Ep. 716 dissects the New York Times’ role in suppressing conservative speech, citing its "The Making of a YouTube Radical" piece as part of a coordinated push with tech giants to silence figures like Ben Shapiro and Jordan Peterson while ignoring left-wing extremism—like Sophie Lewis’s abortion-as-self-defense rhetoric. The episode contrasts selective outrage over right-wing radicalization with unchecked progressive ideology, from California’s anti-free-speech resolutions to Pride parades morphing into leftist indoctrination hubs. It warns that this double standard, fueled by corporate-state collusion, erodes democratic discourse, framing the Times as an enemy of open debate rather than a guardian of truth. [Automatically generated summary]
Summer is here and mosquitoes and Democrat candidates are swarming Iowa.
Residents of the Hawkeye State say they're keeping the pesky bloodsuckers at bay with poisonous aerosol repellents, but mostly just slapping at the mosquitoes.
In a rally on Sunday in Cedar Rapids, a full 19 Democrats were on hand to deliver speeches.
Crowds gathered outside, shouting slogans, beating drums and shaking tambourines, but still couldn't get them to go away.
Each candidate was allowed to make a speech for five minutes or an eternity, whichever seemed shorter.
Frontrunner Joe Biden skipped the event in keeping with his campaign strategy of hiding until it's all over so that no one will find out what he's really like.
But socialist Bernie Sanders was there and he told the crowd, quote, we must reverse whatever Donald Trump has done.
So where he has restored our economy, I will impose socialism and take care of that in a big hurry.
But this is not bad socialism, like the socialism of the Soviet Union, China, Venezuela, or other real-life places.
This is good socialism, like in the Norway of my imagination, unquote.
Eric Swalwell arrived on the scene with poll numbers so low he may be the first man ever to be elected not president, a new office in which whatever power you may have had is taken away from you and given to someone else.
Swalwell announced that he is you, which was a relief since otherwise no one would have recognized him.
Other candidates included Corey Booker, who told the audience this was a moral moment in which he was Spartacus and he was looking forward to tomorrow, which would be a material moment in which he was Madonna and got to wear the spiked bra.
And of course there was a bunch of women who said they were also running for president, which was kind of sweet in a way.
The candidates regarded the gathering as the official start of the political season as well as the official end of their political careers.
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-dunky.
Shipshaw dipsy-topsy, the world is a bitty zing.
It's a wonderful day.
Hoorah, hooray!
It makes me want to sing.
Oh, hurrah, hooray.
Oh, hooray, hurrah.
YouTube's War on Conservatives00:15:29
The New York Times, a former newspaper, launched a full-on attack on conservative voices on YouTube over the weekend, essentially giving cover to YouTube's plan to deplatform anything they deem hateful, i.e. anyone who believes in the Constitution and the right of individuals to run their own lives, think their own thoughts, and speak without restraint in a free society, no matter what the New York Times, a former newspaper, thinks is acceptable.
The New York Times, which used to be a newspaper, is now a sophomoric mouthpiece for social justice leftism, which is the opposite of social, the opposite of justice, not to mention the opposite of freedom.
It's a racist philosophy that divides Americans according to their genetic makeup, their sex, their delusions about what sex they are, and any other way it can find to set us against one another so that we never unite against them, which is to say corporate America and the power of the state.
Standing against that dangerous and anti-American strain of thought is a hodgepodge of conservative voices that range from the thoughtful guys like our own Ben Shapiro and Jordan Peterson to evil lunatics like Richard Spencer and just plain lunatics with ugly mugs and also ugly mugs like Stephen Crowder.
Some of these conservatives I think are terrific, some I don't like, some I despise, and of course I have a restraining order out against Crowder, not to mention his mug.
But all of them, all of them should be allowed to speak.
Of course they should.
They're part of the dialogue that is helping us bring freedom into a new century.
On the other hand, if we are going to start censoring haters, we should start with the people who support baby killing and federal spying on opposition candidates, like the New York Times, a former newspaper.
But no, actually, I want them to keep talking too, and we will be talking all about it.
But first, let us talk about rock auto.
You know, there's so many kinds of cars, so many models.
It's impossible to stock all the parts you need in a traditional chain storefront.
People go into those chains.
You know why they go into them?
They want the person behind the counter to tell them what part they need.
They want to say, I think I need this part.
And the person behind the counter, who doesn't know anything about it, will nod and say, yeah, good idea.
Because there's just too many parts to know.
But if you know what you want, you have computers with access to rockauto.com at home and in your pocket.
Rockauto.com is a family business serving auto part customers online for 20 years.
Go to rockauto.com to shop for auto and body parts from hundreds of manufacturers.
They have everything from engine control modules, which I don't even know what that is, brake parts, tail lamps, anything you need.
You can get at rockauto.com.
They're always got reliably low prices, and it's the same for professionals or do-it-yourselfers.
Why spend up to twice as much for the same parts?
They've got an amazing selection and low prices.
Go to rockauto.com right now and see all the parts available for your car or truck.
Write Clavin in there.
How did you hear about us?
So they know we sent you.
So I know what you say.
You say, well, I'd be happy to do that.
But how do you spell Klavin?
People, people.
It's K-L-A-V-A-N.
So the name of this piece in the New York Times is The Making of a YouTube Radical.
It's by Kevin Roos.
And it had this montage, what do you call it, collage of faces of people who were supposed to be these horrible right-wingers.
So it had the horrible right-winger Ben Shapiro.
We know he is.
He is quite horrible, just an absolute threat to us all.
Milton Friedman was one of them.
Bill Whittle, my pal, my old pal Bill Whittle is there.
Stephen Molyneux, you know, and Milo and all these people.
So just to kind of just all splash together.
There's Crowder down at the bottom.
So they just splash together no matter who they were.
Later on Twitter, the author Kevin Roos put out a thing saying, well, they weren't supposed to represent all right-wingers.
These were just some of the people that this guy had watched while he had become radicalized.
So it was just the kind of to show you how you could sink from somebody lovable and delightful like, ah, gee, I can't think of anybody there.
But you could sink into the evil of actually listening to Milton Friedman.
But that's not the point, because the point is the whole point of the article was to give cover to YouTube for their efforts to deplatform people, which is also covered to Twitter, Facebook, to silence conservative voices before the upcoming election.
I just want to say, by the way, that my face did not appear anywhere on this.
And I mean, are you telling me that Bill Whittle is more hateful than I am?
I can be just as hateful as Bill Witt.
Crowder, I hate Crowder.
I mean, it seems to me that should trump Crowder's hatred.
Crowder just hates everybody, but I actually hate Crowder.
So, I mean, shouldn't that put me, I'm offended.
I believe that because I call the New York Times a former newspaper and call their op-ed section Knucklehead Row, I think that they hate me so much that they won't even acknowledge my hateful existence.
And I just think that that is unfair, and I protest.
I feel that the New York Times should be silenced unless they start to pay attention to my hatred and my divisiveness.
Anyway, the point, I don't know.
It just bugs me that I can't be hateful enough to make the New York Times.
The point of the piece is obviously that these people have to be silenced, and YouTube has to do stuff not to encourage people to listen to them and go from one to another.
And let's just be clear about this.
The New York Times does not support free speech.
It does not support the First Amendment.
The New York Times is now a woke, sophomoric hate paper.
I mean, today, I mean, sometimes they don't even have headlines anymore.
It's just like Trump, Gr.
You know, that's what it'll say, like G-R-R-R-R.
They just have become this crazed left-wing voice of silence.
If you don't believe me, take a look at Citizens United.
You remember Citizens United case, I think, was decided in 2010 by the Supreme Court.
Our pal David Bossi, he made a film against Hillary Clinton, put it on TV, and they took it off TV in accordance with McCain-Feingold because they said this was a campaign contribution.
So you can't put an anti-Hillary documentary on TV when the election is coming up because it's a campaign contribution that should be controlled by McCain-Feingold.
It went to the Supreme Court.
In the arguments of the Supreme Court, Elito asked the government lawyer who was defending McCain Feingold, he said, look, couldn't you apply this to a book?
And the lawyer said, well, yeah, you could censor a book because it would be, if it was anti-Hillary, because that would be a campaign contribution.
And he said, well, could it be applied to a thousand-page book that had a sentence attacking Hillary Clinton?
And ultimately, the lawyer had to admit, yes, it could.
I mean, this is censorship.
All these campaign finance things, we don't need campaign finance laws.
They are all censorship laws.
Almost every one of them is certainly McCain-Feingold.
So they gutted McCain-Feingold and said, no, you can't do this.
This is ridiculous.
Oh my gosh.
You know, this was Hillary Clinton.
She never forgot that someone, that the Supreme Court of these United States could allow an anti-Hillary Clinton video to be aired was too much for her.
And she went and campaigned about it.
One of the reasons I would never have voted for her was I thought she was anti-First Amendment.
So was the New York Times.
The New York Times hated this.
Their idea, they are a corporation, right?
The Times Corporation, they are a corporation.
And the idea here was evil corporations should not be allowed to speak because David Bossey had a little company that made this film and that was his corporation.
But, of course, the New York Times wanted an exception for journalist corporations.
Now, you know, you'd have to be an idiot not to have the next question occur to you, who decides what a journalist corporation is?
We can guess.
We know exactly who's going to decide.
Will the Daily Wire be a journalist corporation?
No, no, no, no.
New York Times?
Oh, absolutely.
It's all about silencing conservative voices because they have lost the argument because they know whenever we argue, we win the argument.
Whenever they debate us, if they can't show you a picture of a crying baby, if they can't scream that you're a racist, if they can't call you hateful, if they can't call you homophobic or Islamophobic, if they actually have to argue the point at hand, they lose.
And that is why they want to shut us down.
So the New York Times is on a campaign.
They hate the First Amendment.
They hate free speech.
They do not want this stuff at all.
So now they put out this YouTube radical.
Caleb Cain was a college dropout looking for direction.
He turned to YouTube.
Soon he was pulled into a far-right universe, watching thousands of videos filled with conspiracy theories, misogyny, and racism.
So, and later at the end, there's a happy ending.
He goes back and he becomes a left-wing idiot.
He becomes a left-wing guy watching left-wing YouTube videos, basically.
But, you know, he says the common thread in many of these stories in YouTube and its recommendation log rhythm is the software that determines which video appear on users' homepage.
So this is what he's attacking.
He's attacking the idea that if you watch me, you might get Ben.
If you get Ben, you might get Jordan Peterson.
If you get Jordan Peterson, you'll get somebody else that you might like.
And this has been very effective in spreading the conservative message.
What they're so upset about is he became a Trump supporter.
And this is, of course, what they're talking about.
They're talking about 2020.
How can they stop these voices from getting out there so if Trump doesn't win re-election?
But here is the key paragraph.
I'll read it to you in just a minute.
First, let us talk about NetSuite.
Here's the thing.
You would not know this from looking at me.
You would just think I'm some kind of crazy lunatic.
But I'm a business.
I am a personal business.
I'm a writer.
I work here as an independent contractor.
You know, the Daily Wire is essentially my client.
I run my own business.
And if you don't know your numbers, you don't know what your business is doing.
And the problem is there's so many business systems that, you know, there's one for accounting, another for sales, another for inventory.
You just don't know what's going on.
That's why you have NetSuite by Oracle.
It's the business management software that handles every aspect of your business in an easy-to-use cloud platform.
It gives you the visibility and control you need to grow.
With NetSuite, you save time, money, and unneeded headaches by managing sales, finance, accounting orders, and HR instantly right from your desktop or phone.
NetSuite is the world's number one cloud business system.
Right now, NetSuite is offering you valuable insights and a free guide, seven key strategies to grow your profits at netsuite.com/slash clavin.
That's netsuite.com/slash clavin to download your free guide, seven key strategies to grow your profits, netsuite.com/slash clavin.
The first strategy is finding out how to spell Clavin.
There are no Es in Clavin.
I just make it look easy.
It's K-L-A-V-A-N.
What happened to poor Mr. Kane when he was listening to these horrible, you know, Ben Shapiro, Stephen Crowder, these hateful, seething, right-wing, evil demagogues?
Listen to what it says.
This is an entire big article in the New York Times Sunday, I think it was.
Mr. Kane never bought into the far right's most extreme views, like Holocaust denial or the need for a white ethnostate.
Still, a far-right ideology bled into his daily life.
Get ready for this.
This is so shocking, even you will reel in horror.
He began referring to himself as a trad con, a traditional conservative committed to old-fashioned gender norms.
He dated an evangelical Christian woman for the love of, for the sweet love of mercy.
And he fought with his liberal friends.
That's it.
That is what happened to this guy from watching videos.
He dated an evangelical Christian woman, believed in traditional gender norms, and fought with his liberal friends.
And Zelda Waite, a friend of Mr. Kane's from high school, said it was kind of sad.
It was just like, wow, what happened?
How did you get this way?
These small-minded creeps, these small-minded creeps at the New York Times, they cannot stand that anyone should disagree.
Because what the thing that drives them crazy about Crowder and the thing that drives them crazy about Trump is they're not operating in their worldview.
They don't mind if you operate in their worldview but disagree.
You know, because you say, well, you're wrong about this, you're wrong about it.
But the thing about Crowder is he doesn't buy into any of it.
Crowder's a loon.
He's a comedian.
You know, I mean, I've often thought that Crowder should have to deliver his show in a straitjacket.
I think he would agree.
You know, here's Glenn Greenwald.
Glenn Greenwald, left-wing, gay writer, writes for The Guardian, but he is also appalled at this assault on free speech.
He was on Tucker's show.
Here's Greenwald talking about Crowder and the issue.
I personally find Stephen Crowder to be just a contemptuous Cretan as a commentator.
I do think he's an infantile bully and bigot, which are not words I easily invoke.
He didn't just criticize Carlos Maza.
He mocked him for being gay and for being Latino.
He used a lisp and things to ridicule him, send a lot of harassment his way.
But that's the point, Tucker, is that censorship advocates want our brains to only go to that most primitive first level of do we hate this person and are we therefore glad that they're being censored without thinking about the framework being endorsed or the consequences that ensue from it.
I don't want to live in a world where our discourse is policed and determined by benevolent overlords who run Silicon Valley companies.
You know, we're always going to cater to the most powerful faction.
That's what happened here.
YouTube caved in, not in defense of the marginalized person, but in defense of the powerful one.
Now, I think we can all agree that Crowder is a contemptuous Cretan.
I think even Crowder would, I think he actually has a business card that says, you know, Stephen Crowder, contemptuous Cretan.
But I think, I mean, it's so obvious that this is true.
And it's so obvious that the New York Times and all these people are in support of these powerful corporations.
Facebook isn't like a puppy dog.
Facebook is this huge thing.
YouTube, huge.
Google, same company, huge.
Twitter, these are huge corporations that are all on the left because our huge corporations used to be manufacturing corporations, which tended to be a little bit more conservative because they dealt with material, real things that only worked a certain way and you had to put them together right.
So that develops conservative values, right?
You can't just put a car the way you feel it should be put together.
You can't put a car together in a just way.
You put a car together so it works and it teaches you that things have to work and that makes you a conservative.
But these are places that are just about ideas and they have come up on the left.
They have this notion that if you can control the narrative, you control reality and therefore they have become incredibly left-wing.
They come all from the elite universities and they want to tell you what to say and what jokes to make.
I mean, Crowder, look, Crowder is like every comedian I've ever met.
My father was a comedian.
I've known a lot of comedians.
Every single one of them should be put in a padded room.
They are all crazy, okay?
And Crowder is no exception.
He's a nutcase, but he is hilarious.
And when he gets going, he can be as funny as anybody around.
Why is it, why is it that Stephen Colbert, Samantha B., Baba Baba, each one of those comedians, every single one of them, can go on and hurl, hurl hatred against Donald Trump every night and therefore against all the people who voted for him.
And nobody says a word.
Nobody says, hey, should NBC, should ABC, should CBS control its content?
Balancing Free Speech00:06:34
No.
But if Stephen Crowder goes out and makes some jokes, and by the way, don't tell me that Crowder uses slurs.
Of course he does.
He's a comedian.
But so does Stephen Colbert.
I mean, he has called Trump things that no one should say on public air, on air actually controlled by the FCC.
But nobody says a word about it.
We all know this.
We all know it.
So I think that the point that he's making that this is the powerful controlling speech.
It's always the powerful who control speech.
There's only free speech and speech controlled by the powerful.
And if you think that that means that the powerful, oh, these wonderful people are going to stand up for the marginalized, no, of course they're not.
They're only going to use the marginalized to divide us.
You know, Bill Maher, who, God bless Bill Maher, because he is like the last voice on the left.
I disagree with almost every word out of his mouth, but he's the last voice on the left who will say a politically incorrect thing and will defend free speech and will have people on his show who disagree with him and let them speak.
But, you know, it was interesting to hear this roundtable because it had different ideas.
He had Brett Eastanellis on.
I'll play Brett Eastanellis.
He's an artist, so he's going to be basically in the same place Greenwald was.
Brett, do you have any thoughts on YouTube announcing that we'll take down videos with extremist views?
Well, I don't know.
I mean, once you start opening that door, and this is what I've always said about the censorous media machine, is that then what's next?
It becomes this thing where you cancel one person out, and then who's next?
And it becomes just this endless maze that you fall into.
So I was not particularly, I was kind of shocked by it and upset by it.
And I also know a lot of my friends on both sides of the aisle were as well.
I don't think it's anything that's going to move the needle forward or protect people or do anything of the sort that it thinks it's trying to do.
Okay, that's the artist talking.
And I think the voice of common sense, really.
It's like, if we're going to have free speech, it should be free.
Here's Clinton Watts, who is a security analyst for MSNBC.
So I assume he's on the left.
But he has a legitimate point that he makes here.
The signal though that they get from the government is if there's a terrorist attack and we tie it back to any of these things or any other extremists, what are we going to do?
We're going to regulate you.
We're going to shut you down.
So their response then is what?
They try and move more towards censorship.
Once they move towards censorship, other people say, oh, you can't censor that content.
I can tell you just having worked counterterrorism for a very long time, what brought people together was the internet.
And social media has really accelerated extremism across the board.
Whether it's al-Qaeda and ISIS or white nationalist terrorism we have now, they network online, they congregate online, they operationally plan online.
So there has to be a balance in there.
I do think the government needs to come up with some sort of middle solution where they work with the tech companies instead of scolding them both directions, depending on what it is.
I see there's some common sense in this because people, criminals can get together online just like they can get together in their social clubs and plan crimes.
But I'm sorry, you can't say Steve Crowder is doing that.
He's not planning anything.
He's just speaking.
And if some lunatic goes off and hurts somebody because they saw something on the Crowder show that set them off, look, it's no different from the guy who shot up the ballpark because he heard something from Bernie Sanders.
Crazy people do crazy things.
Crazy people hear crazy things no matter what you're saying.
But the point that, you know, we should be able to police internet spaces in case people are planning crimes and luring people into things that are really dangerous.
Obviously, that's one thing.
What he's saying is all these platforms are afraid that they'll be blamed for something.
But the blame only goes one way.
I mean, it only becomes an issue when it's a right-winger.
No one has ever said, let's shut down Bernie Sanders.
Let's keep Bernie Sanders off the internet because some guy with a rifle, Bernie Bro, went off and shot at people.
Nobody said that.
It's only one way.
It's all against this speech.
Here's the insidious guy, Charles Blow, who really is the guy, I always say he's the best-named commentator because everything he does blows.
But like, this is really insidious, what he says here.
This is still on the Bill Marshall.
There was a point when the press thought it was very much in danger of having government regulation.
And they stepped in.
The big media companies stepped in and said, we're going to do this ourselves.
We're going to make sure that we have some standards.
The big tech companies could do the same thing.
I'm not saying that we shouldn't have federal regulation.
But I'm saying the idea that they think that we are supposed to be pitying them, that we're still helpless, we can't do it on our own.
Yes, you can do something.
And I think you can do something with morals and values and that says that this is our value system as companies.
And that that is a first step for the government.
See, that's so insidious because Blow doesn't know who he is.
He does not know that he's so dipped in left-wing ideology that what his idea of decency is, is left-wingism.
His idea of moral is left-wing.
And that's what a lot of these guys, including the New York Times, don't understand, that they are completely radicalized by being within a conformist structure.
You know, Noom is, I've been toying with this for a couple of days.
Noom is a health app that goes on your phone, right?
And you don't need to, it helps you manage your health and advises you on losing weight.
You can have a goal specialist, a community of members who keep you motivated and accountable to get in shape.
And it really, it really is kind of fun.
You know, it's a habit-changing solution that helps users learn to develop a new relationship with food through personal courses.
This is N-O-O-M.
It's based in psychology.
It teaches you why you do the things you do and arms you with the tools to break bad habits and replace them with better ones.
Noom's not a diet.
It's a healthy and easy to stick to way of life.
No food is good or bad or off-limits.
It gives you a guide.
You tell them what you want.
You tell them how you're built.
You tell them how old you are.
You tell them what you're looking for.
You tell them things like where, how you tend to slip, what kind of temptations pull you in.
You don't have to change your life in all one day.
Small steps, make big progress.
Sign up for a trial today at Noom, N-O-O-M, NancyO-O-Mary, N-O-O-M.com/slash Clavin.
What do you have to lose?
Visit noom.com slash Clavin to start your trial today.
That's noom.com/slash Clavin, the last weight loss program you will need.
And the first thing you'll need, of course, is you'll need to know how to spell Clavin.
Hyde Amendment Controversy00:07:24
Who knows?
Just make it up.
No, it's K-L-A-V-A-N.
If you don't think, if you don't think the left is on a slippery slope, just listen to this.
The California Democrats had their convention and they had resolutions.
And here is one of their resolutions.
Whereas protecting First Amendment rights is critical, but is also limited to exclude hate speech using the concept that offending statements first should be viewed through the lens of the party experiencing the hate.
And that Jews, Latins, Latinos, and Tinas, African American, Asian Pacific Islander, Muslims, disabilities, and LGBTI communities can be targets of oppression and hate speech for a variety of reasons.
In other words, anybody who complains can shut you down.
And this is the thing.
They really do believe this.
And you know, you can watch when you are, the conformity on the left is so great.
For instance, Joe Biden, he supported the Hyde Amendment.
The Hyde Amendment prevents federal funding on abortions.
Here he is in 2007.
Are you still opposed to public funding for abortion?
I still am opposed to public funding to abortion.
And the reason I am is, again, it goes to the question of whether or not you are going to impose a view to support something that is not a guaranteed right, but an affirmative action to promote.
See, the thing about this is, the Hyde Amendment is kind of ridiculous because they still support Planned Parenthood.
And they say, well, we support the part of Planned Parenthood.
Federal government still supports Planned Parenthood.
And they say, yes, but it's not the abortion part.
But money is fungible.
You can use it.
You know, if you support one part, they take the money from that part and they use it for abortions, which is mostly what Planned Parenthood does.
So the Hyde Amendment is kind of ridiculous, but it makes people feel better because those people who think abortion is a bad thing don't want their tax dollars going to it.
It has to be renewed every year so it's vulnerable to any Democrat majority.
The fact that Biden supported this had to be taken down, so he was bullied into changing his mind.
Here he is changing his mind.
For many years as U.S. Senator, I have supported the Hyde Amendment like many, many others have.
Because there was sufficient monies and circumstances where women were able to exercise that right, women of color, poor women, women are not able to have access.
And it was not under attack as it was then, as it is now.
But circumstances have changed.
If I believe health care is a right, as I do, I can no longer support an amendment that makes that right dependent on someone's zip code.
If in fact it was still available, I think, just as I've never attempted to impose my views on anyone else's the when life begins, I have never attempted to impose my view on who should pay for it if people fundamentally disagree with the position we take.
But folks, but folks, times have changed.
I don't think these guys are going to let up.
So people who are in conformist situations or in situations where only one idea is being spoken again and again because they're silencing all the other people, they tend to get radicalized.
So what he just said was absurd, right?
I don't impose my ideas on when life begins.
But if I say it begins at 15, will he impose his ideas then?
Of course he does.
Of course he'll impose his ideas.
We have to impose moral ideas on society.
It's just a question of how free people can be.
We want people to be as free as possible.
When they start killing other people, the freedom stops.
So everything he's saying is nonsense.
But you become more and more radicalized.
Every study shows this.
When you associate with only people who agree with you, you become more and more radicalized.
I want to play, and then we'll go to the break, but I want to play this woman, her name is Sophie Lewis, and she's a radical.
She's a radical on the subject of abortion.
I'm not going to say that she represents anybody in the mainstream.
I think she's kind of a loon.
But this is what happens.
And if you don't think that the slippery slope is slippery, and if you don't think this is where it goes, who will stop it if the rest of us are silenced?
Who will stop us?
Because we know that what they do on the left all the time is they define their idea as right and our ideas hate.
It's not like, oh, you know, we want to accept gay people into society.
It's if you disagree that homosexuality is moral, you are hateful.
It's not that they want to say, oh, let's stop bullying transgenders.
It's they want to say if you will not speak the words that this man in a dress is actually a woman, you are hateful.
And that silences one side, creates conformity, and ultimately creates radicalism.
If you don't think, I mean, read the New York Times.
It's now a radical, left-wing, woke, racist paper.
Okay, and this is where the abortion idea ends up.
And I recognize how controversial this is.
A form of killing.
It is a form of killing that we need to be able to defend.
I am not interested in where a human life starts to exist.
I see the forms of making and unmaking each other as sort of continuous processes.
The other end of the spectrum is the process of learning how to die well and hold each other and let each other go at the end of our lives as well as at the beginning.
But looking at the biology of this kind of hermicoreal placentation helps me think about the violence that, innocently, a fetus meets out vis-a-vis a gestata.
And that violence is an unacceptable violence for someone who doesn't want to do gestational work.
The violence that that gestator meets out to essentially go on strike or exit that workplace is an acceptable violence.
So the baby is committing violence against the mom, so the mom has to kill it to stop the violence.
So yeah, a loon.
But still, still, that kind of idea only becomes even possible when you're surrounded by people who all agree that abortion is just a thing.
Frankly, at least she's being honest.
She's saying, is killing, yeah, we got to kill these babies.
They're eating us alive.
These babies are this attack of the babies and they get inside you.
It's, oh my God, it's horrible.
So that voice is never going to be silenced.
Her voice is never going to be silenced.
Nobody is going to say that when a woman comes on and says killing babies is acceptable because of the violence they do to the mother.
Nobody at the New York Times is going to say that's a problem.
But if you date an evangelical woman, you've been radicalized by evil voices such as Milton Friedman.
That's the world at the New York Times, folks, and they're coming after you.
You don't think they're coming after you in the First Amendment.
You're just not paying attention.
All right.
If this wasn't hateful enough, we've got Michael Knowles coming up.
We will descend into the very bowels, the very bowels of right-wing radicalism in a moment.
First, I got to say goodbye to YouTube and Facebook.
Come to dailywire.com and subscribe.
It's only allows you 10 bucks a month, allows you 100 bucks for the year.
The hate is endless.
Pride Parades Go Hollywood00:13:14
Come on over.
Knowles, you hateful, evil guy.
It's so I. You know, I have to correct something that you just said.
You said people have to go to dailywire.com and not watch it on YouTube anymore.
We're not on YouTube.
There's no way that this, we're far too hateful.
We're far too right-wing.
I tried.
I couldn't even get my damn picture in the New York Times.
I mean, how hateful do you have to be?
Well, because you're not a Nobel Prize-winning economist from the 70s, so you can't.
I could win the Nobel Prize for hate, though.
Certainly.
Certainly if there were only a Nobel Prize.
You're just not as right-wing as Dave Rubin, Phil DeFrank.
I love Dave Rubin.
Dave Rubin has got to be the poster boy for this stuff because he's the sweetest, like most liberal guy.
He is the nicest, most centrist, sort of hears-all sides.
But he's like, he sucks you in.
I know.
Once you listen to him, next they'll be listening to you.
Because he brainwashes you by presenting you two sides of an argument.
That's how he gets it.
You got to stop that.
I got to tell you a thing that went out on Twitter.
I don't know where of you eating that cake.
I was embarrassed to know you, but that was his first time.
You know, it's just, I just really take all of my political cues from the preeminent philosopher of our time, Miley Cyrus.
So I wanted it to be clear.
I want to convince people that we should have lower taxes.
And I figured the only way to do that is to get naked and lick a cake.
We made a very essential argument.
Speaking of getting naked and licking cakes, I sent you out in my evil, hateful way to cover the gay pride parade, which I could hear from my house.
So it must have been a big one.
I'll say it out loud.
I'm Michael and I'm proud.
You didn't just send me out to annual Pride Parade.
You sent me this is West Hollywood.
And this parade is growing.
I don't just mean it's growing ideologically.
Obviously, they're happening in more cities around the country.
They're happening in more countries around the world.
In the Philippines, now there was one.
Really?
Yes.
But the West Hollywood one is literally growing inside.
That's why you could hear it from your house.
They're blocking off way more streets now.
This was all over San Vicente, all over Santa Monica Boulevard.
This was going on all over.
And actually in other places of LA too, but the main one, obviously, is in West Hollywood.
And to be fair, West Hollywood is to gay people what the jewelry district is to ascertain.
West Hollywood is a gay neighborhood and one of the biggest gay neighborhoods in the entire country.
So it's getting bigger physically.
It's getting bigger commercially.
Every corporation in America is getting in on this.
I mean, for one month, every corporation has rainbow flags.
I saw there's a sign by my apartment for a marijuana delivery service called Ease.
And even that, it said, smoke proudly, puff proudly.
What does this have to do with gay?
I don't know.
There were two people at the West Hollywood Pride Parade.
They were selling sushi.
They said, eat sushi naked.
One guy was all painted in rainbows.
One woman was all painted in black.
I don't know.
I was hoping beige or something, but that's okay.
So everyone's getting in on this.
Every politician is getting in on the Pride Parade.
So in LA, the LA County Sheriff's Office had a big rainbow sign.
The LA City Attorney's Office had a rainbow sign.
Chamber of Commerce, obviously.
Churches, too.
I like the churches that have pride, you know, because not, and this is nothing, it's not against gay people, by the way.
It's not against gay people.
It's just like it is one of the deadly sins.
Would you say it's the queen of all sin, to quote the church fathers and doctors of the church?
I think it is.
It's just, it's unnerving to have a church celebrate pride.
I mean, that's not gays, celebrate pride.
I think in the Bible it says pride goeth before a really good time and when everything's perfect, right?
It's either that or destruction.
I don't know.
But let's.
This is the thing.
It's not actually about gays.
I mean, it's not happy for gays to be accepted into society.
I really am.
Not only is it about paying.
It's not really about gays.
It's not about sex.
It's not even about sex anymore.
First of all, most people at Pride in West Hollywood and elsewhere are straight.
The majority of people who go to this now are straight.
This is a major change from older years when it was a bunch of gay guys.
Actually, kind of, it was sort of an ironic parade in the early days.
It was them dressing up like leather daddy.
It was like Halloween in San Francisco, where a guy once walked up to me, exposed himself, and said, you're the father of my children.
And I cracked up.
Yeah, it used to be this kind of shocking thing.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
And only the left could make transvestites boring.
I don't know how they did that.
How did they manage to take the humor out of being gay?
I don't know.
Because now it's not just mostly straight people.
They're children and babies at the Pride Parade.
And if Pride were primarily about sex, this would be a bigger scandal than it is.
But it's actually not primarily about sex.
Sex sells the parade.
But what it's all about is leftist politics.
This is what bugs me.
Okay, let's see.
So at the Pride Parade, there was more than sexual pride.
There was disability pride flags, fat pride, all around the country.
The logic here.
You're proud of being fat.
I know.
This is not.
At least shames me for being fat all the time.
There's a changing logic that we're seeing, which is it used to be, I was born this way.
You would never choose to be born this way, but I was born this way, and you should not ostracize me or oppress me for that.
Now the logic is a little different.
There were people in West Hollywood who said, there was one quote, it was interviewed on the news.
She said, should my family members choose to be LGBTQIA, all the letters, I would love them no matter what.
And you hear that word choice.
It's changed into something that was natural and I was born this way, into something you can choose.
You can choose your gender.
You can choose your sexual preference.
You can be one gender or one sexual orientation one day and change it on another day.
Sounds like so much fun.
When would you have time to get any work done?
I know.
Sometimes I choose to be single.
It's not adultery.
I choose to be single.
And pride is a totalizing ideology.
Do you know the theme, the motto of this year's Pride in West Hollywood, was hashtag just unite.
Just unite.
Don't worry about the conflicting ideologies.
Don't worry that transgenderism and homosexuality cannot coherently coexist.
Homosexuality is...
Well, feminism, really, yeah.
Feminism too.
Homosexuality is when boys like boys and girls like girls.
Transgenderism says there's no such thing as boys or girls.
Gender is mutable, changeable.
It's this totalizing ideology and it is a leftist one.
So I sort of expected, I hoped, I didn't expect, that there would be some pro-Trump people at Pride.
Donald Trump is the most pro-LGBT Republican nominee.
Absolutely.
Certainly.
He is working to legalize homosexuality, decriminalize it all around the world.
He waved the gay pride flag.
They were united against Donald Trump.
There could not be one.
There was not one, not one bad man.
In fact, by the way, when there was a, you know, the log cabin Republicans held a dinner at one of some local restaurant, and they complained about it.
They threatened the restaurant basically.
This happens.
I know a lot of the log cabin Republican guys.
That's the gay Republican group.
There was another one called Go Proud.
And yeah, always ostracized from the Pride community.
It was actually not just anti-Trump.
It was in D.C., it was anti-Jewish.
At the D.C. Pride Parade, they refused entry to people.
It always comes down to what is the best.
It's the Jews.
It's so strange.
There was a rainbow flag with the Star of David.
They weren't allowed to march.
Then they got one that said, let our people march, and they wouldn't let them do it.
This was the same issue with the Women's March.
The Women's March didn't like Jews either and had very anti-Semitic speakers.
And you realize the Women's March isn't about women.
And the Gay Pride Parade is no longer about gays or even sex.
You know, years ago, I was on the Fox show, the one that was Gretchen Carlson.
Yes.
And it was a panel.
And I made the mistake of having a thought out loud, you know, because usually she's just displaying the points.
Bullet points.
And I thought, I said, why is feminism leftist?
And the panel stopped, and everybody just kind of looked at me like, what do you mean?
And I said, well, you know, why can't women be more free as right-wingers, just like the rest of us, you know?
Like, why is it?
And they didn't even understand the question I was asking.
I mean, it's the same question with gays.
Why?
Does leftism help gays?
Well, I think a lot of it comes down to the so-called expression of the Pride Parade.
Because I talked to a lot of my gay conservative friends, and I have many of them.
And a couple of them liked the Pride Parade idea.
The vast majority of them despised it, do not go to Pride Parade.
They think it's outrageous.
They think it's degrading.
They think it's shallow.
and obviously it's leftist.
And do they still have the kind of display of sexuality, people in leather and people with their backsides hanging out of the...
Much less so.
I mean, you know, when I, growing up in New York, you'd go to the village on a Tuesday night and you'd see a lot more than that than even at the Pride Parade.
No, no, no.
Halloween was the night.
You would walk outside and think, like, I'm sorry.
You'd open the door and kind of close the door again.
I think this is what the left does.
It's sort of what pornography does, is the flagrant display of sex throughout our culture.
At first, it's sort of titillating and scintillating.
And then over time, it just becomes boring.
And I think this is what the left has done.
And so Pride has gone mainstream.
And it's, talk about mission drift.
I mean, now it is just, it is just a front for leftism.
Did you talk to people in the parade?
I talked to some people around.
Did you tell them who you were?
Absolutely not.
Are you insane?
I don't want to be tarred and feathered in rainbow feathers everywhere from Boas.
No, but I didn't find any conservatives.
No conservative, nothing.
Yeah.
It is really fascinating to me.
I'll tell you the other thing that's fascinating.
We're running out of time.
I'll have to talk about this another time.
It's fascinating to me that people are having less sex.
And so that, like, you have Miley Cyrus supporting abortion by licking a cake naked.
And you think, like, yeah, but people are having less sex.
So what you're saying is the sexiest thing you can do is kill your children as opposed to like actually have sex.
Well, this is the thing.
You would at least expect a gay pride parade would have a lot of sort of sexual imagery, much less so.
And you know those studies that show that people are having less sex.
Younger people are having the least amount of sex.
I know less sex than anybody.
Yeah, it's exactly the opposite of what you think.
It's because it's all virtual.
It's all virtual signaling.
It's all virtue signaling.
It's all digital.
And it's all ultimately selfish.
I mean, this is why you have a rise in loneliness and pornography.
And it really is something, this thing that it's transformed into a political meeting so that Jews are not allowed.
You're not allowed to be a gay person to support.
I mean, it's the opposite of diversity.
It is the opposite of diversity.
And it's amazing to me.
I mean, it still breaks my heart because I'm old enough to remember the New York Times being a good paper.
It's amazing to me, this kind of vicious attack on anybody who disagrees, on anybody who says, well, wait, let's stop for a minute.
Let's reconsider.
Maybe you can be gay and be a Republican.
It's just amazing the way they shut those guys up.
This is what this big conservative debate over the last few weeks has been about.
Can you have a neutral space where everyone has their own ideas, they're all tolerant, or will people, in the name of that liberal intolerant ideology, enforce a brand new, far more rigid morality on you?
And that's what we're seeing.
Really interesting.
What's your show about today?
Today is about how queer our culture has become.
No one can talk about that better than you.
So let me have a final reflection here.
You guys may remember I had Myron Magnet, the brilliant Myron Magnet on, to discuss his book, Clarence Thomas and the Lost Constitution.
I had not read the book at the time, but the company sent it to me, and Counter Books sent it to me.
And I finished this book.
It just may say something about me, but I finished this book at 2 in the morning.
I couldn't put it down.
Let me recommend this highly.
Myron is a friend.
I have a lot of friends.
They wrote a lot of books.
I don't recommend them all.
I don't come on and just make a point of it.
This is different.
And here's the reason.
It's like 130 pages long, 133 pages long.
And what Myron does, it's not about Clarence Thomas in the sense of, oh, now I'll know a lot about Clarence Thomas.
It is about how the Supreme Court has gutted our Constitution and how Thomas's writings point to a way to restore it to what it was meant to be.
Not to restore it to 18th century morality, but to restore this brilliant device that brilliant people invented for maintaining our freedom.
It's a hopeful book, although it's also a depressing book.
But when you finish these 130 pages, you'll have a very precise and concise idea of what went wrong, what the issues are, and how not to be distracted by the fight of the day, but to understand what we're trying to do as conservatives in restoring the Constitution as Jefferson and Madison and Adams wanted it to be.
Clarence Thomas, you know, the guy is already one of my intellectual heroes, but Myron, you know, he says he wrote this book after writing a lot about Barack Obama, and he needed to clear his mind and cleanse his mind of that victimology, of that identity politics, and go back to first things, the things that make this country what it is or what it was supposed to be.
Clarence Thomas and the Lost Constitution by Myron Magnet.
Highly, highly recommended.
Myron's a brilliant guy.
He's just one of the smartest people I know.
He got me started writing at City Journal and really helped me shape some of my ideas and shape the way I wrote.
But this is just, it's a terrific book, Clarence Thomas and the Lost Constitution, and I recommend it.
I got to stop there.
Production Crew Highlight00:01:04
I'll be doing Ben's show this afternoon.
If you want to hear more of me, I will be back on the radio as Ben, and I'll try to talk faster in a slightly higher voice.
I'm Andrew Clavin.
This is the Andrew Clavin Show.
I'll see you tomorrow.
Executive producer, Jeremy Boring.
Senior producer, Jonathan Hay.
Our supervising producer is Mathis Glover.
And our technical producer is Austin Stevens.
Edited by Adam Sajovitz.
Audio is mixed by Mike Cormina.
Hair and makeup is by Jessua Alvera.
And our animations are by Cynthia Angulo.
Production assistant, Nick Sheehan.
The Andrew Clavin Show is a Daily Wire production.
Copyright Daily Wire 2019.
Is queer a bad word?
We will examine why queer is not like the N-word.
Then the New York Times radicalizes a whole generation of leftists and President Trump wins big on his negotiations with Mexico.