by this time, I had had some interactions, sexual interactions with a Roman Catholic priest who's dead now, has been dead for a long time.
But that had obviously, you know, that fed into it all as well.
No, but really for me, this is what's important to do the other stuff first before you get.
Oh, and I was raped by a priest.
But this sort of psychological torture as I experienced it was, you know, sort of like, so I had no private space anywhere, and I knew that all the men in my life were just not things I wanted to become.
It sounds like Milo had a tough time growing up, and that sucks.
Doesn't mean that everyone's just faking being gay as a trauma response, though.
I do think that a lot of what Milo was saying that ended up getting him canceled is stuff that involves shit he hadn't processed yet.
In a lot of cases, what he was saying was something that was really about his own experience, which only became offensive when he tried to generalize it to everyone else.
So for instance, if he had just said that he didn't feel victimized by the sexual interaction he had with that priest, a lot of people might have disagreed with him.
But ultimately, it's his right to feel however he wants about his life.
The problem was that he expanded this to suggesting that other 13-year-olds shouldn't feel victimized by the same kind of sexual interaction with adults.
You know, my wife likes to watch true crime documentaries, of course, like the world does, I suppose.
But this is that type of psychopath shit.
Like if you go to a prison with a psychopath who's murdered like eight people, they will tell you about their entire life and what's true and what's not true, you'll never know.
And the individual path that Milo went on, whether or not the trauma that he experienced as a child and through his time growing up, how much of that informed his drug abuse and sexual behaviors and all that stuff, who knows?
Only he knows that fully.
But to pretend that his experience unlocks like a Rosetta Stone that explains everyone's experience is fucking stupid.
And that's where we go from like, hey, I feel for you, man.
I think that it sucks that you had to go through this.
And I hope you can work on this and get it all together to go fuck yourself.
You are going to get tons of people hurt and killed.
There's that difference between somebody who is like, like you have to get to a place where at some point in your life in the past, you go, I could have made a different choice.
Right.
Because if you are the type of person who's like, no, I made every choice correctly.
It's just how it is.
You know, then you get to this place where you're like, well, everybody else would have made the same choice.
Nobody else could have made a different choice.
There's no way to do things differently than the way I did them.
And so, of course, I can judge everybody else, right?
I carved out a much, I have a new kind of career and a new life now that I much prefer.
More satisfying, lucrative.
Blah, blah, blah.
We'll do it later.
So I haven't gone crazy like so many of my friends do.
And it's funny watching them because I see some of the in the way that their personalities have become kind of empty and sharded and become filled with wickedness.
See some of the things that I have been working over the last 10 years to get away from that created this sexual behavior.
It's not that you can turn a person into a frog or you can make yourself look more beautiful or you can whatever.
What's the worst thing about magic?
Is that it robs others of agency that you can make them do things they don't want to do?
The worst and most sinister bit of magic is that you can trick someone or compel someone against their will to fall in love with you or to or to throw themselves off a cliff.
And that's what I think homosexuals are seeking when they, because they feel so powerless in their own lives and have this understanding that they are broken people without agency over their own sex lives, over their bodies, over that down there.
Like, I don't even have control over me, but I'm damn well going to have control over you.
The reason there's a higher proportion of closeted gay people on the right wing is because they know that the right wing base is inherently hostile towards gay people and that they think they're living in sin.
So Milo's answer to why there are so many closeted gay people in the GOP is a dumb thought about magic and how it's an attempt to exert control over people because gay people don't feel like they have control over their own sexuality.
Again, this is something that Milo felt, not something that's universalizable for all gay people.
But even leaving that aside, his answer makes no sense.
This doesn't explain why there are more closeted gay people in the right wing.
Milo's answer would make sense if Tucker was trying to figure out why there's a disproportionate number of gay people in politics.
Then the thought at least tracks.
But as it stands, this is a non-sequitur, and one that's a very sad projection at that.
The decades of practice where you're alone by yourself over and over and over again, messing with this one card over and over and over again, alone, by yourself, alone, working with this one card.
That's the worst part of magic.
That's what it is.
And if you could get somebody else to do that for you, you fucking would.
Milo seems to think that gay people are attracted to the magic of power and the government, and that maybe that also is why they like to be Catholic priests.
Keep in mind that Tucker wanted to have a non-hateful and non-hysterical conversation about homosexuality, which is why he called in Milo.
I don't think it's a stretch to say that Milo is basically having a little breakdown on this show.
Well, Tucker does his best to pretend it's insightful.
Milo is really just complaining about things he feels about his own life and his family, and he's getting pretty angry in the process.
This is a pretty embarrassing display for both of these dudes, even more so than I expected, which is insane because when I clicked play, I knew it was Tucker and Milo, and yet it still was like way worse than I thought.
And I really don't think it's an understatement to say that, like, if you watch this as well, Milo seems like he's kind of not really in control of himself.
Every one of these conversations between two right-wing attention Seekers, uh, attention addicts, uh, is two people working at cross purposes, never able to complete a joke.
It is fascinating to me that this ecosystem sustains itself through failure.
Gay men turning women into the demons they see themselves as.
You see, gay, look at, look at the most, who's the most celebrated woman on the stage at the moment is the Gorgon opposite Ariana Grande, whose name I forget now.
You know, this Nosferatu, like black Nosferatu, who seems to be sucking the life force out of poor Ariana, who's I think going to die within the next few weeks.
If you've seen that singer's physique lately, she's sort of...
But this appalling apparition.
Cynthia or something, I think.
Of course, she's called Cynthia.
You know, with these claws.
All right, I'm finding the very religious silhouette.
And you're like, that's literally Nosferatu.
It's literally Nosferatu.
And I know a gay man did that.
And of course, the gay man then put her on stage in Jesus Christ Superstar as our Lord.
It's funny that Milo has this problem with Arrivo playing Jesus in Jesus Christ Superstar when he should probably hate the whole idea of that musical to begin with.
And I was related to one of them and I spent a lot of time in my house, lived in my house when I was a kid and gay, died of AIDS, you know, but and had a lot of problems.
But I will say creative, free thinking, like truly free thinking.
This Milo guy, he's resigning from Breitbart or something.
And he says, I'm getting letters from people who say, you make it okay that I have a gay son because if he grows up, he doesn't have to be like Ross Matthews.
And I'm like, no, they should be like Ross Matthews.
They should be like Ross Matthews.
They shouldn't be like Dave Rubin, like you might not even know unless you watched him for a little bit.
Because this domesticity of homosexuals has killed all the things that were good about gays that made them tolerable.
And instead, has given them this grotesque parody, this simulacrum of domesticity, which has, of course, in their never-ending hunger, expanded to include babies.
And now we have the Buttigig couple buying black children.
You can see how there's no way to win with these guys.
Like, Milo's mad at the decadence and debauchery of the gay lifestyle, but he's also mad at the gay people who just want to live quiet domestic lives and have a family.
It doesn't matter what gay people do.
They'll always be sinners to someone like Milo and Tucker.
They're just trying to pretend to have a conversation about something that involves society and politics.
But at the core of it, this is just about their fundamentalist religious beliefs.
And I find their beating around the bush tiresome.
Like, you know, like, if we were still worried about tigers, like on the regular, then I don't think anybody would talk as much shit as they do right now.
Because it's the sleight of hand that's going on is you're like, well, gays are just like everybody else.
So we should behave like everybody else, which means we should have kids.
And if we can't physically have kids because our sex is this like demonic, sterile horror show, then we'll buy them be in the middle of the day.
It's a lot of fun.
I mean, that's how bad it is.
That's how bad it is.
And so you have the.
I love.
I don't know if it says anything about Republicans versus Democrats, but you have like Dave Rubin, who for whom buying a child is not good enough, it must be his own.
When you live that kind of life, you're living deep in profound denial.
And it comes from.
I read something in the Atlantic or Mother Jones, of all places, you know, some left-wing gay guy who just wrote about this really beautifully.
I'll try to find it on Twitter after this, but he said, when homosexuals are young, they realize they have to put on different faces for different people.
I guess their racial equivalent would be code switching, right?
Yeah.
And the effect of this on a person who has disordered urges, unlike someone who just happens to be black, is that it begins to create cracks and ultimately that turn into like shards in the personality, like bits of the personality, like burst ping off like a chandelier that fell to the floor.
And it produces the space for profound denial of the type that most homosexual men find themselves in, where that flooding of addictive urge is mistaken for healthy and normal sexual attraction.
And so I kind of stumbled when I looked into.
I just woke up one day and I was like, and I was married to a dude, to my shame.
And who's now like the ex-wife from hell, my God.
Look, if there's no other reason to not be gay, just imagine how bad a black homosexual ex-wife is.
It's an interesting idea that Milo brings up about how gay people have to code switch around different people and how that can lead to fractures in a personality.
I don't know if that's true or how common an experience it is, but I would say that the problem there isn't someone being gay.
It's that they would need to code switch entire aspects of their personality, presumably because they know it's not safe for them to be themselves in certain company.
Yeah, I think that a lot of people mistake Being safe from God and his punishment and wrath for the same as being safe from, say, the people around you who are professed Christians and their wrath and punishment.
So if you are somebody who's like, oh, I'm hiding because God will be angry at me, stop, pull back.
Maybe you're hiding because there's an asshole out there who's going to hit you.
And the way that I started to address this, I kind of stumbled upon a crude version of what the enlightened, like they don't call it conversion therapy anymore, they call it reintegrative therapy because it's reintegrating those shards and those broken bits of like memory that lead to the wrong output.
We can talk about it in detail if you want to, but I stumbled upon kind of like a crude version of that.
So when I was trying to stop myself from doing this stuff, I was using like hot oil on my thighs.
I was like doing things, you know, like self-flagellation.
You get like, forgive the language, but under every post that I will make online or every, you know, on the rare occasion I might say something about this in an interview.
One phrase keeps popping up over and over again in the comments.
You can't unsuck a dick.
Meaning, there's no salvation for you once you're gay or gay.
But he's unfortunately in a position where he's going to be made fun of no matter what he does, which is kind of his own fault.
We would have never known who Milo was if he didn't use his sexuality as a brand, like with the name of his book and his tour, because that allowed him to be used by the extreme right as a token gay guy that made them look slightly less bigoted.
Yep, he accepted the terms of the deal and he was paid handsomely to be that guy until he went a little bit outside of what the right wing can handle and he got cut off by his donors.
Whether or not his newfound heterosexuality is sincere, it's impossible for him to ask anyone to take him seriously, given the career he's had up till this point.
His entire thing relied on him provoking a reaction from people, and he often used his sexuality to incite that reaction.
So it's easy to see how someone could think that that's just what he's doing again.
And even if people don't think that, why the fuck should they care about what Milo is doing a good 10 years after his sell-by date?
Because we're all kind of like, you know, we see other people who are doing well in life or who have got themselves out of a sticky situation or, you know, who left their phone on the table when they went for the bathroom and break or whatever.
And who lash out against others who do seem to be achieving something redemptive?
And isn't it true that one of those characterizations of the demons is that they're, you know, in the presence of the light, in the presence of good of the word of God, they hiss and spit, right?
And it's not necessarily these people who are gay themselves, but they to confront the horror that a gay person might be able to ungay means that whatever, whatever you've got going in your life, you could fix easy.
Because if he can stop having sex with men, knowing what a powerful compulsion urge that is for most men, you know, that might mean I have to stop drinking.
That might mean I have to stop taking drugs.
That might mean I have to stop being a fat ass.
That might mean I have to stop being cruel, being vindictive, abusive, malicious.
And I think that part of it is certainly that we have become a society that encourages vice over virtue, that aggressively pushes sin.
Definitely food, which, I mean, like, if you're a trap, as I was in the hotel last night, as I was thinking about this show, and I looked at the menu and I was like, there's nothing on here for men.
It was all these like seafood, a bit, hand, whatever.
And the guy that was serving me had a huge ginger beard.
God bless him.
And I said, you don't eat here.
And he said, well, and I said, you don't eat here.
To sort of have a nudge and a wink kind of relationship with.
Like, oh, I don't do it.
But who's this?
Oh, just Jamal.
You know, who's this?
That's not the guy that you were with like three days ago.
Quiet girl.
Sorry about her.
You know, like just all that kind of stuff.
And men, just the way in which the self-destructive self-sacrifice, the relinquishment of the will to the most addictive version of everything is very gay.
Like, it doesn't mean every man has to go out looking like he wants to drop on his knees in a public park or in a toilet just because his wife chooses what washing powder they use.
And it's and it's like the difference between effeminacy and femininity, right?
You look carefully at the behaviors.
It's like it might have started off feminized.
Like you said, oh, the HR departments have kind of like feminized language in the corporate sphere.
And blah, blah, blah.
Of started that way, but the gays took over very soon afterwards.
And so now we don't have a feminized public square, we have a faggotized public square.
And it's hardly surprising given that everybody in Congress and everybody in the Senate and everybody in the party and everybody on TV and everybody else that you've ever heard of on television and everybody on all the TV shows are gay.
I think that Milo's point is a little unclear here because he's kind of saying that literally everyone in the world is gay, but at the beginning of this, he was arguing that no one was gay.
The biggest thing that changed for me, though, which is not like a big, the biggest thing to me, because I live quite an internal life, you know, like most of my, most of my life is up here, right?
The biggest thing that happened to me is I started caring what happened in stories.
Like spoilers started to bother me.
And I couldn't figure out what that was about.
Like 10 years ago, when the Star Wars movie came out just before Christmas, when no one had had the chance to see it, I tweeted, Han Solo dies.
So this isn't the kind of answer that Tucker wanted.
He's asking him how his life is different now that he's not gay, and Milo throws out a racist joke about dogs not barking at him, then this overly dramatic shit about how he doesn't like movie spoilers anymore.
This is, I think, somebody who thinks that this interview is supposed to be like, let's figure out what makes Milo tick.
And he has a belief that you can tell what's important to someone by what they try to hide.
These are the two things that sort of jump out at you.
So in that spirit, I'd like to remind you where we started in this episode, with Tucker hiding the majority of the Ugandan anti-gay act from his audience in order to pretend that it was about outlawing rape.
You can tell that something's important to someone by what they hide.
And Tucker hid the reality of what that Ugandan law was about.
I believe that the only reason that Tucker did that was so that he could pretend that his content isn't what it actually is.
A disgusting over-the-top hate broadcast.
If he spent the first half hour of this show full-throatedly defending a law that put consenting gay adults in jail for life, there really wouldn't be a mystery about how you're supposed to hear all this bullshit that he's doing with Milo.
The only way that he can stay in any way defensible is if he pretends a little bit here and there.
And the only way to do that is to lie and to hide things strategically.
Even when he was a flamboyant gay man, he was perpetuating politics and ideas that were detrimental to gay people.
It was very clear his positions were disadvantageous to anyone in the LGBTQ community.
And I think it's really interesting to hear him discuss his regrets because I think his actual regret is that people didn't get that he was trying to stop people from being gay.
I feel embarrassed and disgusted by the things I did, but I feel ashamed, particularly about 10 years ago, about how many people...
You know, I thought I was, like, laying it on thick with this sort of, like, Damon Everidge kind of, you know, a high-synth bouquet performance on stage, and I realised people weren't picking up the layers, maybe.
And every talk I ever gave in the Q ⁇ A, I said if I could not be gay, I would push that button, you know?
And nobody ever, like, that never registered with people.
All that they, why?
I don't know.
All they got was being gay is okay now and being right-wing, being gay and right-wing is okay.
And I know that I pushed that button with the left to annoy them and because it was absurd at that time, but people never got the message.
I know that I said that being gay and right-wing is okay because it made the people on the left angry, but my message was really that being gay and right-wing isn't okay.
I wanted them to kill me.
I wanted this to be a situation where everyone like me was destroyed.
And no one got it.
No one got the irony of the over-the-top character that I was doing.
I don't know if I would believe that that was intentionally how he was running his career, but descriptively, if that's how he wants to salvage things, I think that's as good an angle as any.
If his point is essentially, this is what I have to do now, right?
I have to say all of these things now in order to salvage what I've got, then it's not saying like, I wish I hadn't done anything I did other than the thing that made me get here now, which was go a little too overboard by saying that a 13-year-old should fuck a priest or whatever.
So, but now since he has been canceled, he's in a position where he feels like it's his responsibility to explain to everyone that he was trying to get you to hate gay people all along.
Now I have a responsibility to others because of because the message didn't land.
Like I was, I was not intending to give birth to this huge generation of gay Republicans who now just think it's openly, like openly fine to traffic in babies and to be a gay Republican.
unidentified
And I feel a great deal of responsibility for that.
That's my goal now: I'm going to do some hanging from a tree, and then I could be, I could do some sit-ups, you know, but without having to have one of those things that hangs on your door.
Yeah, possibly one of the biggest talk show hosts in the world and the hero of the right-wing guy who's friends with the president is doing this kind of a fucking show.