Andrew Clavin skewers Donald Trump’s self-deprecating satire while Sean Hannity praises his "honesty," then pivots to a Los Angeles bomb threat, jokingly blaming a "right-wing white maniac named Muhammad" to push gun control. He dissects Trump’s rally chaos—where protesters disrupted a grieving father—while accusing media of bias against Clinton and Obama, contrasting Trump’s aggression with Cruz’s strategy. A Big Short review exposes Barney Frank and Chris Dodd’s role in the 2008 crisis via Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac’s risky loans, mocking Dodd-Frank as corrupt. Clavin ends by recommending The Holly and the Ivy, framing it as a nostalgic antidote to today’s fractured narratives. [Automatically generated summary]
Donald Trump has now climbed so high in the national polls, he has no one left to fight with but himself.
On hearing the news, Trump immediately issued a statement saying he was a dishonest lowlife with a ridiculous comb over.
Trump said, quote, Trump is a very dishonest man, frankly, who could in no way be trusted with the presidency.
If I were president, Trump went on, I would make sure Trump would never be president.
I would be Donald Trump's worst nightmare, namely Donald Trump.
Reacting to the statement, commentator Sean Hannity praised Trump, saying, quote, no one but Donald Trump has had the honesty and integrity to expose Donald Trump's complete lack of honesty and integrity.
Hannity went on to say, Trump, Trumpety, Trump, Trump, Trump, and so on for the next three hours.
Trigger warning.
I'm Andrew Clavin, and this is the Andrew Clayton show.
Ah, that's how we're in L.A. We're in L.A. this morning.
All the schools are closed because there was a bomb threat.
So hundreds of thousands of kids are staying home in Los Angeles, which shows that we need stricter bomb laws, right?
You can just walk in and buy a bomb anywhere you want.
I'm sure some right-wing white maniac named Muhammad, not that Muhammad, has been reading the Koran, but not that Quran about Allah, but not just a God who happens to be named Allah.
Anyway, we will follow that.
I don't know what's going to happen with that, but if you go on the Daily Wire, they're following it live, and you can find out what the latest updates are.
And speaking of mindless violence, the Republican debate will be tonight, I think.
And so we will continue to follow, you know, Donald Trump, I guess, is going to now have to, he's down to Ted Cruz.
He's going to have to fight with Ted Cruz.
I think Trump is now polling at 100% of the Republican electoral.
I think there's no Republican who is not.
Until they walk in, until, so help me, they walk into the voting booth and suddenly they blink and go, where am I?
What was I doing?
How did I get here?
So today there was a story, maybe it was yesterday, there's a story in BuzzFeed.
Donald Trump's campaign rally had only been underway when the first angry eruption occurred.
They're talking about a violent altercation at a Donald Trump rally.
The Republican frontrunner had invited a supporter up to the stage to recount how his son was killed by an undocumented immigrant, read illegal immigrant.
And midway through the story, a pair of protesters interrupted and they started screaming and then the Trump supporters started screaming at the protesters.
It says in BuzzFeed, physical altercations between protesters' security and the occasional tough guy supporter have been a running theme in Trump's combative campaign this year, but Monday night was different.
Reporters who regularly cover Trump said they had never seen anything like the fevered, frenzied mood that gripped the ballroom in Las Vegas, with the candidate's ever-darkening political style seeming to grow more perversely effective by the day.
His grassroots opponents on the left, this is like a little danger music.
His grassroots opponents on the left are becoming more defiant and effective at causing trouble.
Activists interrupted Trump at least half a dozen times at the event, and the longer the night wore on, the more crazed many in the crowd seemed to get, one after another.
They started shouting.
They wanted to kill him and all this stuff.
Rush And The Media Rush00:16:07
You know, it's funny.
It's easy to start trouble at a political rally, and now, especially the left, has gotten better and better at doing it.
And they do do these things.
And of course, the media doesn't blame Hillary when the Black Lives Matter people show up and force her to confess that white lives don't matter or whatever they do.
And they never blamed Obama for the people fainting and the kind of religious zeal that people.
But I blame them.
See, I blame.
I don't believe in living a reactive life just because the media lies.
Doesn't mean I'm going to lie.
I blame Hillary for that.
I blame Hillary for kowtowing to the Black Lives Matter people.
I blame Obama for nursing and inspiring, purposely inspiring that kind of religious zeal that his followers had for him.
And I have to say, I blame Trump a little bit for the angry attitude of his followers.
We are all experiencing this in the media.
Everybody in the media from low to high is experiencing this thing that when you speak out against Trump, people come after you and they come after you with rage and they start canceling their subscriptions and they start unfollowing you and the minute you say anything.
I get this on Twitter.
I'm not following, you said something bad about Trump and I'm not following you.
I was on with Stephen Crowder, my pal Stephen Crowder, and Lauder with Crowder and we were, both of us feel the same way about Trump, that he's a fraud and not a conservative and kind of a cult of personality fascist type.
And Stephen was complaining, you know, that people drop off his site.
And of course, that's hard for him because he lives off his subscribers.
I live by collecting empty soda cans in the street and turning them in for the deposits, which is, it's honest work and it cleans up the economy, you know, cleans up the environment.
But, you know, it's an amazing thing not to listen to somebody who disagrees with you if you trust them.
I mean, I have people that I go to that I read who disagree with me about a lot of stuff, which keeps me on my toes, makes me argue my case, makes me change my mind on occasion.
I mean, think about it in life.
Like, in life, who's your wingman, right?
Who is your wingman?
Is your wingman the guy who says, yeah, you know, that babe at the office is kind of cute and you only live once?
Or is your wingman the guy who says, you know, you're a married guy, you're a married guy, you made vows and your kids look at you as the moral center of your life.
Remember who you are.
I mean, that guy is annoying, but he's your wingman.
I mean, if you're a girl and you're waking up next to people and you don't remember who the hell they are, you know, your friend is not the person who says, you know, hey, it's all good, baby.
You know, she's the one who says, your wingman is the girl who says, respect yourself, you know, sober up and take care of yourself.
You're drinking too much.
Wingmen are annoying.
Your friends are annoying if they're really your friends.
And there's going to come a time, you know, Americans, listen, Americans throw up guys like Donald Trump from time to time.
The Huey Longs of the world and the Father Coglins and the Barack Obamas.
Normally, normally, Americans at the last minute pull back.
And I think that's going to happen with Trump.
I believe Trump may win one primary.
I know he's like soaring in the national polls, but when you look at the people who are actually going to vote, he's not soaring quite as much.
And that's why he's getting more and more belligerent and more and more attacking.
And I really don't think, I think he may win one primary, but I don't think he's going anywhere.
And I also, I'm not sure about this, but I don't think he's going to run on a third party if he loses legitimately in the primary.
But, you know, even the right is starting to realize who he is.
I mean, because the right, look, everybody is dealing with this.
Everybody's dealing with the fact that you, Trump supporters, turn away.
We lose audience if we diss Trump.
And so, you know, to tell you the truth means to lose your affection, lose your revenue, and lose the advertising that people get when they address you.
And so people are not doing it.
But even the people on the right who have been very soft with him, people who I think should know better, have started to notice the way he is.
Mark Levin, guy I make fun of Levin because of his dyspeptic style, which I just find gives me a stomachache.
But I have deep respect for him because I've read his books and I know how smart he is and I know that he really is a guy of integrity and principle.
And so his style doesn't suit me, but that has nothing to do with who he is.
But he had a reaction, and this is a radio, so there's no video with this, but he had a reaction to the fact that Jake Tapper on CNN asked Trump about Scalia's comments about affirmative action.
And the left had been piling on Scalia and saying, oh, this was racist, when, of course, everything Scalia said that affirmative action is bad for blacks.
It creates more failure in the black community.
Everything Scalia said was true.
And he was only quoting someone to begin with, but even so, it was true.
And Trump said, yeah, you know, he joined into the crowd that he was racist.
And Levin had this reaction.
To pile on?
To pile on?
Scalia, for over 30 years, has been defending the Constitution, case after case after case after case.
Does he not deserve better than this from a Republican candidate?
Yeah, I think he does.
It was a bad few days for my friend, for our friend Donald Trump, in my view.
I hope he learns from it.
If he doesn't, and he stands firm and he keeps sticking at the conservatives and keep promoting the establishment and promoting big government programs, it'll have an effect on him and you.
All right.
Well, you know, before I respond to that, Rush Limbaugh did the same thing.
Rush Limbaugh has been circumspect.
And listen, no one respects Rush more than me.
I think Rush is like one of the great radio talents of the age.
I thought so from the first minute I heard him.
I think, you know, as we he is always telling us, he's 99.5% correct.
Isn't that his mind?
And I basically agree with that statistic.
But now he's reacting to the fact that Trump with Cruz is now leading, I think, in Iowa.
And so Trump reacted to that and called Cruz a maniac and started to say there's something creepy about him and all this.
So Rush reacted to that, same as we did.
One thing, you know, my questioning here about the way Trump has gone after Cruz here, calling him a maniac, refusing to work with people in the Senate.
The reason I'm focusing on that, folks, because that's so unlike Trump.
I mean, that's a huge mistake.
But on paper, it's a huge mistake.
Trump gets away with his mistakes.
Such is the bond of loyalty that his support base has for him that he gets away with them.
And I don't think he's made that many.
Don't misunderstand.
But for any of you who are holding out hope that Trump is a genuine conservative, genuine conservative, even in the Republican field, would not go after Cruz this way.
So that's just raised red flag for me.
It made me made me somewhat curious.
Well, Rush is 99.5% right, but he's wrong about the fact that this is not like Trump.
Trump himself said it was like Trump.
Trump said, oh, I'm not attacking Cruz because Cruz has been nice to me.
But the minute he comes after me, you just wait.
Well, wait a minute.
You know, think about that for a minute.
That set off a red flag in me immediately because it's as if this were all about Trump.
I mean, that's the cult of personality.
If you attack me, I'm going to unleash on you.
Not if you are doing what's wrong for America, not if your policies are bad.
I mean, compare that to Ted Cruz, who has been incredibly circumspect, who has slapped down the press when they have tried, and they do try.
They continually try to cause there to be fights between the Republican candidates.
Cruz has slapped them down.
He's been continually polite to Trump.
And you can call that strategic.
You can say, well, Cruz is looking to garner Trump's support, but it's also the right thing to do.
I mean, it may be strategic, but it's strategic because it's the right thing to do.
And Cruz has got it right.
Trump will attack anybody.
He will say anything.
He will hit at anybody.
And the problem is, you know, I really appreciate people think whenever I talk about Trump, people say, we're angry.
I know you're angry.
And I know why you're angry.
And I think you have a right to be angry.
It has nothing to do with that, but you can't let your anger make you stupid.
And it doesn't help to have not only the mainstream media attacking Trump, just piling on, because they pile on anybody who gets ahead, any Republican who gets ahead.
They call them a fascist.
They just happen to be right this time.
And that's very, very frustrating.
But it's even worse, I think, that the establishment right press has been piling on.
I mean, the Wall Street Journal, listen, I love the Wall Street Journal, but they did a piece, it was an editorial over the weekend about Trump and the mafia.
Trump, and it was kind of one of those things where they wrote it with this kind of dark style, same way BuzzFeed was writing that piece about Trump's rally, the Trump and the Mafia.
Well, Trump was in construction in New York.
And they said to him, well, you worked with companies who were owned by the mafia.
And Trump basically said to him, if you're in construction in New York, if you are pouring concrete in New York, you're working with the mafia.
What could I do?
Those are the people who pour concrete in New York.
And that's just true.
And I thought, and the Wall Street Journal said to their credit, they said in the editorial, there's nothing new in this.
There's no new information in this, but we're bringing it up again.
Well, come on.
That's the kind of thing that fuels Trump's support.
If you would just lay off that stuff, if you've got the goods on him, go after him, sure.
But when you do that stuff, when I first started writing mysteries back in the 80s, mystery stories, I had a scene in one of my mysteries in which some mobsters buried a guy in concrete.
And I was kind of wondering about the technology of that.
What would that actually be like?
Because you want to write a scene, you want it to be realistic.
And I was at a party.
It was a Christmas party, in fact.
And I sat down next to, and this happens to authors all the time.
I'll go back to that in just a second.
This happens to authors all the time that if you're looking for something, you find it.
Every author will tell you this.
And I sit down and I'm making conversation with the guy next to me.
And I said, what business are you in?
And he said, I'm in construction.
And I said, oh, you're just the person I'm looking for.
If you wanted to bury a body in concrete, and the guy without missing a beat turned around and described to me how to bury a body.
And I started to realize, oh my God, this is that guy.
He's the guy.
He's actually done this.
He actually described to me what would happen to the concrete after you bury the body, after the body rotted, because the problem with burying a body in concrete is when it rots, the concrete sags because the body's not there to hold it up anymore.
So there he was, there he was explaining this thing.
That was, and when I said to him, that was when John Gotti was the head of the mafia, you know, and I said to him, you know, do you ever, because at this point it was so obvious what he was, I said, do you ever worry about guys like John Gotti?
And he said, no, John Gotti is in construction.
I said, you know, I thought he was the head of the mafia.
You can't believe everything you read.
I'm actually talking to this guy.
So anyway, you know, Trump is right about that.
But going back to this principle about authors always finding, it's the same principle as when you're having a problem and you go into church and suddenly the guy starts preaching on that problem or when you learn a new word and suddenly the word starts turning up in every crossword puzzle you do and every book you write.
It's the same principle.
Happened to me last night as part of my pious observance of Christmas.
I'm going through all my screeners, right?
The screeners are those free movies that they send you when they want you to vote on the awards.
And I can vote because I'm in the Writers Guild.
I can vote on Best Screenplay, so I get all these movies at the end and I catch up on all the movies that I didn't have a chance to see or that I, you know, or I wouldn't have gone to the theater to see and was waiting for the DVD and you get all these free DVDs and I go through them to keep up with what's in the movie.
So last night I watched The Big Short, which is about, it's by, what's his name?
It's based on the book by Michael Lewis.
He's the guy who wrote Money Ball and the Blind.
It's like a really good writer.
I haven't read any of his books, but I read Money Ball when it was serialized and Sports Illustrated.
He's a really good writer.
It was directed by Adam McKay, who is an SNL guy, a Saturday Night Live guy.
And he did one really good movie, which was Anchorman.
I think that was a funny movie.
Most of his movies, they're okay.
And I kind of felt like he was the wrong guy for this.
Why is he doing?
The big short is about the financial crisis.
And so why is he doing this movie about the financial crisis?
Great cast, all-star cast, Christian Bale, Steve Carroll, who has become, he's great in it.
And he's up there with all the, you know, he's up there with Brad Pitt and Melissa Leo, these real actors.
Ryan Gosling is in it, also an excellent actor, and Carroll is probably the best one in it.
I mean, he's the one who's kind of riveting, really playing a character really different.
So this is a true story about a bunch of guys who realize, you know, like 2006, before the 2008 crash, they realize that the economy is built on the shifting sand of these crummy mortgages.
And they're selling all these bonds filled with these subprime mortgages, they call them, which just means they're crap.
You know, they're mortgages given to people who can't pay them back.
And they realize that the economy is going to crash and they start shorting.
It's called the big short because they start shorting the housing market, which means betting against it.
So they were betting against it, which meant that they were betting against the entire economy because the entire economy was resting on this housing bubble, this inflation.
So I brought some of the trailers.
Let's just look at the trailer.
gives you an idea of what it's like.
Michael, how are you?
I found something really interesting.
The whole housing market is propped up on these bad loans.
They will fail.
The housing market is rock solid.
It's a time model.
So Mike Burry, who gets his hair cut at supercuts and doesn't wear shoes, knows more than Alan Green Spanner.
Dr. Mike Burry, yes, he does.
You know what?
I'm pissed off.
American people.
We're getting screwed by the big banks.
And I am getting madder and madder.
It's unbelievable.
Then this guy walks into my office and says, There's some shady stuff going down.
Keeps on raining.
Leviticus.
While the banks were having a big old party, a few outsiders saw what no one else could.
The whole world economy might collapse.
I'm sure the world's banks have more than incentives of greed.
You're wrong.
No one's paying attention.
The banks got greedy.
And we can profit off of their stupidity.
You want to bet against the banks?
I think we're either high or having a stroke.
Kind of brilliant.
Fraud has never ever worked.
Eventually, things go south.
When the hell did we forget all that?
So that basically tells you the entire story.
What was really interesting is just yesterday, we were talking about the way in which narrative trumps reality so often in our media and in our lives and the things that we think are true.
And this is more prominent on the left because the left has such a monopoly on our news media and on our entertainment media and on our professoriate and on our publishing industry.
They have such power that we see them manipulate reality a lot more and they manipulate reality basically to tell us that the things that they don't like are actually bad.
Okay, there's two different, there's a difference between something you don't like and something that's actually bad.
Narrative Trumps Reality00:09:42
So they don't like guns, so they tell us guns are bad.
Guns cause crime.
They don't like freedom, so they tell us that we shouldn't be free.
You know, they don't like capitalism.
They don't like all these things.
So they tell us oil.
They don't like oil because basically they don't like freedom.
They want to be the, they think the elite should be telling us what to do.
And they do that by selling us this narrative, which they think is as good as the truth.
Now, the right also has a narrative of panic and despair and pessimism, which is a problem not because pessimism isn't sometimes warranted, it's a problem because it makes the right panicky and it makes them scramble from emergency to emergency and forgetting the long game, forgetting the things that matter, people's minds, people's hearts, the culture, the way we live, the way we represent ourselves to people.
We forget all that in this kind of panic to get to the next big emergency.
And so this picture starts with a quote from Mark Twain: It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble, it's what you know for sure that just ain't so.
And the funny thing about the movie is it not only illustrates that theme, it also exemplifies the theme.
It also is an example of the theme, because the movie is completely skewed in one direction.
Kyle Smith of the New York Post wrote this review of it.
He says, The story is everything, and that story is evil bankers in an unregulated wild west of capitalist depravity crippled the economy, cost us taxpayer billions, us taxpayers billions of dollars in bailouts, and carried on in a lawless spree that should have resulted in jail time for everybody.
To say the least, it's an impress, an imprecise view.
The preachy, hectarine tone the director takes at the end of the film is not only discordant, it's also hugely misleading.
And that's right.
I mean, this picture is completely misleading because what it leaves out entirely, and listen, Wall Street has a lot of responsibility for the 2008 crash, a lot of responsibility, but it begins with the government and it begins with the Democrats.
And this is key.
I mean, the Democrats had this myth that they still maintain this myth that the lenders were cheating, oops, just let me pull up this book, that the lenders were cheating black people.
They weren't loaning to black people, and they called this redlining.
And this myth is so pervasive, it's still around.
And the idea, see, the left always gets everything backwards.
Owning a home is part of the American dream.
And one of the wonderful things about owning a home is it turns you into a better citizen because you have to work hard, you have to save.
Better to keep your wife and not get into a divorce, better to have your family in a home.
It gives you a sense of responsibility, of ownership.
You become the kind of bourgeois person.
I know bourgeois is supposed to be an insult, but it's not, because the country rests on the shoulders of the bourgeois.
It makes you into the kind of solid citizen to get that home.
So the left says, well, if we give you the home, then you'll be that solid citizen, which of course is putting, you know, it's literally putting the horse before the cart.
I mean, that doesn't, you know, you put somebody who doesn't know anything about money in a home, he's still going to be that guy.
So they started to say, well, why don't the poor have homes?
Why don't blacks have homes?
And the reason was they couldn't afford them.
So they had this study, this famous study.
Now, I'm going to read a little portion, little pieces of a book called Reckless Endangerment, okay?
And the book is by a Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist for the New York Times, a former newspaper.
So you know, this Gretchen Morgenson, her name is, you know that she is not some kind of left-wing lunatic like myself.
This is an actual, you know, New York Times left-wing narrative reporter, and she says, accusations of discrimination by banks against minority borrowers, especially blacks and Hispanics, continued.
Banks contended that they were willing lenders and colorblind in their operations.
Why would they pass up the profits that such loans would generate?
And yet activist consumer groups such as Acorn, and we all remember the corruption at Acorn that Andrew Breitbart exposed, Acorn maintained that discrimination was rampant.
Too often, though, the bias claims were based upon anecdotal evidence.
So in October 1992, a report came out, Mortgage Lending in Boston, Interpreting HMDA data.
It was published by the Boston Fed.
Its authors were so-and-so and so-and-so.
It says, although the title was dull and the writing dry, its conclusions were explosive.
The study was immediately hailed as a landmark in research on lending and discrimination.
It claimed that these guys were redlining black people.
They were keeping the blacks out.
So remember, the government had these two arms for lending to people, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
And they were based on, you know, certain, they didn't guarantee mortgages, but they sort of told banks that you would be supported if you gave mortgages to the poor, all right?
So they started to react to this report.
Underwriting flexibilities, new products, expanding outreach efforts, all were code words for loosening underwriting standards and lending to people whose incomes, assets, or abilities to pay fell far below the traditional homeowner spectrum.
There was only one problem.
The methods used by the Boston Fed researchers to prepare their report were flawed, according to a throng of critics in and out of academia who questioned the paper's findings the following year.
Its claims of bias were by no means proved, these people contended.
This redlining was a myth.
They weren't loaning to people because the people couldn't pay it back.
So once, with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's support, they started making these bad loans, the banks started to say, well, we've got to do something with these bad loans.
So they started mixing them into bonds with other loans.
And you were buying these mortgages that you thought were AAA.
And the credit rating people who were being paid, they had to keep their business alive.
If they didn't give them good ratings, the people would go across the street and get a rating from somebody else.
So these things were getting AAA ratings when they were packed with these bad mortgages, these mortgages made because the Democrats wanted to give people homes.
And so through the corruption on Wall Street, no question about it, there was corruption on Wall Street, through the corruption on Wall Street, these things spread because now people started betting on these bad bonds.
You know, that's the way it works.
I sell you a bond and then you make a bet on whether that bond is going to fail.
And then by the time you're finished, all of America's money is piled into this housing market that is garbage.
And the guy who was at the center of this was Barney Frank because the Republicans, Bush, everybody, McCain, everybody kept warning Congress that these instruments were going to fall apart.
And Barney Frank said, and this is a quote, he said, I'm willing to roll the dice.
He rolled the dice and he got snake eyes.
You know, we got snake eyes.
And once that happened, once this whole thing collapsed, Barney Frank, I'm not even sure I can say this without getting sued, in my opinion.
Barney Frank belongs in prison.
I mean, I think that he was really, really shameful.
And there's video after video after video of him saying, oh, no, no, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are great.
They're in great shape.
Everything is fine.
And then after it was over, after it was over, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd were the two guys who benefited from this and who defended this thing.
And they, then Obama had them write the write the law, you know, Dodd-Frank, the law that was supposed to reform the system, that they corrupted, that they corrupted.
In fact, I did a video.
We have just a little snippet of a video I did explaining how this worked.
Boy, oh boy, Barack Obama, Chris Dodd, and Barney Frank are finally going to take on Wall Street Fat Cats and their unsavory political cronies, Barack Obama, Chris Dodd, and Barney Frank.
That's right.
Dodd, the Democratic chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, got more than three-quarters of a million bucks in sweetheart loans from Countrywide Financial after Countrywide CEO made a fortune off corrupt shenanigans at Fannie Mae, which was consistently protected from scrutiny by lies from the powerful Democratic chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, Barney Frank.
And now Dodd is pushing financial reform through the Senate just as Frank is pushing it through the House.
Now I know what you're thinking.
You're thinking, oh, Clavin on the culture, you're so funny.
Your satire's the best.
You're good looking too.
And last night with you was the best sex I've ever had in my life.
All right.
Probably only some of you are thinking that last part.
I'm sorry, I just left that last part in for fun.
You know, I always get these emails.
You know, you should stop making jokes about sex.
I show these videos to my kids.
And I always think, you should stop showing these videos to your kids.
I'm making jokes about sex.
The thing about the financial crisis is, if nothing else, at least it does this.
It disproves the left's idea that the narrative and the truth are the same thing.
It proves that if you follow the narrative, you will go off a cliff.
Only the truth will set you free.
Only the truth will get you home.
Yesterday I ended with a Bible story.
Here's another.
I think this is from the Apocrypha, but there was a story in the book of Ezrus or something like this, where Darius, the king of Persia, invites three people to a contest, named the most powerful thing in the world.
Truth Bears Away Victory00:02:15
And the first guy says, the most powerful thing is wine because it fuddles the minds of kings and beggars alike.
It makes them exactly the same.
The next guy says, well, the most powerful thing is the king because he can send armies with a word.
He can make armies fly off.
And the third guy says, no, the most powerful thing in the world is women because women can get the king to do whatever they want.
And he says, women are the most powerful thing, but truth beareth away the victory.
Truth beareth away the victory.
And that's the point of this movie should be the truth beareth away the victory, but it's actually part of the problem that it's exposing, this empire of lies.
And Mark Twain's great comment that it ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble.
It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.
The left knows that Wall Street is corrupt, but it knows for sure that the government is going to help us.
And it's the government that started the problem.
All right, Christmas stuff I like.
Here is a movie.
We're going to cheer for Christmas stuff.
Hey, Christmas.
Christmas stuff I like.
You know, everything for Christmas always seems to be about children and it always seems a little soppy.
So here's an adult movie about Christmas, a really terrific movie, which I would bet good money most of you have never heard of.
It's a film called The Holly and the Ivy.
It's a British film made in 1952 starring Ralph Richardson, who was one of the great British actors, and Celia Johnson, who is now forgotten, but was also a terrific actress, just wonderful.
And it's about the family of a Church of England pastor, a rector, they would call him, whose family comes together for Christmas, and it's based on a play, so it's very contained, but it's just this family basically coming apart at the scenes around Christmas.
It's very intelligent.
It's also very moving and very, in a strange way, uplifting toward the end.
And it's really about a culture, Britain, after the war, that is starting to fray and starting to come apart and about the things that hold people together and the role that faith and tradition play in people's lives, even as those lives unravel.
It's a really good movie.
I'll come back with something simpler for kids tomorrow, maybe.