Andrew Clavin skewers Everyday Feminism’s absurd "yoga appropriation" guide—demanding white practitioners speak in broken Hindi, avoid competition, and send religious selfies—before pivoting to media hypocrisy: journalists excused Obama’s Iran deal deception but crucify Trump for calling a reporter "sleazy" over his $6M veterans fundraiser (which raised just $800K). He ties this to Ben Rhodes’ admitted press manipulation and CBS’ editing of Couric’s gun doc, framing it as a double standard rooted in partisan complicity. The episode spirals into Catholic replacement theology, progressivism’s sanitized Christianity, and Coulter’s Trump endorsement, all capped by Jacob Collier’s acapella—proving Clavin’s brand of satire thrives on chaos. [Automatically generated summary]
Hot diggity dog, it's time for another visit to our favorite website, Everyday Feminism.
The website that's more than 300 times more stupid than ordinary feminism because it's every damn day.
Whoever you are and whatever you're doing, everyday feminism will tell you why you're doing it wrong and should feel bad about yourself.
It's sort of like having a shrill, mean-spirited, nagging shrew of a wife who can't cook and won't have sex with you.
In other words, it's feminism.
Today on Everyday Feminism, you can find a post entitled, and I'm not making this up, warning signs that your yoga practice is culturally appropriated.
For those of you who have more important things to worry about, like combing out the hair around your navel or bleaching your nostrils, cultural appropriation is when one sort of person unfairly uses something that originated with another sort of person, like when Muslims use human rights or when feminists use reason.
Now, according to Everyday Feminism, quote, there's not necessarily anything wrong with you doing yoga as a white person, unquote.
And whew, that's a relief.
But here are just a few signs that your downward-facing dog is sucking the lifeblood from the weak and innocent.
Sign number one, your yoga is culturally appropriated.
You don't acknowledge where your yoga practice comes from.
Yoga originated in India.
So now and then, while gliding into a tadasana pose, you should say something Indian like, white man, speak with forked tongue.
Or hurry, Lone Ranger, Tanto see Badmen riding to Black Canyon.
Or if you want to do something more like an authentic Indian from India, try giving incomprehensible technical instructions over the phone to someone whose computer is broken.
Sign number two, your yoga practice includes shame and ridicule.
Only a white person would introduce competition to such a lofty practice as yoga.
So if you hear yourself saying things like, hey, Fatso, where'd you learn to do a tadasana?
Hoboken, you're probably getting it wrong.
Sign number three, you've removed the spiritual aspects of yoga.
This, says everyday feminism, is reminiscent of the way colonial powers forced their own practices on innocent local cultures, like when the British came to India and forced them to use the rule of law and railroads and soap.
To get into a more spiritual mood, try taking a selfie while in a particularly appealing pose and send it to your husband with a note that says, having a wonderful time.
Vishnu, we're here.
Sign number four, you're misusing sacred objects.
Some yoga studios try to give themselves an authentic air by displaying sacred objects like crystals or Buddhist statues as decorations.
If your instructor should provide you with a handful of crystals, never put them in your nose without first being certain they're actually cocaine.
And of course, you should never use a Buddha statue as a sex toy, even though it feels amazing.
All in all, everyday feminism wants you to remember if you're white and you're doing yoga, you better bend over backwards to feel guilty about it.
The Press Asks Tough Questions00:16:16
Get it?
Bend over because it's yoga.
Never mind.
Stupid Indians.
Trigger warning, I'm Andrew Clavin, and this is the Andrew Clavin Show.
Hey, hey, everyday feminism.
I swear, they must be so unhappy that people, if anybody, if anybody is reading that site seriously, they must be so unhappy.
I was just doing my yoga.
What a horrible way to live.
Oh my god.
All right, so there's media chaos yesterday as Donald Trump did the unthinkable and attacked a reporter.
I listened to and read a lot of the commentary.
You will not hear anywhere else what you heard here.
I've been joking that the Andrew Clavin show is where the future comes to rehearse.
I was reading the New York Times this morning.
All of a sudden, they're talking about how political correctness created Donald Trump.
I mean, we've been talking about that here for like eight months.
I wrote articles about it and all this stuff.
Suddenly, so you're going to hear stuff today that you have not heard.
I think, you know, maybe I missed someplace, but you haven't heard elsewhere, and then you will start to hear it elsewhere.
Okay, so you've come to the right place.
And then we do the mailbag.
It's mailbag day.
So subscribe so you can be in the mailbag.
You know, it's what?
It's 30 days for free, and then it's like $8 a month, $7.99 a month.
You can spend that extra penny anywhere you want.
All right.
So let's do the history first of all, all right?
Back in January, before the Iowa caucuses, Donald Trump decided to duck out of the debate.
I think he was feeling a little uncomfortable.
He was feeling like they were asking tough questions like, what would you do as president?
And where do you get your tan and all this stuff?
And he was just starting to think like the debates were not working for him, I think.
And so he ducked out, but he didn't want to seem to be ducking out.
So he said, well, we're going to do something.
Instead, we're going to have an event and raise money for veterans.
And then he said, in one day, I'll play, I think it's Trump cut number three.
He says, we raised all this money in one day.
Once this started, it's for our vets.
There was nothing I could do.
I don't know.
And you know what?
I don't know.
Is it for me personally, a good thing, a bad thing?
Will I get more votes?
Will I get less votes?
Nobody knows.
Who the hell knows?
But it's for our vets, and you're going to like it because we raised over $5 million in one day.
Okay, sometimes he said $5 million, sometimes he said $6 million, but at first he was saying I did it in an hour.
And the point was I wasn't running away from the debates.
I was doing something much more important.
Nobody was doing what I was doing.
It's all to my credit.
Some time goes by, and then the press starts to investigate.
Did any of these vets, veterans organizations, actually get the money?
The Washington Post did one, CNN did one.
Drew Griffin went around calling people.
Here's Drew Griffin telling the results.
We got an accounting of just $800,000 confirmed.
Nine organizations say they got a total of $800,000.
Only 500 of which, Chris, actually came from Trump.
The other 300 came from a friend of Trump.
Now, there are seven organizations that either say they got something but wouldn't confirm or wouldn't confirm at all.
And then the others did not respond to us.
One did say they didn't get anything.
So, okay, so you don't want to be screwing the veterans and saying that you're giving them money when you're not giving them money.
This goes on, it gets more intense.
So finally, yesterday, Trump comes out with a list of all the places who got the money.
And his basic story is that, you know, people pledged the money, but it took some time to come through and that he himself gave a million dollars.
So this is January, February, March, April, May.
It's like four months later.
And he goes out and he gets in the press's face.
Trump cut number one.
I'm not looking for credit.
But what I don't want is when I raise millions of dollars, have people say, like this sleazy guy right over here from ABC, he's a sleaze, my book.
You're a sleaze because you know the facts and you know the facts well.
Okay, that was actually not the cut.
Play the other one.
Play Trump too.
Most of the money went out quite a while ago.
Some of it went out more recently.
But all of this has gone out and I'll give you the names.
Are you ready?
Do you have your pad?
And again, I really think the press, look, the media, you know my opinion to the media.
It's very low.
I think the media is, frankly, made up of people that, in many cases, not in all cases, are not good people.
But I think this is an example.
And I just, on behalf of all of the folks that have worked hard on this and all of the people that have made contributions, including myself, I gave a million dollars.
But I just want to tell you that there are so many people that are so thankful for what we did.
One other thing that's important to know, it's zero dollars have been taken out for administration.
You know, when you go to a lot of these different groups, in this case, zero dollars have been taken out for administration.
So a lot of these companies, they make a lot of money with doing the administration stuff.
So no money.
It costs zero dollars to accumulate all of this money, okay?
Okay, so that's his story.
And he says, you know, he's raised all this money and some of it didn't come through and now it's coming through.
Then he makes that line about the sleaze over there.
He's talking to Tom Lamas, I think his name is, from ABC.
And Lamasud asked him a question.
And here's the question that Lamas asked him.
He said, Mr. Trump, because Trump now says he's written a million-dollar check to the veterans.
He says, writing a million-dollar check is incredibly generous, but the night of that Iowa fundraiser, you said you had raised $6 million.
Clearly, you had not.
And then he says, your critics say you tend to exaggerate.
You have a problem with the truth.
Is this a prime example?
Okay, that's the question that caused him to call Lamas a sleaze, okay?
Now, he went, having gone after Trump, having gone after Lamas, the press was universally condemnatory, because the press is like the mob.
It's like a family.
You go after one of them, they all come after you.
You do not insult the press.
And they all said the same thing.
Now, I want to be absolutely clear about this.
A lot of the donations, the donation, for instance, that Trump gave, he only gave after the press came after him.
So that is the job of the press, right?
To hound him, make sure he's telling the truth and all this stuff.
And so the press immediately got on its high horse.
This is our job, asking tough questions, hounding the guy when he's not telling the truth.
And again, don't get me wrong, Trump does seem to have been kind of sleeky about this.
It does seem that if he hadn't been hounded, so I'm not saying anything nice about Trump that has nothing to do with Trump.
Okay, chief among the reporters to attack Trump was Dana Bash at CNN, Bash bashing Trump.
And Bash was typical in getting on her high horse.
Listen to her, the first cut of Dana Bash.
Not to get too corny about it, but it is the press.
Number one, it is our job to ask questions, particularly of public figures, especially somebody who wants to be the leader of the free world when they make a promise and they do it in a very public way, like he did with this big rally for veterans, to say, it is our job to say, where's the money?
Where did it go?
How much did you raise?
It is a fundamental requirement and responsibility of a free press.
It's what makes us different than North Korea or other places.
And he hasn't had to answer questions like this in his prior life.
He's been a public figure for decades, and he hasn't had to answer questions because he's been a public figure in the press, if you will, but he's been a private citizen.
It's a different ballgame now.
And so it is up to us to ask the questions.
And I think it's because people like Drew Griffin and others were asking questions about where this money is going that these veterans groups were able to get this money.
And he was able to give all of these big dollar amounts to all of these fabulous organizations.
Okay.
So now I want to get back in the Wayback Machine, okay?
Because Dana Bash is going very high up, very, very high-minded here.
This is why we're not North Korea.
This is our obligation.
This is the thing that we do.
Is it about a year ago?
Yeah, about July, July 2015, the Iran deal had been secured.
Obama comes out and he says, I've made the world say, I've made the Middle East safe for humankind.
We've now made sure that Iran, these crazy people in Iran, will get nuclear weapons and kill everybody.
It's a wonderful, wonderful thing.
Major Garrett, then working at CBS, stands up and he asks a tough question.
And he asks it in a very tough way.
Do we have the Major Garrett cut?
Yes, we do.
All right.
So Major Garrett at CB News gets up and he asks a question because there are still three or four hostages in Iran who weren't part of the deal.
They're cutting this deal with Iran, but they don't secure the freedom of the hostages, one of whom is a Washington Post reporter.
Okay, so now Major Garrett stands up, and he asks Barack Obama a tough question in the same kind of tone that Lamas asked the question of Trump.
Here it is.
As you well know, there are four Americans in Iran.
Three held on trumped-up charges, according to your administration, one whereabouts unknown.
Can you tell the country, sir, why you are content with all the fanfare around this deal to leave the conscience of this nation, the strength of this nation unaccounted for in relation to these four Americans?
And last week, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said under no circumstances should there be any relief for Iran in terms of ballistic missiles or conventional weapons.
It is perceived that that was a last-minute capitulation in these negotiations.
Many in the Pentagon feel you've left the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff hung out to dry.
Could you comment?
I got to give you credit, Major, for how you craft those questions.
The notion that I'm content as I celebrate with American citizens languishing in Iranian jails?
Major, that's nonsense.
And you should know better.
Well, you know, so that's, so he didn't call him a sleaze.
Obama's got a little bit, he's a little bit more upper class.
He's been, you know, the better schools and all that than Trump.
Trump just is a blunt guy.
But that's pretty much a slap in the face.
What happened?
The press almost universally sided with Obama and against Major Garrett.
Here's Dana Bash, same person we just heard being so high-minded about what the press should do.
Here's Dana Bash on Major Garrett.
A fine line between asking a tough question and maybe crossing that line a little bit and being disrespectful.
What happened to the press?
It's supposed to ask the tough questions.
Now it's rude.
We have Bill Maher, Bill Maher sent out a tweet on this saying that Major Garrett might just as well have used the N-word.
Okay?
That's what he compared it.
He compared it to calling him the N-word, just asking that tough question.
Here's CNN Don Lemon and another reporter talking about this.
I was at home watching it going, wait a minute, you know, it was a little out of school.
But I thought that was the next thing that was coming.
Like, what is wrong with you?
That's what I thought he was going to say.
But so, Gloria, this is just a question.
Reporters ask questions.
Do you think that was an unfair question, and do you think this scolding was warranted?
I think, look, the question about the fate of four Americans is a completely legitimate question.
When you look at the language and the way it was loaded in this question, capitulation, are you content?
Did you hang the Joint Chiefs of Staff out to drive?
There are different ways to ask questions.
And I think, again, when you look at the president, and I think Don's absolutely right, I don't think he really wanted to say that's nonsense.
I think he wanted to say something a little bit stronger, but you could see that he was visibly angry and upset and irritated.
The president goes off on a reporter and the press runs to the defense of the president.
And this was virtually universal.
I mean, it was virtually everywhere except guys like Sean Hannity on the outskirts of polite conversation, talking to mainstream media.
The president went off on a reporter and the press ran to the defense of the president.
Trump goes off on a reporter and they run to the defense of the reporter.
And suddenly it's all about the First Amendment and North Korea and freedom, the freedom of the press.
These guys for eight years have sold their soul.
And there are no exceptions.
Even the good reporters, even the Britt Humes who stood up and the Brett Baers who stood up, they're involved.
They're implicated because they're part of the media.
You know, the media sold its soul.
You sell your soul and the devil shows up to collect his due, you got to pay up.
And that's what's happening now.
Trump, when Trump calls these people sleazy, it is only because they're sleazy.
It is because they're sleazy.
It's also, is Trump hiding behind that?
Yes, he is.
But don't tell me that situation was different.
Don't tell me the Iran deal was different in some way, that Major Garrett shouldn't have just excoriated him, because we now know the administration lied and manipulated the press.
Ben Rhodes, the deputy national security advisor, told the New York Times magazine, We ripped you guys off good.
He basically just spat it in the Times' face.
And was it covered?
Yeah, but now it's old news.
What did he say?
He said, This is Rhodes talking to the New York Times.
He said, the average reporter we talked to is 27 years old, and their only reporting experience consists of being around political campaigns.
They literally know nothing.
So what did they do?
They planted think tank experts.
They planted think tank experts to call up the press and say, oh, yeah, the Iran deal, great deal.
New moderate people showing up in Iran.
And the press fell for it.
The press fell for it.
And now they have no credibility.
So when Trump does this stuff, and I, again, I'm not defending who Trump is or what he did, but you can't show up after eight years and say, oh, we're putting on our First Amendment hat again.
And now we're asking the tough questions.
And by the way, by the way, this is only one example.
You know, they just had this story, which is typical, typical of these people, of Katie Couric bringing out a documentary.
It's now been canceled.
She brings out a documentary on gun rights, right?
And they're all over LA.
There are billboards advertising this thing.
And it's completely edited to give a false impression.
There's a scene in this thing where she asks people, I won't play it because you can find it on YouTube.
But there's a scene where Katie Couric says, well, if you don't have background checks, how are you going to make sure that criminals don't get guns?
And in the documentary, the gun supporters, the gun rights supporters, sit there and look at each other and they got nothing to say.
And they look down at the floor and they look ashamed and the danger music starts playing in the documentary.
Bump, bump, bump, bah, you know, they've got no answer to this.
In the real audio, in the real audio, they just answered her question.
They said there are laws on the books that protect that.
Immediately, there was no silence.
There was no lag.
They just immediately answered her question.
She edited it, CBS News, with Dan Rather.
The guy threw away his career bringing out fake documents to catch and humiliate George W. Bush on something that had happened 40 years ago.
You know, I mean, a little minor transgression if he had gotten him, if he had gotten him.
The documents that he produced were debunked within seconds.
Let me just read you this from Peggy Noonan.
This is a description of the IRS scandal.
A high official in the IRS named Lois Lerner targets those she finds politically hateful.
IRS officials are in the White House a lot, which oddly enough finds the same people hateful.
News of the IRS targeting is about to break because an inspector general is on the case.
So Ms. Lerner plants a question at a conference, answers with a rehearsed lie, tries to pin the scandal on workers in a cubicle in Cincinnati, lies some more, gets called into Congress, takes the fifth, and then retires with full pension and benefits, bonuses intact.
Taxpayers will be footing the bill for years for the woman who in some cases targeted them and blew up the reputation of the IRS.
Now, on the week in July, July 28th, 2014, when this story blew up, okay, here's the Media Research Center, the saga of Lois Lerner's missing emails, because remember, she did the same thing as Clinton.
IRS Scandal Revelations00:08:43
She dumped all her emails.
It took a bunch of twists and turns this past week, but you wouldn't know it if you only got your news from ABC, CBS, NBC News.
On July 21st, it was reported that even more IRS officials had their hard drives crashed on them.
On that same day, it was revealed that a top IRS official was uncertain if backup tapes of learners' lost emails still existed.
The next day, the story changed again.
Then on July 23rd, the head of the IRS testified that the backup tapes had finally been discovered, but she doesn't know how they found them.
How many of these intriguing nuggets were reported on any of the network evening or morning shows last week?
Zero.
None.
They covered this thing not at all.
They used the IRS, the most powerful agency in the country, against you because of your political opinions.
And Barack Obama, not a smidgen of corruption, not a smidgen of corruption.
These guys sold their soul, and now the devil, and the devil is named Donald, shows up and takes his due.
They're not going to get away with any of this stuff.
Donald is going to walk all over them, and they earned it.
They earned it.
The mailbag.
You will not hear that Dana-Bash.
I bet you will not hear that Dana.
You haven't heard that Dana-Bash thing before.
I'll bet you'll hear it now because that's amazing.
It's amazing to me that she's making excuses for the president and calling a reporter rude for asking a tough question.
That is amazing.
The mailbag.
Time for the mailbag.
All right, here's my favorite question that came in the mailbag from Michael.
Hi, Andrew.
Who writes all those wonderful monologues at the beginning of your show?
They're hilarious.
Best, Mike.
Well, thank you, Mike.
We have 150 comedy writers here who come in and work 24 hours a day.
It's me!
I write them!
Look, you can see the scars on my brain.
What do you think writes them?
No, I write them, Mike.
I really appreciate that you like them.
And every word comes from my teeming brain.
Mark, I have been a subscriber since the beginning.
And when the episodes were still in their single digits, I thought to myself that I should watch Ben Shapiro's podcast before I watch yours, which has since turned into popular opinion because people feel Ben is depressing and I kind of cheer them up.
Mark says, I did this once, but to this day, I still watch your podcast first.
What's wrong with me?
Mark, you're manic depressive.
I think this is what you enjoy is the high from my show, and then you like crashing.
It's kind of a masochistic manic depressive.
You should see someone about it or just take drugs or alcohol is also good.
All right, from Siobhan, is that how I pronounce this, Lindsay?
S-I-O-B-H-A-N?
Siobhan, okay.
I'm waiting for my copy of The Great Good Thing.
Well, thank you, Siobhan.
So I haven't read the part you mentioned about your interpretation of the Jews killed Jesus.
The Catholics teach that it's not the Jews who killed Christ, but all sinners who were the authors of Christ's passion, which would be everybody since we're all sinners.
What are your thoughts on this?
Could you go into it more in depth than you did last week?
Siobhan.
First, thank you for ordering the book.
I appreciate it.
Yes.
Okay, it's a little complicated, but here's the thing.
Here's my problem with the Catholic point of view.
It is definitely true, and the Catholics on all their official pages will point this out, that official Catholic opinion during, say, the Middle Ages was to protect the Jews.
They frequently kept people from rioting and tried to persuade them.
There were heroic priests who stood up against mobs who would come after to kill the Jews.
But their basic theology, which is sometimes referred to as replacement theology, is that in Jesus, the Jews had been kicked out of God's favor, were no longer the chosen people, and Christians had replaced the Jews in God's sight.
And this became interpreted as the Jews killed Christ.
If you go back and you read the passion plays from the Middle Ages, the Jew shows up as this mustache-twirling, I guess, beard-twirling villain who rubs his hands and all this, and he kills Christ on the, you know, betrays Christ.
And it was really a very, very intense racial thing, and it infected all of European culture.
If you look at Shakespeare, I mean, that's what Shakespeare is writing about when he writes about Shylock.
You know, that's a very, in its time, a very sensitive, thoughtful description of a Jew.
He says, am I not a human being?
He makes that famous speech.
But at the same time, he represents the unforgiving, give me a pound of flesh in return for our debt, whereas the Christian hero makes the famous speech, the quality of mercy is not strained.
So the Jews were continually condemned and demonized by these people.
My interpretation of the Bible is simply this, that God chooses the Jews to make his re-entry into human life after humans become separated from him through the Garden of Eden and the fall.
He uses the Jews as a doorway.
And as such, the Jews become both the chosen people, but they also become representatives of all of us.
If you read the Old Testament, it's an amazing, there's nothing like it.
It's an amazing story of an entire cycle of civilizational history.
It's the cycle from their creation story to their gathering together of the tribes to their adopting a king to their becoming an empire to the empire falling to their rebuilding in a more modest way, that then that's the world that ultimately, hundreds of years later, Jesus enters into and kind of represents the whole thing.
So my interpretation of that is the Jews represent all of us.
And what they do, you know, it's ridiculous to say, no, any more than I would say that a German born today is guilty of the Holocaust, which would be absurd, to say a Jew born today is guilty of what a Jew, some guy did 2,000 years later.
But in the story, they represent everybody.
And so you're right.
When they say the Jews kill Jesus, that only makes sense if it means all of us, all of us kill Jesus.
Any one of us who was there would have done the same thing.
And that, I believe, when you look at the crucifixion story, it's religious people, it's political people, it's ordinary people, it's political, you know, it's all kinds of things are out there shouting, kill this guy, crucify him, crucify him.
If you think you wouldn't have been in that crowd, you are wrong.
None of this applies to Ben Shapiro, who actually did kill Christ because he was in a prison.
He confessed to his cellmate, who turned out to be a federal informer.
I just made that part up.
I couldn't resist.
Anyway, that's my interpretation of it.
And there is a lot more about that in my book.
From George.
Dear Andrew, you have mentioned before that you are a tragedian of sorts.
From what I have read, the tragic worldview is nearly universal prior to the coming of the Christian religion.
To what extent do you think it is the case that modern progressivism is fueled by a desire to retain the comedic narrative of Christianity apart from Christ?
That's a very complicated question.
Let me see if I can simplify it.
I mean, the idea basically is before, this isn't entirely true, that before the idea of Christian resurrection and heaven, that life was just looked on as a tragedy.
But there is some truth to it.
And the classical Greek and Latins looked at life, many of them, from a tragic point of view.
And Christianity, early Christianity, adopt a lot of the philosophy of Stoicism, which was this Christian thing, that, you know, you got through life by not caring that much and by suffering through.
However, Christianity had this payoff.
At the end, you went to heaven.
And a lot of people misinterpreted that, in my opinion, as transforming life into a happy story.
It doesn't.
One of the things I love about Christianity, one of the things that I find so convincing about Christianity, it's it's a tragic religion.
If you look at it, if you erase all the supernatural stuff, if you erase heaven, if you erase the afterlife, if you erase the resurrection, it's the story of a man who comes from God and tells the truth and is killed dead.
That is the world without faith.
That is the world without faith, and it remains the world even with faith, except you add on something else.
So I definitely think F. Scott Fitzgerald said Americans like their tragedies with happy endings.
I definitely think that this happy talk misreading of Christianity, that if you believe good things will happen to you, you know, the prosperity gospel and all this stuff, I think it's nonsense.
Schopenhauer, the philosopher, called it banal optimism.
I think it is a misreading of Christianity.
Christianity does nothing if not accept the tragedy, the tragic nature of human life.
Even the early Christians, in the last year or so, a couple years ago, I was reading some of the earliest Christian writings, and they would say, oh, you know, I love to suffer.
I seek out suffering to be like Christ.
Well, Christ didn't seek out suffering.
Christ was in the garden of Gethsemane saying, get me out of this, get me out of this, because he was wholly human.
He was wholly human.
So yes, the answer to the question is yes.
I think there are a lot of people who use Jesus to create a happy talk version of life.
I think that is a misreading of Christianity.
I think Christianity fully and completely embraces the tragedy of life, but says there's something more.
There's another spiritual level on which things on which things exist.
Singing Without Instruments00:03:00
All right, I'm going to take one more.
I never leave myself enough time.
I should just do the whole show as a mailbox.
Elaine asks, I says, I know you and Ben are friends with Anne Coulter, but it's not fair to give her a pass just because she cares about illegal immigration.
If she were to say, yeah, I know Trump is all those horrible things, but I care most about illegal immigration, so I'm on the Trump train.
Okay, maybe.
But instead, she endorses and defends every horrible thing about him.
From Elaine in Atlanta, I don't give Anne a pass.
What I said about her and will continue to say is that she's acted in keeping with her own philosophy, that no one can say that Anne is trying to, you know, bump up her brand or get on television or sell her books by endorsing Trump.
She is being completely true to her point of view, which is that we are being invaded, that it's more important than anything else, that the cultures that are coming in and are destroying our country.
I disagree with her.
I disagree with her, and I think she's wrong, but she's on the Trump train for reasons that are completely legitimate and in keeping with her personality and philosophy.
That's the only thing I've said about her.
And I don't think it's fair to attack her as if she's being dishonest.
That's it.
Okay, I'm done.
Stuff I like.
Yesterday, as I was talking about my anniversary, I played a song by George and Ira Gershwin.
So I figure it's a short week.
I'll just stick with that.
I have made a discovery that I think you guys are really going to like.
I haven't seen this guy around much.
He gets a lot of hits on YouTube.
His name is Jacob Collier.
He's a young British guy in his 20s who has worked with MIT to develop ways that he can use only his voice to make himself an entire acapella choir.
So here he is singing one of my favorite Gershwin songs, Fascinating Rhythm.
This is all him singing acapella, using machinery to blend his voice together.
But I'm all...
Oh, how I want to be the mother I used to be.
Fucking rhythm.
Oh, won't you stop tingin' on me?
Please stop tingin' now.
That's a talented guy.
I mean, that is really a talented kid.
Jacob Collier, we'll come back to him.
He'll be on Stuff I Like again because he really is that good.
The Clavenless weekend is already looming in front of us.