The Andrew Klavan Show dissects the Democrats’ "morality scam," mocking CNN’s Jim Acosta and Hillary Clinton while framing leftist outrage over Roy Moore or Bob Menendez as hypocritical. Jenna Ellis argues Trump’s birthright citizenship stance could exploit legal gray areas, while Klavan dismisses universal healthcare as inferior to U.S. systems. A listener with anxiety is advised to act despite fear, a Black MAGA supporter warned of risks in high-crime areas, and Jewish rejection of Jesus tied to messianic expectations. The episode ends by defending free speech against hate-speech bans, citing Asia Bibi’s acquittal and Austria’s Muhammad conviction, arguing governments shouldn’t shield religious sensitivities. [Automatically generated summary]
It's Halloween, and with the Daily Wire's famous Halloween party in full swing, it's time for us to announce our winners for the best costumes of the year.
The prize for the scariest costume goes to the child dressed up as Jim Acosta.
Or maybe it is Jim Acosta.
How would we know the difference?
But anyway, the Jim Acosta costume includes a mask with a face and a permanent expression of sanctimonious self-seriousness topped with hair that magically goes from salt and pepper to pitch black after just a little dab of narcissism.
Jim is having fun terrifying the neighbors by stomping zombie-like through public gatherings, chanting in the guttural voice of the living dead, look at me, I'm Jim Acosta, look at me.
Until everyone laughs, then gets bored with him and goes home.
The ribbon for the funniest costume goes to the two pranksters who dressed up as a centaur with the head of CNN's Don Lemon, with one person dressed as the horse's ass and the other as the centaur's tail.
I'll pause to let you get that.
As a fun Halloween game, we surrounded the Lemon Centaur with conservatives and watched him prance around shouting, everyone who disagrees with me is racist, until somebody finally canceled the cable service and the Lemon Centaur vanished into complete obscurity, leaving everyone to wonder if he had ever really existed in the first place, and if so, why.
The plastic trophy for most ridiculous costume goes to the lady who dressed up as Hillary Clinton for president in 2020.
Wearing a dyed blonde wig and a half-empty bottle of Chardonnay, Hillary spent most of the party stumbling around, giving each and every guest a different excuse for why she lost the last election.
She then explained her motivation for taking yet another shot at the White House by saying, quote, I sacrificed every scrap of dignity I had to get this gig.
That's why, unquote.
After which she did a faceplant into the rum punch where she remained for the rest of the evening.
Happy Halloween from the Daily Wire.
Trigger warning, I'm Andrew Clavin, and this is the Andrew Clavin Show.
I'm the hunky-dunky.
Life is tickety-boo.
Birds are winging, also singing hunky-dunky.
Ship-shaped dipsy-topsy, the wind is it-zing.
It's a wonderful day.
Hoorah, hooray!
It makes me want to sing.
Oh, hurrah, hooray.
Oh, hooray, hurrah.
All right, happy Halloween.
Some of you may think I'm not wearing a costume, but in fact, I am Michael Knowles.
No, I don't wear a costume for the simple reason that I'm a grown-ass man.
That's why our graph have the wonderful Jenna Ellis on to talk about this birthright citizenship thing and a lot of other.
Oh, and the mailbag.
Of course, it's the mailbag.
Oh, my God.
It's the mailbag day.
And talking about something really scary, Election Day is coming up on Tuesday, November 6th.
Don't miss our next episode of Daily Wire Backstage, the Election Edition.
The God King, Jeremy Boring, Ben Shapiro, Michael Knowles, Elysia Krause, and me will be covering all the latest election news as it happens.
So be sure to tune in.
As always, only Daily Wire subscribers get to ask the questions.
Everyone can watch, but only Daily Wire subscribers get to ask questions.
So make sure you subscribe today, get Another Kingdom, get the Leftist Tears Mug, get all the good stuff we give to you.
Podium.
You know, here's the thing.
You know, there are lots of businesses you go to that you love, but you never leave reviews, right?
So I'll go to the dentist.
I love my dentist.
He keeps my head on straight, makes me look good.
But it never occurs to me to think, hey, maybe I should go on and find some place where I can leave a review.
Podium is a system for businesses to connect with their customers.
It's like a middleman between businesses and the customers that facilitates customers interacting with the business.
If you are a business, you want podium.
They will go out.
You know that 83% of happy customers are willing to leave a review, but only 23% actually do.
So one of the things podium will do is it will contact customers and say, were you happy?
Would you mind leaving a review?
And podium users see a 6% increase in revenue just from reviews because podium is helping them get in touch with their customers.
So reviews matter, and the way you show up online determines who shows up at your door.
So go to podium.com slash Clavin for 10% off, a monthly subscription.
Become the obvious choice online by going to podium.com slash Clavin to get started and save 10%.
And you can ask all your customers.
How do you spell Clavin?
And as one, they will rise up and say, K-L-A-V-A-N.
So many of you have noticed with the election coming close, the news coverage has begun to look kind of like this.
I'm hysterical.
I can't stop when I get like this.
I can't stop.
I'm hysterical.
I'm a dynamite.
Oh, no, We know for most of that actually was a cut from CNN.
We know that the reason the media does this is they're trying to cause this fog of crisis and hysteria, make everybody think that things are going terribly, something's wrong.
They want Democrats to show up.
They want Democrats to be upset, the people out of power because they're Democrats, and they want to suppress the Republican vote.
And we have, we have this kind of larger responsibility not to just react.
We have a responsibility to, you know, when I talk about the culture, I always talk about how conservatives ignore the culture.
The culture is not just the movies.
It's not just talk shows.
It's the way we live.
It's the way we behave.
It's the way we behave toward one another.
It's the way we behave in public.
It's the way we behave with our families and how we treat our families.
It doesn't matter.
You know, I see these guys going around like, you know, the moral world is collapsing.
Our sexual mores have collapsed.
But at least I'm getting laid.
You know, that's like, wait a minute.
If you want to rebuild the culture, you got to start with yourself.
Each of us carries a piece of the culture.
So it's our job.
It is our job, especially here on the Andrew Claven Show, to step back, look at the picture, bigger picture, look at what is being talked about in context so we can make moral choices.
Because the left is basically and has been for many years running a morality scam.
They have been putting on the idea that somehow we are violating the moral code by being conservatives, by pushing for freedom, for pushing for the Constitution, whereas they, oh my goodness, what moral fellows they are.
So we'll talk about that in terms of this birthright citizenship.
Trump is saying he would like to issue an executive order to repeal the birthright citizenship, which seems to be on the surface of it guaranteed by the 14th Amendment, which was in the amendment passed in 1868 to ensure that slaves were not, ex-slaves would have citizenship, would not be kept out of citizenship by evil Democrats who were trying to subvert the, who were trying to change the outcome of the Civil War.
See, Democrats would never do that now.
What they said then was they said, you know, well, the Civil War didn't count because Abraham Lincoln was colluding with Russia.
That's what they said.
They would never do anything like that now, like trying to overturn an election by spreading lies and spreading conspiracy theories.
No, they would never do that.
But they did that then.
So all of that is causing panic and all this.
And we'll talk to Jenna about it from a constitutional point of view.
But my point is simply this.
There's two things that the press wants to do as the election come close.
They want to spread a crisis, an atmosphere of crisis.
They've been trying to do this for two years.
And they want you to think that moral questions are on the line that you will violate by voting Republican.
That's very important to them.
Just before I get into this a little bit deeper, I want to just play this one montage that's been going around the internet, which I just love, which is a montage of how they have covered Trump in the first two years, in the first couple of years.
This is just cuts from mainstream media.
I think this is cut six, right?
Yeah.
Breaking news, a new bombshell.
Astrologer says this means the beginning of the end for President Donald Trump.
The beginning of the end of the Trump presidency.
Trump will resign.
Trump is going to resign.
Is this the tipping point?
I know we've said it over and over.
Do you think this is a tipping point?
And over and over.
This is a tipping point.
And over and over.
Breaking news, President Trump off the rails.
There's a beginning of the end day.
It's the beginning of the end.
It reminds me a lot of the last days of Nixon.
Breaking news tonight, new bombshell.
This is the beginning, not the end.
The beginning of the end.
The walls are closing in.
The walls closing in.
The walls closing in.
Breaking overnight bombshells.
This is a very dramatic day, and I think it might be near a tipping point.
Do you think this is a tipping point?
This is unbelievable.
This is remarkable.
Have you ever seen anything like this?
His presidency is crippled.
December 1st, 2017.
You can mark it down.
This is the day that everything changed.
We begin with the bombshell.
beginning of the end the beginning of the end the beginning of the end the beginning of the end the beginning of the end in fact if this were a football game we're in the third quarter It may even be the beginning of the end.
It's amazing with all those bombshells falling that America is still standing.
That's the tenor of reporting when a Republican is in office, amped up for Trump, right?
It's always been like this.
It is always, oh my God, the lies.
Remember, every soldier who came home from Iraq, you know, that was another, oh, another tragedy.
And of course, it is a tragedy.
It is a tragedy, but it's also the nature of war.
And the number of soldiers who died compared to other wars was, you know, in keeping with small wars.
That's what it was.
But it was utter, utter panic all the time.
Now it's Trump.
So Trump foments it himself because he likes it.
He knows that while they're paying attention to their own, they're chasing their own tails around.
He knows he can get a lot done.
But I want to point out before we get to Jenna and the birthright citizenship thing, I just want to point out there's a race going on in New Jersey where Bob Menendez is running to keep his Senate seat.
Now, there hasn't been, I don't think there's been a Republican senator in New Jersey, a very blue state, for 50 years.
I don't think they've had a Republican senator for 50 years.
So the Democrats are pouring money into this race.
They are pouring money to keep Menendez in his seat.
And it's a very close race.
He's up against a Bob Huggan, I think his name is Hugin, maybe.
He's an ex-pharmaceutical executive.
Now, remember who Menendez is, right?
This is a guy who was investigated.
There was substantial corroborated evidence that he was doing favors for his pal, a Florida ophthalmologist, Solomon Melgan.
And in response to this, Melgan was taking him on trips to the Dominican Republic, and they were sleeping with underage prostitutes, all right?
They were sleeping with underage prostitutes, and there was a lot of evidence of this, a lot of corroborated evidence.
And he went on trial for corruption, not just for this, but for all kinds of corruption.
And the jury deadlocked and they dropped the case, okay?
But, but the Senate Select Committee on Ethics severely admonished him.
There's no question that some of this stuff, some of this stuff was going on.
He's obviously like just barely escaped.
He only barely escaped being convicted.
We have to talk for a minute about Bowl and Branch sheets because some of you, you know, if you use Bolin Branch sheets, you'll find you're sleeping much better.
What I find is I'm lying awake much better because I never sleep.
And since I never sleep, I want to be incredibly comfortable.
Bowl and branch is a great place to start.
Three most important words for sheets, comfortable, comfortable, comfortable.
And that's what they are.
They are made with what makes them unique is each sheet is crafted from 100% organic cotton.
That means Bowl and Branch sheets not only feel incredible, they also look amazing.
But since Bolin Branch sells exclusively online, you don't pay that expensive retail market.
That's half the price, twice the quality.
You will love these sheets, I know, because I spend hours awake on them every night.
Go to Bolinbranch.com today and you'll get 50 bucks off your first set of sheets plus free shipping in the U.S. when you use the promo code Clavin.
That's 50 bucks off plus free U.S. shipping right now at Bolinbranch.com, spelled B-O-L-L and branch.com, promo code Clavin, Bolinbranch.com, promo code Clavin.
But, how do you spell Clavin?
K-L-A-V-A-N.
Bolenbranch, incredibly, incredibly good sheets.
Remember Roy Moore?
Okay, so he's accused credibly with corroboration of sleeping with underage prostitutes, right?
So let's go back to Roy Moore, who was in that special election to become senator in Alabama, right?
And there were unsupported allegations that 40 years before, as a younger man, he had dated very young women, maybe one of them underage, because remember the age limit then was very low.
So he was within the law most of the time.
And these were uncorroborated.
Now, I said at the time, I don't like Roy Moore.
I don't like him for his politics.
I don't like him because I think he's phony.
I have all kinds of reasons for not liking him.
I didn't know anything about whether these charges were true.
But what I said is we cannot lose that vote.
We should elect him and then censure him.
You know, then throw him out.
But first elect him.
Do not lose the seat because the seat is what matters.
Remember the absolute wave of moral indignation that this man, I mean, here is just one sample is Stephen Colbert doing a whole five-minute routine about this.
And now we've learned that in the 80s, when he was a local assistant district attorney, Moore was banned from an Alabama shopping mall for bothering teenage girls.
The only place in the mall the girls was safe was Forever 21, because that is way too old for Roy Moore.
Okay, so fair enough.
You know, that's a joke.
Here's Colbert on Bob Menendez.
Yeah, suddenly it doesn't matter.
Suddenly, it doesn't matter a damn bit.
You know, the New Jersey Star Ledger, here's their editorial endorsing Bob Menendez.
Choke it down and vote for Menendez.
Before he was caught in 2015, Senator Robert Menendez broke Senate rules by routinely accepting expensive gifts, including private jets to luxury resorts abroad.
He kept those gifts secret, breaking another rule.
He then used his office to promote the personal and business interests of the man who paid the bills.
All that was the unanimous conclusion of the Senate Ethics Committee, including all the Democrats.
It's a miracle that Menendez escaped criminal conviction.
But vote for him.
Constitutional Immigration Dilemma00:09:33
Come on, we need the vote.
We need the vote.
So all that posing from not just the news media, not just that, but also from Colbert, also from the entire entertainment media.
Oh, they were so, so shocked that Roy Moore may have put his hand on the bra of a young girl when he was a younger man, legally.
They were so, so shocked.
Nothing, nothing.
Crickets, crickets.
It's a scam.
It's the morality scam.
It is all about power.
Let me tell you another scam.
Another scam is this healthcare thing.
The Democrats want to make this election about healthcare.
And this is the curse of John McCain.
John McCain, after swearing, promising he was going to help repeal Obamacare, delivered the one vote that saved Obamacare, putting the Republicans in the bad position of having to chip away at it, which causes other problems instead of reforming it, completely reforming it.
However, however, what they're talking about is that, and you know how they always say, oh, every civilized country has universal health care.
That is a lie.
Every civilized country leeches off our health care.
We pay 180% of the price, what they pay for important medications.
We pay 180% more than they pay for important medications.
And Trump issued a kind of stupid idea for curbing this by basically price controls.
That's not going to work.
The problem is, is because they have universal healthcare, there's only one person there for the pharma companies to negotiate with.
And what they say is, oh, this is what we're going to pay.
And if you don't like it, we're going to break down the medicine and put out a copy because we won't abide by your copyright laws.
We'll just put out a patent laws.
We'll put out our own copy.
So they have to let them pay less so we pay more.
We, we are paying for their health care.
That's what universal health care is.
It's America paying for Europeans' health care.
And by the way, the other thing is, is because the pharma companies can't make money, it's very expensive to invest in research because most research fails.
So because they can't make money, they don't give them as many drugs as we get.
Of 74 cancer drugs launched between 2011 and 2018, right, 95% of them are available here.
74% of them are available in the UK.
49% of them are available in Japan.
8% are available in Greece.
So what the government is saying to people is everybody gets care, but it's crap.
Everybody gets care, but you die.
You know, you die because we don't have the drugs, because we won't pay for the drugs, because we can't afford the drugs, because the government is paying for the drugs instead of having a free market system that would bring the drugs down to their normal price.
If we had a worldwide global free market system, we would not have this problem, right?
So all of this stuff, the sex stuff, the healthcare stuff, this moral posing, it's all a lie.
It's all a lie.
The thing is, you've got to decide what you're for.
You've got to decide what politician you're going to plug in there who's going to get you what you're for.
That's all it's about.
And then you have to live the moral life.
You have to live the life you expect people to live and teach it to your superiors, these guys, these clowns who are in office.
Let's talk.
Is Jenna here?
There she is, right in the Jenna spot.
Amazing.
Jenna Ellis, the director of the Dobson Policy Center, the author of the legal basis for a moral constitution and a birthday girl, right?
Is tomorrow your birthday?
Tomorrow is.
Happy, happy birthday.
We're glad we would have brought you a cake, but none of us can do anything.
So we have no capability to make a cake.
Okay, well, the birthday wish is much appreciated.
Thanks.
All right.
Well, listen, let's talk about this thing.
You've written an article basically saying that Trump wins just by bringing up the birthright citizenship idea.
This is the idea that no matter who you are, break into the country, have a baby, the baby's a citizen, right?
Yeah, and that's really obviously a legal fraud.
And the fact that we have been perpetuating this policy through really misconstruing the language of the 14th Amendment, it really is a great thing for President Trump in the context of the immigration debate to bring to the forefront.
And what I think is so fascinating, Andrew, is that the left and really everyone is debating the merits of this hypothetical executive order without any language actually being put forward.
And we've seen historically, just in the last two years, that related to immigration, the left always has such a memory lapse because the travel ban executive order was a total win for Trump.
And then even the executive order on the child separation at the border, that was manifestly constitutional because all that President Trump did was urge Congress to act.
And so he has wide latitude here if even an executive order will exist sometime down the road.
So, okay, so it's an election, it's an election kind of gambit.
He's putting it out there to make sure people are thinking about what he wants them thinking about.
You can't overturn.
I mean, even if the 14th Amendment is a little unclear, there's something about what is the language in there about you have to be born under the jurisdiction of the United States.
Yeah, under the jurisdiction thereof.
And that becomes the question, Drew, that really the Supreme Court hasn't answered.
And we can definitely talk about that too.
But I think your question is going to be, can President Trump really overturn this by executive order?
And it depends, because through the INA, the Immigration and Naturalization Act, Congress has really deferred a lot of their congressional authority to the president.
I don't think that anyone really is arguing that the president can just unilaterally create law.
That would obviously be unconstitutional.
But what he could do in the context of stopping some of these people from manipulating the immigration system, it really will depend on the language and then how it might be interpreted by now a more conservative Supreme Court.
But now, I mean, it's just hard for me to imagine even this Supreme Court saying, yeah, this executive order overrides the Constitution or even like, even if the intention is unclear, if they passed a law, if Congress passed a law saying if you are, the 14th Amendment doesn't apply to you basically if you broke into the country, do you think the court would go for that?
I do.
And definitely an executive order can't override the Constitution.
But if there is a law that is consistent with the Constitution through Congress, I think they can do it by statute.
The issue here, and with all due respect to the ACLU, this is not a question that has been settled.
In fact, the only case that's on record that even sort of touches this issue of what the 14th Amendment actually means and if it applies to illegal aliens was a case that's called the United States versus Wong Kim Ark.
And that was back in 1898.
So actually pretty shortly after the 14th Amendment was passed.
And I was actually reading this case this morning because I'm a legal nerd and I do that.
And there is a really interesting piece of this case because it dealt with parents who were from China, but they had permanent legal status here in the United States and then had a child.
So they had that relationship.
And what, and so the court hasn't ever answered the question, what about a child of illegal immigrants?
But what it says in the footnote, which is what we call dicta in a case, meaning the court didn't directly say this is a binding opinion, but it discussed the conversation.
And in this, it's talking about the fundamental principle of common law with regard to English nationality at birth was talking about obedience, faith, or power of the king.
And so the principle that embraced all persons within the king's allegiance and subject to his protection.
That's what in the jurisdiction thereof means.
So this is the interesting footnote.
It says children born in England and such aliens were therefore natural born subjects.
But the children born within the realm of foreign ambassadors or the children of alien enemies born during and within their hostile occupation of a part of the king's dominions were not natural born subjects because they were not born within the allegiance, the obedience or the power, or as it would be said at this day, within the jurisdiction of the king.
So I think that's language that a future Supreme Court could go back to and say, this is what really in the jurisdiction thereof means.
And it excludes children of hostile occupants of the United States.
And I mean, then there would become a question of whether you could call somebody who had broken into the country a hostile occupant, I guess.
Well, and that would be fairly obvious because if you don't have a legal status, I mean, look at the caravan.
That's an invasion.
If you come here and you break into the country without legal status, our immigration system already treats you that way absent if you have amnesty, if you're here as a refugee and you qualify, but then that still gives you that legal status.
So if you're here without legal status, it's just like if someone breaks in to my house without having a landlord-tenant relationship, an inviteee status, a guest status, then they're here illegally.
That's really interesting, Jenna.
Thank you so much for coming on.
Have a wonderful birthday.
Thank you so much for having me.
It's always great to see you.
We'll talk to you soon.
Thanks.
Thanks.
That's really interesting.
But again, interesting legal issue, obviously an election gambit.
You know, Trump hasn't even issued anything.
Klux Klan Controversy00:03:25
It's just, you just put the words out there and they panic and get hysterical.
My big point, though, is this moral superiority is an illusion.
You know, listen, I just want to add this.
I want to just conclude by saying that when we are dealing with politics, we are dealing with politics.
If you want to see, when you're dealing with morality, you're not dealing with any of these people, any of them, none of them, not one of them.
I mean, we used to know that politicians were windbags, celebrities were idiots, and news people were just kind of Ted Baxter stand-up people.
But if you need a reminder, I just have to play this one last thing, which is Don Lemon commenting on how we should not demonize people.
Let's play this.
We have to stop demonizing people and realize the biggest terror threat in this country is white men, most of them radicalized to the right.
And we have to start doing something about them.
There is no travel ban on them.
There is no ban on, you know, they have the Muslim ban.
There is no white guy ban.
So what do we do about that?
You ever see that picture of the guy with half a head, like his whole top of his head is caved in?
You notice you never see him and Don Lemon at the same place.
My God, this man.
Anyway, that is their hypocrisy right there in about 20 seconds of tape.
Unbelievable.
And that is why we should not let them make us hysterical about any moral issue ever, ever.
Okay, let us play the new lefties dictionary entry.
K is for what?
K. K is for Ku Klux Klan.
The Ku Klux Klan is an organization founded by Democrats after the Civil War in an attempt to overthrow Republican state governments in the South in order to reestablish the Democrat policy of white supremacism.
The Democrat Party was founded by former slave trader Andrew Jackson around 1828.
As the issue of slavery began to divide the nation, the Democrat Party fought to preserve slavery in opposition to the new anti-slavery Republican Party led by Abraham Lincoln.
When Lincoln won the presidency, the Southern Democrats were afraid he would outlaw their slaveholding.
They therefore seceded from the United States and the Civil War began.
When the Republican freedom forces of the Union defeated the Democrat slavers of the Confederacy, blacks were freed from their chains.
The Democrats formed the Ku Klux Klan and established anti-black Jim Crow laws in order to prevent the former slaves from enjoying their newfound freedom.
Even into modern times, Democrat segregationists like George Wallace and Bull Connor fought against the civil rights movement led by Christian Republican Martin Luther King Jr.
Although the Ku Klux Klan is now in disrepute among Democrats, modern Democrat policies such as welfare, sexual liberation, and anti-police activism have rendered impoverished African Americans dependent on government largesse, socially hobbled by a plague of illegitimate births, and chained to the murderous violence that is the norm in many Democrat-run cities.
Thus, the Democrats have finally accomplished the goals of the Ku Klux Klan by other means.
But that's only the meaning of Ku Klux Klan in real life.
In leftees, Ku Klux Klan refers to any Republican who disagrees with Democrat policies.
Understanding Subtlety00:14:24
Now, you may say, whoa, hold the phone.
That would mean that lefties describes a world that is exactly the opposite of reality.
Correct.
Now you are beginning to understand this subtle and complex language.
K is for Ku Klux Klan.
I'm Andrew Clavin with the Lefties Dictionary.
You're finally beginning to understand this subtle and complex language.
All right, we got the mailbag coming up.
We got to say goodbye to Facebook and YouTube.
Come to thedailywire.com so you can subscribe.
Come to dailywire.com.
I always say the, dailywire.com, so you can subscribe.
You can listen to our backstage on election night.
You can have the leftist tears tumbler.
You can have another kingdom.
You have so much for just a lousy 10 bucks a month.
What are you doing with it otherwise?
Come on over.
All right, the mailbag.
Woo!
Yeah!
All right.
This is from a big fan all the way from Switzerland, so I'm not sure if the name is Jean or Jean, but he says I'm he or she says I'm 28 years old and kind of became religious over the last two years, which deeply surprises everyone who knows me.
I grew up in an atheist environment and always felt certain myself drawn and always felt myself drawn to religion, but always misinterpreted the feeling until recently.
I followed Dr. Jordan Peterson, and hence the reason for me being kind of religious.
I'm deeply convinced about all the virtues and truth of Christianity, but I can't bring myself to really believe in it.
I don't believe in heaven, salvation, and all that.
It puts me in an awkward position as I feel like I'm just wearing the face of religion without taking the burden of living it.
I can't bring myself to go to church, for example.
Is it hypocritical of me to claim to be religious?
Thank you for the correct answer.
I expect at least a 27% increase in the quality of my life.
All right.
Oh, yeah, I think we can guarantee you that.
So that sounds like a man to me.
Let me make clear before I start that I'm not at all talking for Jordan Peterson.
I'm not speaking for Jordan Peterson at all, but it is my understanding that Jordan is a Jungian.
And now I have to talk about my understanding of Jung, because he's a very, very complex thinker and also a very bad writer.
And I think he's writing in German or something like that, so he's even worse.
But basically is my understanding of Jung is that he believes that the spiritual world is a kind of connection between human perception and the wholeness of life.
So as he said himself, we cannot tell whether the subconscious is God or God is the subconscious.
We can't tell.
We cannot tell where we end and God begins.
So an example would be, for instance, this glass, scientists will tell you it's mostly empty space.
The thing that we see is not there.
For complex reasons, it reacts as if it were a solid object.
But as far as we're concerned, in real life, that glass is there and we can pick it up and we can drink out of it, right?
And so Jung was essentially saying that God was the same way.
We don't know if he's really there.
We just know that we feel him, we see him, we experience him, and therefore we can react as if he were there.
And that's why I believe Jordan is always saying, I act as if there were a God, because he's saying essentially, we don't know whether this is a real thing or not, but we know we have to see it that way in the same way we have to see the glass there.
I don't actually believe that that is a full and complete philosophy of life.
I actually believe that at some point you have to decide because otherwise you're talking about a metaphor for your own experience.
Now, I think that there's truth to this.
I think there's truth to that view of life, that we only have the human experience of life.
But I think that part of believing in God, part of having faith in God, is having faith in the human experience, that it is an essential experience.
The world was built for life to exist.
It was built for a mind to understand it.
So the experience that that mind has and understanding is, in some sense, a very, very real experience, not a metaphor for something else.
And that means to me that God exists.
The logic of God's existence seems so complete.
I'm not going to go into my arguments now.
You can read my memoir, The Great Good Thing, which has a lot of it in it.
It seems to me to be very real.
So to get to your question, I don't believe that acting as if God exists is a full and complete philosophy of life.
It seems to me that that is saying I am going to live by the conclusions of a syllogism without accepting the premises.
And that doesn't make any sense to me.
If all the conclusions that you live by show you that God exists, then it seems to me the reasonable thing to have faith in your logic and believe in God.
Now, faith is not a leap into the unknown.
Faith is a belief in your logic being true, but you can't prove it's true because you can't experience the spiritual world in physical terms, right?
Proofs are usually about physical experiences.
So if you believe in all the trappings of religion, all the conclusions of religion, it seems to me the thing of integrity to do is to try and have faith, to experience faith, to give yourself over to faith.
And the way you give yourself over to faith is by living your faith and communicating with God and being in a relationship with God.
Now listen, you can do anything you want.
You can live any way you want.
You can live a moral life without God.
You can live a life that makes no sense.
You can live any kind of, that makes no philosophical sense.
But if, as you say, you are deeply convinced about the virtues and truth of Christianity, then the reason that you can't believe, I would argue, is because of a narrative, is because we are surrounded by this narrative that these things don't happen.
And I agree with that narrative.
These things don't happen.
That's why we're so impressed when they do.
So what I would say to you is at least commit to the logic of your, if you can, at least commit to the logic of your conclusions and then see where that takes you.
I think just sitting in your room and saying, oh yes, I believe, it's not a full life.
You know, it's not a full life.
You should live out the meaning of your creed.
You really should live out the meaning of your creed.
I say that to you only as a helpful hint that you will have a happier life if you live out the meaning of your creed.
I mean, somewhere it was written that if you can say, oh, I behave as I would behave whether someone is watching or not, you are then a happy man.
I believe that.
I think that is absolutely true.
So I think like, you know, you should say, if you are deeply convinced about all the virtues and truth of Christianity, you should, I, let me put it this way, I would then commit myself to faith.
I did commit myself to faith.
I have found that in that commitment, it has proven itself again and again and has become more and more real to me and more of it has become real to me.
They say that seeing is believing, but in this case, I think believing is seeing.
I hope that's a full explanation.
It got a little complicated because I did want to talk about that Jordan Peterson thing.
I don't think most people understand what he's saying.
From Anonymous, dear Lord of the Multiverse Clavin, I'm a comedian and college student in New York City, and it turns out I'm depressed.
My doctor gave me an official diagnosis or whatever.
I have generalized anxiety disorder, but I've really been sad since my senior year of high school, which is now four years ago.
I know you said exercise and interacting with people helps.
I exercise, but it's the interacting part.
For some reason, that's hard for me now.
I used to be able to talk to people, but now I can't make eye contact.
I stopped speaking to all my old friends, and now I literally don't have anyone.
I'm always scared to say the wrong thing or be too much for somebody.
I always feel like the depressed friend.
My question is, is there a way to stop being scared?
And how do you even make friends, real ones?
Okay, I will answer that question.
You don't have to stop being scared.
You have to act even though you're scared.
You're scared because you're depressed.
I've been depressed.
I went through this experience about the same time in my life that you are in your life.
It's very, very painful.
It makes it almost, it feels impossible to even order a pack of gum from somebody.
It feels impossible to communicate even at that simple level.
Exercise is important, but the thing that I did, don't talk about not being scared.
Be scared.
Be scared and saddle up.
You know, that's what you do.
That's what courage is.
It's being scared and doing it anyway.
What you should do is get yourself into situations where interacting is simply part of the situation, not about making friends, just about doing what you do.
So, you know, I joined the campus radio station.
I joined things that I would never join.
I don't like joining things, but I did it.
I forced myself to join.
Volunteering, really good way to get in touch with people because if you are feeding the hungry, suddenly the fact that you don't want to talk to people looks pretty silly.
And you're working with people and you're helping them out.
Just being with people and having to interact with them in spite of your shyness will break through that.
The more you do it, the more, the easier it will be to do and you will get through it.
It sounds like you have a diagnosis.
You know, they're probably going to want to give you drugs.
I hate drugs, but I'm not going to tell you not to take them.
What I will tell you is get to the drugs.
This is not a chemical imbalance.
You're depressed.
It has to do, I'm almost, I would bet money, it has to do with your relationship with your family.
The reason you got depressed when you were a senior in high school is because you were leaving home, you were moving on into another phase, and you were realizing unconsciously that you were not going to resolve these issues with your family, which are clearly very painful to you.
I would make sure, whatever else you're doing, I would make sure that you are dealing with the issues in your family that are making you depressed.
That's the ball and chain you're carrying around.
You can break that ball and chain.
But meanwhile, break through the depression by taking action.
You know, get out there, volunteer, join stuff, make yourself do it.
Don't try to stop being afraid.
Don't try to make friends.
Just get out there and interact with people, and the rest will take care of itself.
All right.
From Stan, Andrew, my fellow bald brother, I'm a black conservative and Trump supporter.
This November 6th, I would like to go out and vote wearing my MAGA hat.
But I live in a predominantly black neighborhood that has a high crime rate.
My family are worried I will get attacked or even shot if I wear my hat out and about in my neighborhood.
So I guess my question is, do I listen to my family and back down?
Or do I exercise my freedom of speech and wear my hat?
Anyway, love you guys.
Thanks.
Well, look, the answer to that is pretty simple.
The question is, are you willing to pay the price for what you want to do?
That's a question only you can answer.
You want to wear the hat.
Is it dangerous?
It sounds like it might be dangerous.
Are you willing to risk that and pay the price?
I have to tell you personally, I never wear political garb outside.
I don't have bumper stickers on my car.
And it's not because of fear of retaliation.
It's simply because I consider myself a complete human being.
I don't put a Jesus sticker on my car or anything like that.
I wear my cross inside my shirt, not outside my shirt.
It's because I don't consider myself a billboard.
I consider myself a complete person, and I want somebody to get to know me.
And if anybody wants to know what I think, obviously I will tell them.
I never lie about it, and I never let anybody assume what I think or anything like that.
So that's the way I deal with it.
I don't go around wearing that stuff.
But if you feel it's an important statement you make, only you can decide whether it is worth the price.
Don't talk yourself, don't talk yourself out of thinking there is a price.
Just calculate whether that's worth it to you.
From Timothy, wise one, I have a couple of questions on writing.
If you've just written a sentence you know to be subpar, do you stop to revise it or resolve to fix it later?
And two, in any discipline, it's natural to develop comfortable habits on which we rely almost unconsciously.
In writing, this manifests as reuse of the same familiar words and phrases.
Again, you recommend techniques for overcoming this crutch.
Thanks for your time, and more importantly, the wisdom that you bring to the Daily Wire team.
Well, thank you.
Okay.
You know, writing is very personal.
When you ask, if I've just written a sentence, you know, to be sub-par, do you stop to revise it or resolve to fix it later?
What I do is I go over everything.
You know, I write, I get through a scene fixing it as I go along, and then I go back over it and do it again.
And then the next day I go back over it and do it again.
I'm a big rewriter.
And then when I'm finished, I go back and rewrite everything again and then again.
So I'm a big rewriter.
But whatever gets you to completion is what you want.
It's more important to finish than to be stuck forever.
To me, it's more important to finish than to be stuck forever getting everything exactly right the first time.
That's the wonderful thing about writing.
You can rewrite it.
You can work on it.
When you talk about using words over and over again, everybody does that.
I always like to read William Faulkner because he had these big pompous words that he loved to use, avatar, and what was the other one?
Oh, apotheosis.
Everything was an avatar and an apotheosis and Faulkner.
We all have words we like to use.
But yeah, what you're looking for is you're looking for your voice only better.
And your voice, of course, is many voices.
We all have many different ways that we speak.
So you will have a number of different voices that you speak in.
Of course, you'll have character voices.
So you want to be in control of your words.
I use a thesaurus to make sure I've got all the words in front of me.
I don't try to use fancy words.
I don't try to use, as Hemingway said, a quarter word when a nickel word will do.
But sometimes I'll say, oh, yeah, that is a better word, and I do want to use that.
But you just want to describe the thing to make it come into the mind of the person reading it.
So, you know, you're looking for your voice.
That's the hardest thing a writer does.
It usually takes years to get it right.
But once you get it, everything becomes easier.
But you want it to be your voice, but better.
So yeah, you want to learn vocabulary.
You want to use all the tools that a writer has, thesaurus, dictionary, all those things.
And you don't want to repeat yourself unless that's the way you write.
Hemingway did write that way, you know, like it was good.
I walked down the street.
The street was good.
You know, that was the way he wrote.
I don't write that way.
I like more variety.
I like more poetry in my writing because that's the way I think.
That's the way I experience the world.
From Nicholas.
Hi, Andrew.
I have a religious question for you, if I may.
I know that back in the time of Jesus Christ, the Jews expected a Messiah that was a conqueror like King David, but why is it that some of the Jewish people denied the deity of Christ given that he fulfilled the scriptures' claims of what the Messiah would do?
Feelings Protected00:05:20
Well, they didn't see it that way.
I mean, it's that simple.
They did not see the prophecies in the Bible as prophecies of the Christ.
They had already, there was already a vast catalog of interpretation that the Jews had saying that they thought somebody in the line of David was going to reestablish the kingdom of David.
It was often thought of as a worldly kingdom that was going to come back.
The Jews had had a proud history.
They believed in a God who supported them.
The Babylonian exile and the fall of that empire was a great emotional shock to them.
They lived in the expectation of it coming back.
And a guy who came back and then got nailed to a cross was not exactly their idea of the hero they had been expecting.
And they didn't overcome that feeling.
Obviously, if you're a Christian as I am, you think they were incorrect in their assessment.
But that was the way they saw it.
And it was, you know, an honest way.
It wasn't like they were just closing their eyes.
That was the way they saw it.
It's very hard when the traditions teach you to expect one thing to see something entirely different.
But that is almost always the way that God works.
He always takes us by surprise.
I guess I've got to stop there.
But let us look at, I will call this tickety boo news, though it's interesting news, tickety-boo news.
I want to look at two stories that explain why I'm opposed to silencing hate speech, why I'm opposed to silencing hate speech.
Every time something happens like the shootings in Pittsburgh, the left immediately, oh my golly, the anti-Semitic speech.
And then of course it devolves into, oh, well, you criticize Bill Kristol, and he's Jewish, so you're an anti-Semite.
And that's the way they argue.
I love that.
You criticize somebody whose grandmother was Jewish, and therefore you contributed to the violence in Pittsburgh.
Obviously, all garbage, all garbage.
But I don't even believe in silencing the speech of true, evil, hateful people.
And I believe they should be allowed online.
They should talk to each other, knock themselves out.
I do believe, like I said yesterday, we should have ways to get rid of the people who are insane among them.
But still, still, I believe that hate speech should be included.
Here are two stories that explain why.
Pakistan's highest court has freed a Christian mother who was sentenced to death under the country's harsh blasphemy laws.
This has sparked protests and violent threats from Muslim hardliners.
After the ruling demonstrators called for the killing of the judges in the case, the toppling of the government and a revolt against the country's powerful army chief.
This was Asia Bibi, a farmhand, has been jailed since 2009 when an argument she had led to blasphemy charges being made against her.
She was a Christian.
I think she's a Catholic.
I can't remember.
But anyway, the court said this is ridiculous.
It's all flimsy.
They described it as a feast of falsehood, the charges against her.
You get in an argument with somebody, accuse her of blasphemy, she's sentenced to death.
Luckily, luckily, this woman has been set free.
I don't know how much violence there'll be in response to it.
Meanwhile, as they make the right decision in Pakistan, the European Court of Human Rights sticks its boot up its own behind and says an Austrian woman's conviction for calling the Prophet of Islam Muhammad a pedophile did not breach her freedom of speech.
That you are not allowed to go.
Now, of course, this is a complex issue for many reasons because their own documents, not in the Quran, it's the Hadiths, I think, says that he had a six-year-old bride, Muhammad had a six-year-old bride, and consummated that relationship when she was nine.
So he was a pedophile.
If that's true, that's pedophilia.
So that is a true thing.
So she was making a statement that was supported by their own documents.
But she has the right to say anything about the Prophet Muhammad she wants, anything.
The Strasbourg-based ECHR, the European Court of Human Rights, ruled Thursday that Austrian courts had carefully balanced her right to freedom of expression with the right of others to have their religious feelings protected.
There is no such right.
That is not a right.
If you have a right to have your feelings protected about anything, about anything, then free speech doesn't exist.
You have no right to have your feelings protected.
Freedom requires a bit of leathery skin.
Freedom requires a bit of leathery skin.
And that's why, once you start prohibiting hate speech, the question becomes who decides?
Is it the Muslims who don't want blasphemy?
Is it the Democrats who don't want conservatism and who are perfectly, perfectly willing to ban speech, criticizing them or supporting the Constitution?
They're perfectly willing to say that Trump calling himself a nationalist really means white nationalist.
You know what a dog whistle is?
They keep calling it a dog whistle.
A dog whistle is anything a conservative says that a leftist can construe as hateful, which is anything that a conservative says.
So dog whistle is a nonsense term.
It's a nonsense term.
We do not ban hate speech because we do not ban speech.
You have no right to have your feelings protected.
We ban violence.
We ban and we condemn.
We condemn hatred.
We condemn it everywhere.
We condemn it against Muslims.
We condemn it against Jews, against Christians, all of it.
We condemn it.
I reject it.
It's disgusting.
But you cannot ban it.
The government has no right to protect others from your thoughts and your speech.
All right.
We Condemn Hate Speech00:00:50
Tomorrow, who knows what's going to happen, but the election comes closer and closer.
I'm sure there'll be ever more hysteria for us to back away from and become calm again.
So this is the place to do it.
I'm Andrew Clavin.
is The Andrew Klavan Show.
The Andrew Klavan Show is produced by Robert Sterling.
Executive producer, Jeremy Boring.
Senior producer, Jonathan Hay.
Our supervising producer is Mathis Glover.
Technical producer, Austin Stevens.
Edited by Alex Zingaro.
Audio is mixed by Mike Cormina.
Hair and makeup is by Jessua Alvera.
And our animations are by Cynthia Angulo and Jacob Jackson.
The Andrew Clavin Show is a Daily Wire Forward Publishing Production.