Drinking Clinton’s Tears dissects Hillary Clinton’s memoir as a self-pitying rant—mocking her "White House is mine" delusions and blaming "misogynists," "Russians," and Trump voters for her 2016 loss while contrasting her emotional breakdown with male Democratic failures like Al Gore. Paul Beston’s The Boxing Kings ties America’s heavyweight dominance to immigration and racial progress, arguing Ali’s Vietnam stance was Nation of Islam coercion, not personal defiance, before critiquing MMA’s spectacle over boxing’s stoicism. The episode pivots to leftist institutional bias, exposing The New York Times’ politicized Miss America questions and Obama-era campus rape policies as kangaroo courts, debunking inflated assault stats with WSJ data while framing DeVos’ reforms as a rare right-wing victory—ultimately painting progressivism as reality-denying emotionalism. [Automatically generated summary]
All right, get your leftist tear tumblers ready because Hillary Clinton is crying and crying.
We are going to drink those tears as if they were champagne.
This is going to be one of the most sexist episodes ever.
I think Hillary was just too girly to be president.
And if that's not bad enough, we'll debunk the campus rape myth and Paul Beston will join us to talk about the days when American men were the heavyweight champions of the world.
Testosterone all around.
But first, Hillary Clinton is about to begin a book tour for her new memoir, which has the title, What Happened, and the subtitle, Oh, what, what, what?
What happened?
Please tell me what happened.
What, Hillary is planning speaking engagements across the United States and Canada.
Tickets for the events are priced at around $350, which will be paid in small, unmarked bills to anyone who shows up.
Contacted by reporters and asked to say what the book was about, Hillary said, quote, It's an attempt to explain how in hell the next president in line had her birthright snatched from her fingers by Russians and misogynists after she had sacrificed every personal consideration in a humiliating sham of a loveless marriage in the hopes it would lift her to power and then committed every form of corruption that might grease her soulless climb to the top unquote.
Mrs. Clinton then fell off her bar stool and was carried into the back room of the saloon, screaming, quote, that was off the record, damn it, unquote.
Then she lapsed into unconsciousness.
Though much of the book has been a well-kept secret, the Daily Wire has acquired a table of contents, which contains such chapter titles as chapter one, the White House is mine, Chapter three, mine, it's mine, you can't have it, it's mine.
Chapter four, Bernie Sanders, that stinking old communist snake oil salesman who ruined everything.
Chapter seven, James Comey, Spawn of Satan, and chapter 10, what is that hideous mask of despair I see in the mirror?
Please don't tell me it's my face.
In one expert of the concluding chapter, Hillary tells her readers, I take full and complete responsibility for my loss to Donald Trump, even though it wasn't my fault.
The fault lies with a raving mob of woman-hating, racist, white supremacist deplorables who didn't recognize the first female president of the United States when they saw her and were too stupid not to vote for some orange-faced crotch grabber who should have stayed on reality television where he belonged instead of ruining the only life I have, the only life I have, unquote.
A publicist for Mrs. Clinton's publisher says the book tour is scheduled to begin September 18th, with Mrs. Clinton walking on stage at the Warner Theater in Washington, D.C., and to end September 19th with Mrs. Clinton being dragged off the White House lawn, digging her fingernails into the grass and screaming, Let me in.
It was supposed to be me.
It was supposed to be me.
Democrats greeted Hillary's book tour with enthusiasm, sending congratulatory emails to Mrs. Clinton that said things like, For God's sake, just shut up already, you're destroying the party, and please, mom, it's over, you're embarrassing everyone, just go home.
Republicans greeted news of the book tour by laughing uproariously.
Trigger warning, I'm Andrew Clavin, and this is the Andrew Clavin Show.
I'm the hunky donkey, life is tickety boo.
Democrats Demand Silence00:13:39
Birds are winging, also singing, hunky-kunk-dee-doo.
Ship-shaped tipsy-topsy, the world is it easing.
It's a wonderful day.
Hoorah, hooray!
It's what I sing!
Oh, hoorah, hooray!
Oh, hooray!
All right, now listen, I don't want to make fun of Hillary Clinton's, you know, pain, but I can't help it.
It's just so, it's just so good.
And we're going to be making a lot of fun of her.
Also, we will have Paul Beston on.
Got a new book about boxing which is really interesting because of what it says about men and about America in the old days.
The mailbag is tomorrow, so get your yes, so get your questions in.
You've got to subscribe.
Allows you 10 bucks a month.
We will solve all your problems.
You can ask about your personal problems politics religion, anything.
Answers are guaranteed, 100% correct and will change your life every now and again for the better.
So you go on the website right, you touch the podcast button.
That's where you can submit your questions.
And, by the way, on the 19th, Ben is going to be doing a town hall, 2 p.m.
Pacific, 5 p.m.
Eastern, 2 p.m.
Pacific.
That'll be streaming live on Facebook.
It's free for everyone to watch.
But if you want to send in questions again, you have to subscribe 10 bucks a month and if you subscribe for the year, it's a hundred bucks a month and you get the leftist tears tumbler, which you're going to need this very day because we're going to be drinking Hillary Clinton's leftist tears.
All right, we will get on to.
Oh, we'll talk about everything.
Ted Cruise and his porn.
You know his porn addiction.
Did you hear about this last night around midnight?
Liked somebody on Ted Cruise's twitter feed.
Liked a porn movie that was on the twitter feed, or something like this.
And uh I, you know who knows who it was, who did it or whatever, and and who cares too.
You know I never understand these stories like Ted Cruz.
What they always say is, oh, Ted Cruise is a Christian, so he's a hypocrite.
If he's a Christian, he believes he's a broken, you know, sinful man who occasionally does the wrong thing.
It probably wasn't even him liking the twitter movie, but if it was, then he was doing.
You know, he doesn't know.
You an apology, us an apology.
Anyway, I always feel guilty when I do a commercial for texture.com, because it is the most addictive app you will ever have.
I feel like i'm giving you something that you're just you're just not going to be able to control yourself.
This app has hundreds of magazines for it's like 10 bucks a month, 999 a month, just all everything, everything you could possibly want to read about.
And the thing about magazines that I really like is like, I think opinion and perspective is really important, but magazines have the money and the time to send reporters out to gather the facts and really get the stories, and these are all kinds of magazines.
So if you like celebrities, it's got people.
If you like sports, it's sports, illustrated entertainment, weekly Forbes for very serious stuff uh, Esquire TIME, all these uh, all the, basically all the big magazines, and there it's just like you start reading it and, because you can read anything you happen to be interested at the time uh, you just get lost in this thing.
Like I said, 9999 a month, over 200 magazines.
And if you sign up right now at texture.com slash Clavin, you get a 14-day free trial.
And that's Clavin.
I know what you.
I know what you're thinking.
I know this.
Now, I don't trust you.
I do not trust you.
You're thinking, how do you spell that?
It's k-l-a-v-a-n.
Why subscribe to just a couple of magazines when you can have all of your favorites on your smartphone or tablet all the time for way less?
This texture was selected as one of Apple's top 2016 Ipad apps.
So start your free trial now and download the texture app right now.
Texture is offering my listeners once again 14 day free trial.
When you go to texture.com slash clavin, that's all it will take to convince you.
14 Days to try text her for free.
When you go to Texter.com/slash clavin, texter.com/slash clavin.
You weren't doing anything else with your life anyway, so this will take care of all your time.
All right.
So I just, I mean, I've been watching this interview that Hillary Clinton gave with Jane Pauley.
And the thing that keeps coming to mind, you know, there was this movie.
I don't know if anybody remembers the movie As Good As It Gets with Jack Nicholson.
Did anybody see that?
See, here's the thing.
Because the left has created a world in which it's supposedly virtuous to lie, to not say that women are like this and men are like that, to not say, oh, there's a lot of crime in the black community, to not say, oh, you know, a lot of the guys who commit terrorist acts just happen for some reason to be named Muhammad.
So virtue is lying.
That is why you see on so many shows the men are now gangsters.
So you get the sopranos, you get breaking bad, you get their men are bad people.
The reason is, is in a world where it's virtuous to lie, bad people are the ones who tell the truth, right?
And that's what everybody likes about Donald Trump.
He breaks the rules.
He tells the truth.
So as good as it gets, Jack Nicholson as a writer who, I can't remember, he had a bunch of psychological problems, but he just was compulsively speak the truth.
And of course, by the end of the movie, they had to cure him of this because that made him a bad guy, right?
So they cure him of speaking the truth.
But the fact is, all anybody ever cared about was the first half an hour of the movie when he says all these hilarious things.
And there's one very famous scene when Nicholson is the famous writer who's walking out of his publisher's office and the secretary stops him and wants to know, how do you write such good women characters?
Here it is.
How do you write women so well?
I think of a man and I take away reason and accountability.
That line was, I mean, that line just made a smash.
He thinks of a man and he takes away reason and accountability.
That's Hillary Clinton.
I mean, Hillary Clinton, we've been told we're so misogynist for not electing the first woman president, but she exemplifies the worst clichés about women.
I mean, look, everybody has flaws, but there are two different kinds of people.
There are men and there are women.
Those are the two kinds of people there are, and men have men flaws and women have women flaws.
And she is out there without reason or accountability.
She won't even take it.
I mean, obviously, one of her biggest mistakes, just like Mitt Romney had that 47% mistake, like 47% of people don't want to work, and so they take free stuff from the Democrats.
And everybody went like, hey, you know, I'm on welfare.
I don't like it.
You know, she had that quote where she called Trump's voters deplorables.
Well, why should any of them now switch to her if they're deplorable, right?
She won't even take that back.
This is cut three.
Listen to this.
Well, I thought Trump was behaving in a deplorable manner.
I thought a lot of his appeals to voters were deplorable.
I thought his behavior, as we saw on the Access Hollywood tape, was deplorable.
And there were a large number of people who didn't care.
It did not matter to them.
So he says, well, I only call them deplorable because they're deplorable.
All of you people are deplorable.
I mean, this is what's happening to the Democrat Party.
I mean, this is amazing.
Their hatred of the American people, their hatred of a large swath of the American people is coming out.
And say what you will about Trump, he doesn't say this stuff.
He doesn't say this.
He says it about the powerful people who attack him, but he doesn't say it about the people who didn't vote for him.
You know, he's trying to win them over.
The Democrats are just telling you, you are deplorable.
She will not take it back without reason or accountability.
Then, I mean, the classic thing about this is going to be the most sexist show ever.
They may come in somewhere around here that two women just may come and carry me out the door.
But the classic thing about women is they're too emotional to make good decisions as president.
So listen to Hillary's description to Jane Pauley.
It's like two girls sitting around talking to Jane Paulie.
She's talking about how she felt after the election was over.
There's a cut two.
I just felt this enormous letdown, this kind of loss of feeling and direction and sadness.
And, you know, Bill just kept saying, oh, you know, that was a terrific speech, trying to just kind of bolster me a little bit.
Off I went into a frenzy of closet cleaning and long walks in the woods and playing with my dogs and yoga, alternate nostril breathing, which I highly recommend, trying to calm myself down and, you know, my share of Chardonnay.
It was a very hard transition.
I really struggled.
I couldn't feel.
I couldn't think.
I was just gobsmacked, wiped out.
You got to get one of these leftist tears tumblers.
The tears, they taste so good.
I mean, who cares?
Who cares?
She's drinking.
She got boozing it up and doing yoga and she's cleaning her closets.
I mean, are you kidding me?
This is a person who wanted to be president of the United States.
Now, don't get me wrong.
When Democrat men lose, they go insane.
When Al Gore lost, he went and said, remember, he got that big beard and suddenly he's screaming about the world is going to end.
You know, it's all global warming is going to kill us all.
And he would make speeches in the snow about global warming.
And they're still trying to sell this stuff to us that, like, you know, you're some kind of Holocaust on IR, you know, so Democrat men go crazy.
But she, I mean, I don't know.
This is a woman who wanted her finger on the button of the nuclear button.
And she's sitting there telling us about how she lost an election and she's drinking herself, you know, she's boozing it up with the Chardonnay and doing the yoga.
I mean, is that the person you want running the army?
Ah, man, oh man.
To me, what is so funny about this, and I've said this before, that feminists, like the only women I know who fulfill the clichés that men say about women are feminists.
They're the ones who like fall into those cliches.
And it is funny.
You know, I've talked about this before, but I may be one of the oldest people who do a podcast.
And there is a real difference between the way young men talk about women and the way old men talk about women.
It is really different.
And I will tell you how, especially, this is really interesting if you're women because they don't do it in front of women.
But all men look at the differences between men and women and kind of roll their eyes.
I'm sure women look at men and roll their eyes.
I mean, that's the way the whole system is set up.
We don't quite get each other, but we like each other, but it's nice, you know.
But older guys, like, say, talk about the difference of men and women with great affection.
I mean, they roll their eyes and they are women, you know, they're like this, but they really like them.
They're really, younger guys are ticked off.
They're angry.
And the reason they're angry is because they were told there was no difference.
They were told that they were bad to say there was a difference.
They were told naughty boys, only naughty boys believed there's a difference between men and women.
So the thing is, like young guys are furious when they find out that women don't want the same things.
They don't think the same things.
They don't like the same things.
And guys, and younger guys get angry because they weren't told that.
They were lied to.
So I'm watching Hillary and I'm in stitches because I just think like, yeah, this is kind of the way women behave.
Listen to her talk about, this has been played before, but I don't think we played it here.
She's talking about that Donald Trump got too close to her on the stage and he was so creepy.
And listen to the dithering here, okay?
Again, a woman who wants to be in control of our armed forces can't even decide what to do with some guy standing in back of her on the stage.
It was so giscombobulating.
And so while I'm answering questions, my mind is going, okay, do I keep my composure?
Do I act like a president?
Am I the person that people can trust in the end to make hard decisions?
Or do I wheel around and say, get out of my space, back up, you creep?
Well, you know, I didn't do the latter, but I thought, you know, people say, well, I don't know her.
And I think my composure, which I have developed over years being in the public eye, has well equipped me for being a leader, because you should keep your cool and you should be steady and predictable.
But I think in this time we're in, and particularly in this campaign, you know, maybe I missed a few chances.
Maybe so.
Like not going to Wisconsin might have been a big one.
Not campaigning in all the places that Donald Trump pulled out from under your feet.
Those might have been a few chances you missed.
But she's worried, she's still worried that she didn't tell the guy on the subway, who happened to be Donald Trump, you know, to back off creep.
This interview is one of, it's hilarious.
It is hilarious.
And I have to say, after watching Hillary Clinton, I was joking about this in the opening, but after watching her basically sell her soul, I mean, who stays in a marriage where a guy humiliates you on national, international TV by cheating on you again and again and again?
Even when he's president of the United States, he goes on cheating on you with a woman young enough to be his daughter.
Who stays in that marriage?
I mean, that marriage was a sham, but she obviously stayed in it for power.
It was a power relationship.
She wanted the power.
She thought she could parlay that.
She did parlay being cheated on into the New York state, into the New York Senate seat.
So she sold that out.
She did all these deals with people.
She was constantly selling government favors behind the scenes.
And then it all builds up to this one shot she's got at the big show and she loses it in the most humiliating way possible.
Cruel Decisions and Constitutional Dilemmas00:03:32
You've got to get the leftist tears tumbler because this has been one of the great, great moments in political history.
You know, the thing, and while I'm picking on women, and Jess is here, and after the show, she will come over and just like hit me upside the head.
But while I'm picking on women, I want to say that the Democrats have always been called the mommy party and the Republicans are the daddy party because Republicans are hard-headed and realistic.
But what the press and the left want to do is they want to turn everybody into this feminist image of weak, dithering, over-emotional womanhood.
This is what feminists think women should be like.
And all they do is sell us emotion.
You know, we were watching that DACA thing where Trump got rid of this unconstitutional executive order giving people who had been brought over here illegally as children the right to stay for a while.
It was supposed to be temporary.
Barack Obama himself said it was unconstitutional.
Trump gets rid of it.
And you'd think the news would be sitting around talking about, well, it was unconstitutional, but how can we do it?
How can we move forward?
What's this?
What's the good side?
What's the bad side?
Listen to this montage, just selling you emotion, all emotion.
This is from our friends at Newsbusters, one of my favorite websites.
They just put together this montage of like the way the news was reported.
This is the number nine.
Joe Biden has just tweeted, brought by parents, these children had no choice in coming here.
Now they'll be sent to countries they've never known.
Cruel, not America.
Well, the statement reads, it's wrong because it's cruel to send these young people to places many of them have never lived and do not know.
Only in a cruel nation do you take 800,000 documented people and make them undocumented.
Getting the bejeebras out of all these kids.
In other words, there's a cruelty there.
And it's a signal to say, I can do something that a lot of people think is cruel.
This is one of the most cruel acts we've seen in the presidency in a long time.
So one, this was a cruel, inhumane, and unnecessary move.
The Trump administration's latest immigration policy move has been called cruel.
It's a very cruel and unfortunate decision to end the problem.
As kids, his critics say the decision was cruel.
The decision by the Trump administration is cruel.
This amounts to cruel and unusual punishment to innocent children.
Immigration advocates say the move to cut them off is cruel.
Are you getting the feeling they want you to think it's cruel?
Are you getting the feeling they want you to react in an emotional way to something that had to do with the Constitution and the law and a very difficult problem?
Bill McGurn, the great Bill McGurn, who does a column once a week at the Wall Street Journal, has a column today called On the Cruelty of Barack Obama.
And he points out that Obama had a shot at solving some of this problem.
In 2007, a coalition of Republican and Democratic senators came up with a bill that enjoyed the support of the Bush White House.
It wasn't perfect, but extracted compromises from each side.
So it gave enhancements for border security, a guest worker program, and the inclusion of the entire DREAM Act, the legislation for children who'd been brought here illegally that Mr. Obama claims he has always wanted.
Senator Obama, instead of voting for it, he opted to back 11th hour amendments that were really intended as deal breakers.
The Democrats decided they'd rather have the political issue than a solution.
And it's fair enough, McGurn goes on to say it's fair enough to criticize Mr. Trump and Congress for whatever they do going forward to clean up this mess.
But let's remember the Obama duplicity that created it.
And that's the thing, that's the thing about emotion.
It blinds you to the facts.
And the facts remain that it is the Democrats and Barack Obama who created this situation.
So last night, Mathis Glover, I know it's not Glover.
Wink And Your Palate Profile00:02:11
You know, everything is growing so much here at the Daily Wire that everybody gets a new title every day.
I don't even know what Mathis' title is.
He was like Grandpa Pubah of Sound or something like this.
But he came over and we were having a great conversation about the movies because Mathis has actually seen movies.
I mean, most people talk about the movies, but they haven't seen anything that was made before 2010.
And what especially made this conversation great was we opened up a couple of bottles of wine.
And wine is the thing that makes conversation really sing.
I love wine, and I have the habit of kind of just going out and buying a Chardonnay.
It's easy.
I don't, you know, I run out to the store, I don't have a lot of time, I'll grab a bottle of Chardonnay, put it in the box.
But with Wink, and this is W-I-N-C, with Wink, they will give you a little test.
They call it like a palette test, I think.
The palette profile quiz, it's called, the PPQ.
And they will give you a palette profile quiz to see what you like.
And then they will send you every month different bottles of wine that fit your palate profile.
To do this, you go to trywink.com.
That's T-R-Y-W-I-N-C.com.
And I know you're thinking Wink is spelled with a K, but they spell it with a C.
So it's T-R-Y-W-I-N-C.com.
You take the palette profile quiz, and Wink will recommend distinct and interesting wines customized to your palate to be shipped directly to your door every month.
So you don't have to waste time going out to the store.
And Wink bases the wines they send you on your taste preferences.
So they'll even introduce you to new, rare, and custom wines that are not available anywhere else.
And they'll tell you the story behind each one.
And they'll also tell you, you know, what kind of food, what kind of meal might be nice to go with.
It's really nice.
You learn a lot, but you also get good wine and you get to try new wine.
And they have a 100% satisfaction guarantee, so you never pay for a bottle you don't like.
Right now, Wink is W-I-N-C is offering listeners $20 off your first order when you go to trywink.com/slash Andrew.
The bottles, I have to say, the wine has just been terrific.
Ali's Legacy in Boxing00:12:01
All right, we've got Paul Beston coming on to talk about his book, The Boxing Kings, When American Heavyweights Ruled the Ring.
But I have to say goodbye to Facebook and YouTube.
So come on over to thedailywire.com.
You can listen to the rest.
But if you want to just watch the whole show, you can watch it.
The whole thing in the dailywire.com, if you subscribe for a lousy 10 bucks a month, it will also give you the right to ask questions in the mailbag.
And if you subscribe for the year, Leftist Tears, you can watch that Hillary interview forever and enjoy every drop.
All right, come on over to thedailywire.com.
All right.
Paul Beston, he is the managing editor of City Journal.
His writing has appeared in the Wall Street Journal, Pop Matters, The American Spectator, just about everywhere.
He is at Paul Beston, B-E-S-T-O-N.
And his new book is The Boxing Kings, When American Heavyweights Ruled the Ring.
I think it's officially published in a couple of days, but I read an early version of it.
It is a really well-written book, but it's about more than just boxing.
It is really about America and manhood and race and a lot of different other things.
Paul, are you there?
I am, Drew.
How are you?
I'm good.
How you doing?
It's good to see you.
It's good to see you, too.
The book is terrific, Paul.
It really is.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
I noticed it actually had a blurb on it from me, so I thought that was impressive because I'm one of the people.
Yeah, isn't that funny?
So the thing is, people don't know this anymore, but the heavyweight champion of the world used to be one of the most glamorous titles in sports.
I mean, it was something you made movies about.
I remember Kirk Douglas was in champion on the waterfront features a guy who had a shot at the heavyweight title.
What happened?
I mean, this was really a big deal.
What happened that made it less important?
Well, my take on it, and one of the reasons why the book is, the subtitle mentions American heavyweights, you know, when American heavyweights rolled a ring, is that for most of the history of the heavyweight title, which my book tells from about 1880 to the year 2000, the heavyweight title and Americans were pretty much synonymous.
It was on the same track.
A couple of foreign champions during that period, very few, almost all American.
It very quickly became kind of an identifier, almost like an American property.
And boxing, as everyone knows, is kind of become a more marginal sport today.
I think that the lack of American representation at the heavyweight level is a huge part of that because that has always been the benchmark that Americans look to when they thought about boxing.
So why did America dominate the sport so much?
I think it has a lot to do with the country itself.
I mean, the nature of when the heavyweight title became big came out in the late 19th century when the country was industrializing.
It was having mass immigration.
The first great group of prize fighters were Irish.
The Irish were in the huge immigrant group at that time in the United States.
First great heavyweight champion was John L. Sullivan.
And it started to slowly track the immigrant path.
You know, in the 50s, a great champion was Rocky Marciano.
The Italians came a little later.
He came on that wave.
And of course, through most of it, pretty much post-1950 or so, black Americans have dominated the title.
They were there all along, but they were being held out for racial reasons.
But it has had a lot to do with the immigration and also just the upward mobility that America presents.
It's just different than other countries.
And boxing is such a dramatization of that.
It's such a dramatization of the struggle to improve yourself.
And most fighters, as you know, come from very poor backgrounds.
Yeah, you mentioned the fact that black guys, once they were allowed into the sport, they really did start to dominate it.
And Joe Lewis is kind of, you know, everybody thinks of Muhammad Ali because they remember him.
But Joe Lewis is sort of the hero of this book and one of the great heroes, really, of American sport.
I mean, can you tell people who just don't remember this time what it was about Joe Lewis that changed so much?
Sure.
Joe Lewis became champion in the late 1930s.
And when he became champion, there had only been one other black heavyweight champion, a guy named Jack Johnson.
Some people might remember him.
Ken Burns made a documentary about him.
But he was the most player-played.
The Great White Hope, right?
That's right, that's right, with James Earl Jones as well.
Probably the most hated man in America during those years.
It was a very different racial climate, and Johnson was a very defiant man.
He rankled white norms very bravely, but perhaps not very advisedly.
So it was a long time between before whites were even willing to give a black fighter a chance again at this title that meant so much to people.
Joe Lewis came along, they gave him that chance, he became champion, and he was champion for well over a decade.
He went through the war years.
His most high-profile fight was against a German named Max Schmelling, who'd been adopted by the Nazi regime in Germany and the master race and all that business.
He managed to rally Americans, black and white, to his side.
And by the time he retired, there were whites in the crowds rooting for him against white opponents, which would have been unheard of before.
And I think that he is overlooked today because people think of Jackie Robinson and integrating baseball.
And Jackie Robinson deserves all the credit he gets.
But Joe Lewis was alone.
He was just working alone out there with this great title 10 years before Jackie Robinson took the field for the Brooklyn Dodgers.
And the fact that he went up against Schmelling, I mean, the representative of the so-called master race and united Americans behind him, I mean, it's a very moving story.
I mean, is that the fight where Lewis said in the ring you can run, but you can't hide?
Is that where that quote comes from?
He said that about a different opponent, but it's fine.
It can be pasted in anywhere you need it.
So then Ali comes along, and Ali, you know, when they were recently, you know, doing his obit and paying tribute to him, everybody mentions the fact that he lost several good years to the Vietnam War and to his anti-war resistance, his anti-war stance.
But you take a very different interpretation of that.
I mean, you look at this and you really see a very sinister presence behind the Ali championship.
Yeah, and I'm not alone in this.
I mean, one of the things about the Ali, the Ali literature, and it is a literature at this point.
I mean, there's hundreds and hundreds of books, is that you start poking around in this, there are pages that start to flash red.
And what most of them have to do with is the level of intimidation and control that the Nation of Islam, which he joined, and when he changed his name from Cassius Clay, which they held, which they had over him.
Everyone, most people know their association with the assassination of Malcolm X.
A lot of people don't know that Ali was very close to Malcolm X.
And he was ordered to break off the friendship by Elijah Muhammad.
And not long after that, Malcolm X wasn't in this world.
There were people who knew Ali very well, who heard him express his fears.
In the Wall Street Journal piece I wrote, I quoted a guy named Dave Kendrick, who covered Ali for decades in Louisville, said that Ali told him point blank in the 70s, I would have gotten out of this years ago, but I'm not going to become another Malcolm X. If I try to leave the Muslims, they would shoot me too.
And that's the quote.
Wow.
So it sheds light on what happened when he made this decision not to go into the draft.
And I just, you know, my interpretation of that and others is that this was not his decision to make.
And I think what people confuse about it is that subsequently he became a great anti-war spokesman.
He's one of the most charismatic people that probably ever lived, right?
So he did a great job at it.
But I think people confuse that with the idea that this was actually his choice.
I argue that it is not.
Wow.
That it was not.
That's a cool story.
You know, there's something recently they had that kind of gimmicky match between Mayweather and I forget the other guy's name, McGregor.
Mayweather McGregor.
And so it's a boxer and an MMA fighter.
And of course, MMA has kind of replaced mixed martial arts, have kind of replaced boxing in the popular imagination.
Is there something, does this say something about the image of manhood in America?
I mean, I know this is a big question, but still, there is something about a boxer that is scientific and controlled and something about an MMA guy that always comes across as a little bit vicious and just wildly painful.
Does this say something about American manhood at this moment?
I think the showmanship of MMA and the marketing of MMA taps into the idea that the way to get people's attention these days is with a certain level of sensationalism.
And in the old days, even the pace of that sport being fat, you know, having a guy sit on someone's chest and just pow him, you know, it's a little different than a boxing match, which can be very scientific and be very gradual the way it unfolds.
And I think the older boxers before Ali exhibited a kind of manly stoicism.
Ali is the guy who brought in all the flash and dash and the bragging and all that business.
That stuff didn't go on before him.
And boxers had a kind of dignity to them.
Joe Lewis exemplified it, but he wasn't the only one.
So I see MMA as very symbolic of that.
I mean, that's the way they've gotten the younger audience's attention.
And I'm not denigrating the fighters because I think fighters of any sport, I've got nothing bad to say about them.
But I'm not a big fan of MMA myself.
Yeah, yeah.
We're talking about Paul Beston's book, The Boxing Kings, When American Heavyweights Ruled the Ring.
I've read it.
It is really good.
It's beautifully written and just very evocative of a time gone by.
The one thing that I often do think when I watch boxing now is everything has gotten better.
Every baseball player is bigger, stronger.
Sometimes it's drugs, but sometimes it's just training.
That's the way we've gotten more scientific about training.
When you look at the way, like even movie stars, when they take off their shirts now, they look like they've been photoshopped.
They don't look like Claude Goebel who look like an ordinary human being.
But the one thing that hasn't changed is the human head.
It's just as soft as it ever was.
And sometimes now when I see a guy get punched in the ring, I immediately think, call the fight, because the guys are so big and muscular.
I guess the question that I want to ask is, can boxing come back?
Can it make a comeback?
And should it make a comeback?
Or is it from a time that should remain in the past?
Well, the second part of that question, I think boxing's history shows that if you try to ban it and make it illegal, it will go underground.
And that's the history that it had of being fought on barges and out in the country.
And it's going to happen.
There's something about us as human beings, there's something primal about the contest of two men and seeing who's best.
And I think that would happen.
So I think it's best to keep it legal, keep it as safe as possible.
And I also think, you know, I still think there are merits in the sport about individual distinction and these kind of struggles that these guys have.
But obviously, the head trauma issue is a very serious one.
There isn't much you can do with it in terms of boxing.
And of course, football is facing that as well.
But I think in America, the only thing that could really bring boxing back in a regular kind of way to the prominence it once had would be if an American heavyweight came along that captured that kind of attention the way Mike Tyson did or Ali or these other guys who I write about.
I think when you have Russian fighters, Ukrainian fighters and that, I mean, you know, again, nothing against them, but Americans obviously didn't care very much about it.
Right, right.
It makes a lot of sense.
Paul Beston, the author of The Boxing Kings When American Heavyweights Ruled the Ring, a terrific sports book, but also a terrific book about America.
Paul, thanks for coming on.
I hope to talk to you again.
Thanks so much, Drew.
Take care.
Talk to you later.
Bye.
Really, really interesting.
Accused and Rights Violated00:11:30
You know, I have to say, there is, I've talked about this before, that leftism is like a zombie virus, that it comes into respected institutions, takes them over, and then the institution keeps walking like a zombie and demanding the respect of its former self, but is now just a vehicle of leftism.
The New York Times, I always call it a former newspaper.
That's why.
The New York Times, I mean, conservatives always railed against the New York Times, but it actually used to be a fairly fair newspaper.
Now it's a sophomoric leftist rag, basically, and yet it still demands the respect of the New York Times.
So it's like this zombie New York Times demanding the respect of human New York Times, Yale University, all these Ivy League universities get taken over.
And Hollywood, you used to go to the movies and they didn't tell you how you should vote Democrat.
Now they insult everybody who doesn't like their candidate.
But Miss America, there's a new Miss America.
I don't know who North Dakota is.
I'm my son.
She's pretty.
They're all of lovely girls and all this.
But they always have this thing where they ask these girls a serious question, which I don't know why.
I mean, I'm not sure why that's part of the thing, but I guess it's supposed to elevate the contest.
So they ask these girls.
And I just put together a very quick montage of the questions this year as leftism eats into this contest and empties it of its soul so that no one will care who is Miss America very shortly.
Listen to just the questions strung together.
There are multiple investigations into whether Trump's campaign colluded with Russia on the election.
Well, did they?
You're the jury.
Guilty or innocent, and please explain your verdict.
Last month, a demonstration of neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and the KKK in Charlottesville, Virginia turned violent and a counter-protester was killed.
The president said there was shared blame with, quote, very fine people on both sides.
Were there?
Tell me yes or no and explain.
195 countries signed the Paris Agreement in which each country sets non-binding goals to reduce man-made climate change.
The U.S. is withdrawing from the agreement, citing negligible environmental effects and negative economic impact.
Good decision?
Bad decision?
Which is it and why?
In order to be Miss America, you have to have a charming face, a lovely figure, a beautiful smile, and hate Donald Trump.
I mean, that's basically it.
And then they're going to wonder, you know, why are the ratings dropping?
What's going on?
You know, it's like the NFL, why are the ratings dropping?
Like Hollywood, how come we had such a bad summer?
It's like, because you hate us.
And guess what?
We hate you right back.
That's the way it works.
All right, sexual follies.
So campus rape, okay?
And I don't mean to make any jokes about rape.
It's one of the, it's the second most heinous crime there is, and it's a heinous crime for the simple reason that it takes away a person's right to make decisions, the most personal, intimate decisions she can make, and it's an offense against the soul.
It's an actual soul, an actual crime, a soul crime.
But Barack Obama issued a dear colleague letter to universities, any university that took any money at all from the federal government, which includes student loans, by the way.
So that leaves basically Hillsdale College as the only college in the country that is immune from bullying from the federal government.
And Obama sent out this dear colleague letter saying, you know, you have got to take care of sexual harassment, and you have to give a right to an appeal to not just to the person who is accused, but to the accuser, on and on.
Basically, set up these kangaroo courts where a boy, if he was accused of rape, his career was over.
And he had to get a lawyer, he had to sue if he was going to reestablish himself.
It's a terrible thing.
I mean, to be accused of rape or even just sexual harassment.
It's a terrible thing to happen to a young man.
And, you know, people lie, people sexually harass, and people lie.
So those are things that people do.
And you have to have a court, a court of law, to determine which is happening in any given situation, right?
That's reality.
That's realism.
So Betsy DeVos, who is one of the best members of the Trump administration, she's the education lady.
She rescinded the letter basically saying, come on, you know, these people have right to due process.
That's a constitutional right, due process.
That means when you get accused of what is a crime, like rape or even sexual harassment, you have a right to a trial.
You have a right to go before a judge and a jury and have all the protections that that provides, not some kangaroo court, okay?
So I want to just read two things.
The New York Times, a former newspaper, has one thing that I really like.
It has a thing called right-left or left-right or whatever it's called, where they just give you a very quick rundown of the reactions to something from the right and the left, basically.
And they go to good people, intelligent people, and get their little comments and talk about what they said.
I just want to give you the difference between how the right reacts to something and how the left reacts.
And this is chosen by the New York Times.
So it's not me, right?
This is the New York Times, a former newspaper, one of the biggest leftist rags in the country, choosing right and left opinions.
So first is from the right, David French in National Review.
Our campuses are not exempt from the Constitution.
There is no excuse for government-mandated kangaroo courts in any part of American life, especially in America's institutions of higher learning.
Ash Sho in the Federalist, if today's activists think due process is so terrible, what would stop them from working to remove it from our courts?
In other words, if you remove it from the universities, why wouldn't you then move on to remove it from the courts so that if you're accused of rape, you don't have the right to a fair trial?
Carol Markovitz in the New York Post, in a few cases, the accused may actually be guilty, but gets off because his rights were violated by a school.
Why even have schools get involved in criminal matters in the first place?
All of these careful, measured, intelligent things dealing with the law, dealing with people's rights, dealing with all the things that hold America up and make America what it is, which is not letting in illegal immigrants.
It's actually this.
It's actually the rule of law.
Now, listen to the stuff from the left, okay?
Lucia Graves in the Garden, Guardian.
The sexually accused are overwhelmingly male, overwhelmingly white, and presumably entitled.
In other words, they are Trump's core constituency to a T, which has to do with what?
With nothing.
And by the way, they're like 57% of them are white.
So, you know, it's a little bit more.
It's like absolutely, you know, absolutely meaningless.
Ruth Marcus in the Washington Post, this is actually a smart one.
It says the proof will be in the details of what the Trump administration produces.
Still, you don't have to be a DeVos-like conservative to have serious qualms about the existing approach and to bristle at the dismissal of such concerns.
All right, totally reasonable.
Christina Kottarucci in Slate, the chilling effect the DeVos Department of Education will have on sexual assault reports will certainly please Trump.
But his larger goal is to send a message to women that the government is not on their side.
I mean, it's blithering nonsense.
So let me end with what I think is the voice of common sense, which is a column that was in the Wall Street Journal today by Jennifer Braceris, a lawyer.
It's called Straight Talk for College Women.
It says, Dear female members of the class of 2021, if you follow the news, you've probably heard that one in four of you will be sexually assaulted on campus before graduation.
Don't panic.
Your parents did not just drop you and your belongings in a crime zone.
Claims of a campus rape crisis are wildly inflated, and a little common sense will go a long way toward keeping you safe.
The assertion that nearly a quarter of all college women are sexually assaulted is based on surveys that ask vaguely worded questions about behavior ranging from an unexpected kiss to rape.
In analyzing the responses, those who lump all such conduct into a catch-all category of sexual assault deliberately create a false impression in order to promote their view of the campus as a rape culture.
The truth is you are far less likely to be raped than women your age who are not in college.
The Justice Department estimates approximately one in 53 college women will be victims of rape or sexual assault, an unacceptable number, but hardly an epidemic.
Many have instituted, many colleges, she says, have instituted mandatory training sessions aimed at changing cultural attitudes about sex and rape and making sure students are aware of college resources for addressing misconduct.
But while such responses may placate gender activists and insulate colleges from legal liability, they do little to keep you safe or punish criminal offenders.
Why?
Because the college is looking out for itself.
They don't want a lot of stories about how they have rapes.
So she gives you some advice.
And she says that academics and college administrators today operate under the assumption that alcohol-infused sex between virtual strangers is a matter of private choice.
She's talking about hookup culture.
They fear that any warnings to avoid such risk-fraught encounters will be lambasted as old-fashioned or worse, judgmental.
And they live in fear that if they tell the truth about alcohol and hookup culture, they will be accused of blaming the victim.
So they refuse to give you the following advice.
Do not get drunk and go home with someone you don't know.
I mean, every time you say this, they say, well, men can get drunk and, you know, that's right.
That's right.
They can.
You can't.
It's just too bad, right?
There's safety in numbers.
Go out if you're going out for a night of revelry.
Stay with friends.
Reject the hookup culture.
Sex without trust and commitment often ends poorly.
It may sound old-fashioned, but it's really common sense.
If you don't know someone well and you are unsure whether you can trust him, is it really a smart idea to be alone with him in a state of partial undress?
Be self-confident enough to say it's okay to meet a guy around the keg or at the pong table, but hold out for a real date.
You deserve it.
Buy or beware.
If you do decide to participate in the hookup culture, go in with your eyes open.
Promises made in the heat of passion are meaningless.
Suitors will promise the moon to get you into bed.
I mean, this is just logic, rational advice.
Be clear about what you want.
If you don't want to do something, say so clearly.
You're an adult and you can't expect people to just know what you want.
And if you are assaulted, of course, seek immediate help.
You know, the funny thing about this advice is a mother in the 1950s would have given it.
What has happened is that the voice of reality, the voice of common sense, has been drowned out by the left.
The left is the enemy of reality.
We were talking about this a little yesterday, that freedom is based on truth, honesty, reality, hard-nosed looks at the facts.
And all this spelling of emotion, oh, I lost the presidency and I had to clean out my closets.
You know, this, oh, you know, DACA has been rescinded and it's cruel.
All this appeal to emotion, and it's not like emotion isn't important in your life and living life and all this stuff, but all of this appeal to emotion isn't really an assault on realism.
It's an assault on reality.
Women can protect themselves.
The campuses are not hotbeds of rape.
They are hotbeds of hookup culture, which is just bad for women.