The MSM embodies progressive feminist philosophies by criticizing Melania's footwear. Michael discusses with his brand-new cultural correspondent! Plus, Roaming Millennial, Allie Stuckey, and Amanda Presto join the Panel of Deplorables to discuss fake news about Defense Secretary Mattis defying Trump on the transgender policy, the US successfully shoots down a medium-range missile near Hawaii, and the fury over Evangelicals’ Nashville Statement opposing the sexual revolution.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
On Tuesday, mainstream media outlets perfectly embodied their progressive feminist philosophies by criticizing Melania Trump's footwear.
How empowering.
We'll discuss with our brand new cultural correspondent.
We'll bring him on a little later.
Plus, an all-female panel of deplorables featuring roaming millennial Ali Stuckey and Amanda Prestigiacomo to discuss fake news about Defense Secretary Mattis defying Trump on transgender policy.
The U.S. successfully shooting down a medium-range missile near Hawaii and fury over Evangelical's Nashville statement opposing the sexual revolution.
I'm Michael Knowles, and this is The Michael Knowles Show.
I can't wait to bring on our brand new cultural correspondent today.
You know, that's actually how I got my start in all of this.
I was the cultural correspondent here at The Daily Wire on The Andrew Klavan Show, so I figured it'd be good to pay it forward a little bit, bring some kid on, you know, give him his start in all of this, too.
We're going to bring him on a little later.
But first, we have to talk about this great triumph of feminism.
In this age of Trumpian misogyny, where women are judged on trivial issues and things like their looks, thank goodness we have the mainstream media to set things right.
Thank you.
High heels for high waters?
The President and First Lady depart Washington for flood-ravaged Texas.
Melania turned heads in a pair of black snakeskin stilettos, high-water pants, and an army green bomber jacket.
Aviator sunglasses, despite the rain, completed the Top Gun look.
An aide carried two pieces of Louis Vuitton luggage, presumably containing a change of clothes, to Air Force One.
Critics were quick to judge Melania's fashion choices, especially those high heels.
This was the headline in vogue.
Melania Trump's hurricane stilettos and the White House's continual failure to understand optics.
Twitterverse exploded.
Someone tell Melania she might want a pair of rain boots went one comment.
She's wearing stilettos.
So out of touch went another.
It is inspiring how far we've come.
It almost brings a tear to your eye, doesn't it, Marshall?
Yeah, I think she looks great.
She always looks great.
That was not the only example of this.
We have to cut to the Telegraph for their breaking news on this issue.
And I'll narrate it because they keep throwing text up on the screen.
Uh-oh, we have to rewind.
What did Melania Trump walk out in?
Hang on, is Melania Trump wearing stilettos to visit Houston's floods?
What?
Yes, America's First Lady has opted for very practical footwear.
Ha ha ha.
And it just goes on and on.
The Telegraph is not out of sync with the rest of the mainstream media here.
From the New York Times, Melania Trump off to Texas finds herself on thin heels.
Inc., Yes, it matters that Melania Trump wore five-inch stilettos on Trip to View Harvey devastation.
Slate, what was Melania Trump thinking with her Hurricane Harvey stilettos?
Vanity Fair, who wears stilettos to a hurricane?
Melania Trump.
Washington Post.
There was no pretense about Melania's heels, but sometimes a little pretense helps.
That went on to be followed by an 820-word article describing this great faux pas, this great injustice.
And then she changed her shoes on the plane, by the way.
So she only wore the stilettos out of the White House to then go on the plane to Texas, where she changed into something more suitable to that climate.
And I guarantee you, if she had walked out of the White House wearing sneakers, it would have been exactly the same, except the headlines would have all been about how Melania Trump is disrespecting the White House by wearing sneakers.
It's really hard to win with these people.
Now, the issue here, too, is that Melania Trump has been a wonderful first lady.
People said that she was going to be tawdry.
She was a model.
She took scantily clad photos, this and that.
She has comported herself with utter grace.
Let's compare her to recent Democrat first ladies.
She never said that the election of her husband was the first time she was proud of her country.
She never stole valor and said that she was under a Bosnian sniper fire.
She never slandered her husband's sexual victims and called them bimbos.
And so she's been excellent.
She's been an excellent role model for women.
And the supposedly feminist media have to attack her for her choice and shoes disingenuously.
And this is sort of ironic, because I looked into a little the history of high heels, and there are a couple theories on this.
One theory from Elizabeth Semelhack, who's the curator for the Bata Shoe Museum, I'm sure many of you have been there, says that, We're good to go.
And then another theory is that it started in the 16th century with European nobility.
Catherine de' Medici, Queen Elizabeth, who wore it to...
I'm sorry, Mary I of England, who wore it to make them look taller, make them look larger than life, and give them stature.
So, shockingly, there is one person on the left who came to Melania's defense.
Because Melania Trump apparently did something much worse.
Yeah, you see, she went to Houston wearing high heels.
Oh, and she's getting a lot of flack for it.
Online, predominantly, but it counts.
And here's my thing.
I don't know why anyone should care what anyone wears when they're on their way to help people.
Like, people are like, why is she wearing those heels when she's gonna help people?
Like, who cares?
Look at the pope.
You see how he dresses?
Look at that.
All white with giant bling.
He looks like he's going to a P. Diddy party.
Like, but we don't say, hey, he can't go out helping people dress like that.
And I know some people are like, Trevor, it's not about that.
It's about sensitivity.
You don't wear things like that to a disaster zone.
And I understand that.
But in Melania's defense, she lives in a permanent disaster zone, and that's what she always wears.
You know, that Pope line is, I think, the first time Trevor Noah has ever approximated a joke, which was pretty good for him.
But also, if the mainstream media, the left-wing media have lost Trevor Noah, the, you know, Jon Stewart's heir at The Daily Show on Comedy Central, they have really lost everything.
So with that...
I want to end this a little bit early and bring on my brand new cultural correspondent.
We've been looking around since I started this show.
It's very important to me that we give the next generation a chance to come up and teach old fogies like me something that, you know, maybe I don't know about the culture.
So let's bring him on.
We have our new Michael Knowles Show cultural correspondent, Andy.
Andy Millennial, thanks for coming on.
Yo.
Andy, as a millennial, what is your take on our culture broadly right now?
Well, speaking as a millennial, and I have to speak as a millennial because I've never read a book and I haven't seen a movie that was made before 2007.
So when I say speaking as a millennial, that's actually the only thing I can bring to this conversation is my millennialness, you know, my essential millennialness, my millennialism, you might say.
And as a millennial, I think I can speak for all millennials and can tell you the kind of world in which we millennials live.
And so that's why I reference that whenever I say anything whatsoever.
And, you know, I think as a millennial, I feel that the culture is in serious trouble.
You know, we have these new things.
You know, rock and roll music, I think, is making people, you know, immoral.
I knew I wasn't going to get through that.
I was really...
I blame you.
I almost...
I almost...
So we have our new cultural correspondent, Andrew Clavin, famed novelist and Daily Wire show host.
I did almost break on the I am a millennial, and so because I haven't read a book or seen a movie...
I was thinking, you know, remember on election night you played Pocahontas?
I think I asked you if your hand ever itched for the tomahawk.
I came on as Elizabeth Warren and Drew with a perfectly straight face asked me, Senator Warren, when you look at Mr.
Trump, do you ever feel your fingers itching for the tomahawk?
I thought that was the pinnacle of my deadpan, you know?
Andy Millennial.
You were wearing that big blonde wig.
Andy Millennial, yo.
Yo.
Yo.
Well, thank you for coming on.
A pleasure.
We have to talk about it.
I was wondering what you were doing in here, guys.
When a guy this young locks himself in a room, you've got to wonder.
It's true.
All the sounds coming out of here, you're saying, I'm not going anywhere near that door.
No, thank you, sir.
So, we have to talk about one of our favorite subjects.
Yes.
Feminism.
We have to talk about this wonderfully feminist response to Melania.
And, you know, one of our favorite websites, and I will take credit for introducing this to you, is everydayfeminism.com.
A true work of art.
I'm not convinced it's not satire.
Why has feminism become such a farce?
Well, I think just about everything.
I mean, first of all, this thing with the stiletto heels was unbelievable.
There's Trump hatred.
You know, what's wonderful is all these people in Texas are obviously rising to this level of nobility and grandeur and heroism.
And they're all the people that the media hates, you know?
It's like deplorable.
They're just making themselves look so bad.
You know, I think the left does the same thing over and over again.
They decide that there's an injustice.
And then they adopt the values of the oppressor, the person they think of as the oppressor.
So they think that men have oppressed women, which, by the way, in the West, completely untrue.
Right.
I mean, that's the first thing.
I mean, the thing is, in a society that's just starting out in this week, women have a very special role to play, which is the role of burying children.
And you have to protect them, and you have to keep them away from the wars and things like that.
We're so safe now that a lot of that stuff has gone by the boards, but that's only because in the modern world we're so safe.
So they decide there's this injustice, and then they say, well, we want to be what the oppressor is.
So if men are making money, why can't women make money?
If men work, why shouldn't women work?
If men are strong, why shouldn't women...
If men are dying younger, why shouldn't women die?
Exactly, which now they do.
And it's so dumb because essentially men and women are the only kinds of people who are different.
I don't really believe that black people and white people are different per se.
You know, culture has a lot of effects.
But men and women are actually different.
They actually have different strengths, different qualities, different things that make them men, that make them women.
And sure, there's always a bell curve.
You know, there's always...
Not all men are as macho as you and I, obviously.
Some are a little more effeminate, of course.
You know, you can't expect that kind of level.
We're at the very top of the macho belt.
But, you know, I think this whole idea that we should value women, and conservatives fall for it, too.
They'll say, you know, you want to see feminism, how about a woman with a gun?
And I think, you want to see feminism, how about a woman with a baby?
Yeah.
How would that be?
It's probably scarier, too.
Probably more intimidating.
Exactly.
How about a woman who's nurturing?
How about a woman who's tender?
How about a woman who doesn't care as much about money because she's doing something more important?
They even have these things where they'll say, if you paid a housewife for everything she did, it would cost millions.
Actually, if you paid a housewife for the actual physical labor she did, it wouldn't cost very much at all.
What she's devoting to it, creating a home and creating a moral universe and creating a family, that's invaluable.
And making the man sane.
And making the man a man.
Yeah, that's right.
You know sweet little Lisa's been gone now for a couple weeks visiting her family.
I know.
My life is in shambles.
My apartment is just destroyed.
Not true, Michael.
We had a great time shooting.
That's true.
Yeah, that's all I do is I go shooting and drinking.
That's pretty much all I've been up to.
My wife leaves town about two days later.
I'm out in the woods hunting deer with my teeth.
You know, I'm just running down deer.
Yeah.
Yeah, no, I mean, I think that is.
And they say, well, why should a woman only have value in what she does for a man?
And you think, well, we all have value in what we do for one another.
So it's just an absolutely materialist greed that has adopted the values of the people, the supposed values of the people they hate.
You know, you see it with, like, Antifa, right?
Antifa, they say that the fascists are the oppressors, and so they become fascists.
They wear masks and beat up each other.
That's right.
They literally wear black shirts, you know.
Yeah.
Do you think this has always been inherent in feminism?
You know, this indiscernible ability of the sexes, the sexes...
Women should just be men.
The sexes should be the same.
They can't complement one another.
Has that always been in first wave, second wave feminism, or is it...
Is it blossoming now?
Is it something new?
I think it's a question of revolution eating its own children.
I have a theory that a lot of these changes come at the time that they're supposed to come.
You know, that when women, when the civilization gets established, women start asking for more rights because they're, in a way, they're less valuable as women.
Children become less valuable, so women become less valuable as the bearers of children, and so they want more things to do to give them value.
I think that feminists attach themselves to those changes.
I was there, you know, as a millennial, I was there when some of this stuff was getting started.
And it was pretty easy.
You know, women said, we want to get in, we want to work, we want to do these things.
Everyone thought, that's fair.
You know, that's pretty fair.
attach themselves to that and then essentially accuse you if you oppose feminism and I am an anti-feminist I'm not like a you know sort of pro-feminist I'm an anti-feminist but they accuse you thinking that women shouldn't have choices and rights I believe a woman should choose whatever she wants to do Each one is an individual.
I believe I'm an individualist.
Whenever the circle of feminism and the circle of individualism intersect, I'm a feminist.
Yeah, I think the one circles down Sepulveda.
I don't know how lucky you're going to find that.
But as we see with Melania Trump, they're not really offering freedom.
What they're really offering is another way of oppression.
What they want to do is turn the oppression on us.
They want to say, when women were oppressed, now men will be oppressed.
Right.
You know, that's no way to build a society.
I think the changes that came for women, giving them more choices and things like that, are great.
But I really think this wave of feminism has accomplished nothing but bad and has attached itself to those good changes and sort of said, we did that, when they just didn't.
Yeah, it seems this third wave seems destructive in both a practical sense but also in a theoretical sense.
It seems post-structuralist.
A lot of these theorists, they use lowercase letters to write their names.
It's attached to an intellectual movement that deconstructs culture.
And I think it was Chesterton wrote That feminists posit, something to the effect of feminists posit, that when a woman serves her boss, that's freedom.
And when a woman helps her husband, that's slavery.
I always say that.
I didn't know Chesterton said that.
They basically say to you, don't serve a man who loves you and will dedicate his life to you and will help you raise your children and will help you support.
Dedicate it to a guy who would back over you and not even notice you were dead.
You know what I mean?
It makes absolutely no sense.
And it really, you know...
It hits at something very important because the entire human perception of the world is divided into yin and yang for the simple reason that there are men and women.
You know, I mean, they always want to say, well, men and women are exactly the same, but a transgender guy is a man with a woman inside.
And you say, well, wait, how does he know?
How does he know?
It's exactly the same.
How does he know he's a man with a woman inside?
He's just a double man.
He contains multitudes.
What's the diff, you know?
They're really taking something very essential to the human perception of the world and damaging it, making people afraid to acknowledge it and trying to bully people out of acknowledging it.
I think it has made, speaking as a millennial, I think it has made millennial dating a nightmare.
I think it's made millennial marriage a nightmare.
I think people don't know it.
And you know what else it's done?
It's ruined the movies.
Like, you can't go to a movie and see the girl get rescued anymore because she's supposed to be so strong.
And it's boring not to see the girl get rescued.
Most women have that fantasy.
And every man wants to rescue a woman.
That's all we want to do.
That's all we dream about.
That is all we live for, yeah.
That is true.
Speaking as a millennial as well, you have noticed that, that you...
I mean, I haven't dated in about 100,000 years at this point, but...
You don't ask women on dates.
It's all this kind of hanging out.
It's the way that you would talk to a buddy.
Sex is easier, which is cool.
I mean, that's great for the guys.
Yeah, absolutely.
But it is destructive.
And you know, your novels don't present a feminist vision of the world.
Only because I don't believe it's true.
I will present women who are tough or manly or masculine or stuff like that, but I will not write women the way feminists write women because I've never met a woman who resembled anything like those women.
I've met women who are very tough.
I've met women who are very manly, masculine.
But they're still not.
They're still women at some level.
And I just really don't write feminism because...
It doesn't exist.
It doesn't exist as an actual, real thing.
It just doesn't ring true.
It presents a vision of the world that none of us in our experience believes to be true, even the people who are propagating it, probably.
That's right.
Well, of course, that's why you get these things where they say, like, I was so upset that he said, you know, women aren't the same as men, that I almost fainted.
You know, and you're like, wait, what?
Yeah.
I started to cry, you know.
When he called me emotional, I almost burst into tears.
No, no.
And it's just, it doesn't make any sense.
And, you know, college professors can afford to lie, but novelists are writing fiction.
They have to tell the truth.
That's right.
Speaking of your stories that don't present a feminist view of the world, we've got one that we're working on around the clock in this room closet of a studio.
In this very room, we are creating the cure for the Clavenless weekend, another kingdom.
You are on which, by the way, and this is the only nice thing I will ever say to you, ever, you are doing an excellent job.
You are the performer of this story that I wrote, and I'm watching you act it out and do the voices and all this stuff, and it's really, actually, you almost have some talent.
Did we get that on tape?
Marshall, is that we sure we're recording?
No, I will cut it out.
Andrew, you're really just ruining the ego.
I need to put that on my IMDB or something.
Only the first positive.
No, thank you very much.
I mean, even I'm listening to it going, hey, this is pretty entertaining.
It is a great story.
It's really great.
It does ring a little true to me because it's about this failed Hollywood guy who wanders into a kingdom that is probably less surreal than...
Sepulveda Boulevard that he walked off of, or the studios.
But it's going to be really fun.
And we're releasing it.
I actually don't know exactly when we're releasing it.
It's going to be shortly after Labor Day.
And we're going to bring it out on Fridays to make up for the...
Because you don't have a show on Friday.
I don't have a show on Friday either.
Our desperate fans will...
And hopefully we'll stave off some of these disasters.
Yeah, God help us.
Yeah, the...
The world needs something to fill that gap.
That's right.
Absolutely.
So we're going to release it hopefully a little after Labor Day.
It'll be a weekend release.
We'll do like one episode a week.
And people can write in and send all their angry comments.
That's what we live for.
Stick to feminists.
Excellent.
Well...
Andy Millennial, thank you for being here.
It's a pleasure to have this great new cultural correspondent.
Andy Millennial, everybody.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Now we have to bring on our panel of deplorables.
And for this wonderful feminist episode, we have an all-female panel of deplorables.
Ladies, sorry to keep you waiting.
We have The Daily Wires, Amanda Prestigiacomo, The Blazes, Ali Stuckey, and of course, Roaming Millennial.
Ladies, none of you would call yourselves feminists.
Is that right?
Is that fair to say?
Yeah, I would think so.
Allie, was there ever a time when you would have called yourself a feminist?
Or was there some awakening you had when you realized these people were out of their minds and miserable?
Or have you always realized a correct vision of the world?
Well, I think I'm going to stun the masses here a little bit.
I'm probably closer now to calling myself a feminist than I used to be.
It's not because that I've changed, but I've kind of realized that I don't believe that the left should be able to monopolize every positive word that we have.
And if feminism at its core just means that the value of human beings are equal, then absolutely I believe that.
I simply disagree with the fact that we have to only focus on Fair enough.
But don't you think?
They always say this.
Feminists always say, well, feminism just means you believe in equal rights for everybody.
Well, then why isn't it called everybodyism?
It seems to me disingenuous because in all of our recent experience, feminists use that line and then spout a bunch of nonsense that has little to do with equal rights.
But I do see your point.
Who wants to let the left keep this?
Roaming, is there any alternative message to feminism that we as conservatives can offer to women?
Well, I think just egalitarianism.
You know, feminists always talk about how feminism just means equality.
Well, then why don't we just use the word equality, right?
I mean, and that's what egalitarianism is.
And, you know, let's say that we really do just want to make feminism all about equality.
We can't escape the fact that feminism is not just a word, right, with a meaning.
It's an entire political movement with its own set of beliefs that I think the longer and farther removed we are from first and second wave feminism, the more this third wave craziness gets established, the more aggressive it's actually becoming.
You know, as conservatives, I don't think we need to be afraid to say that we're not feminists or need to be afraid of being critical of feminism.
But, you know, it does sound bad to some people, especially those on the left, when you say, yeah, I'm not a feminist.
So I think we need to be really vocal not only about disavowing feminism, but also about explaining why and talking about actual instances of equality.
Absolutely.
I've been trying to do that my whole life because all I really care about is having women like me.
That is basically the main motivator in my life.
Amanda, I know that one of your favorite hobbies is irritating feminists and making them cry.
It is a very fun hobby.
It brings to mind that Sandra Fluke.
Remember Sandra Fluke, that Democrat contrivance?
She loved the contraceptive subsidies.
And there's that image of her...
And she's frowning, and she says, that's not funny.
What is it about pissing off feminists that's just so entertaining?
Well, they're just joyless to begin with.
That's why they are feminists, typically, because things don't work out for them, so they blame men for everything, and they kind of sulk in their own victimhood.
So they're just joyless, humorless people.
Everyone on the left is humorless anyhow, so they kind of fit right in.
Feminism is leftism.
Yeah, and it's true, though.
I mean, they're already joyless, so they're just constantly spitting out this, like, man-hating nonsense that makes no sense, and they're trying to rip Women of any femininity or anything that makes them different and special and unique.
So when I can bother them, it's especially satisfying.
But Amanda, how do you really feel?
You know, come on, be honest with us.
Excellent.
That's really wonderful.
Now, I'm very sorry to say this to all of our viewers, but we have to say goodbye to Facebook and YouTube.
If you're already a subscriber to The Daily Wire, thank you very much.
We appreciate it.
It helps us keep these lights on.
It helps us hire cultural correspondents like our new one, Andy Millennial.
And...
What you have to do is go over to dailywire.com right now.
It costs $10 a month or only $100 a year to subscribe.
You get me, you get the Andrew Klavan show, you get the Ben Shapiro show, you get the Leftist Tears Tumblr.
A delicious, delicious way to drink up your salty Leftist Tears.
You can have them hot or cold.
It is the must-have item of the century.
So go over there right now, dailywire.com.
We'll be right back.
The mainstream media have breathlessly reported that Defense Secretary Mattis is going rogue and defying President Trump's ban on transgender servicemen.
NPR is saying Mattis puts a hold on the transgender ban.
Washington Post is saying transgender ban is frozen as Mattis moves forward.
USA Today, Mattis freezes transgender policy, but it turns out that was all fake news.
In reality, Mattis is doing precisely what Trump directed in a recent White House memo.
Roaming, which is the main culprit here for this terrible journalism?
Is it malice or is it laziness?
I think it's a combination, right?
I don't think it's fair for us to say that they only have one fault.
Am I right?
That's absolutely true.
The world could end in fire or ice.
What do you think is the primary motivator here, though, knowing that both are certainly involved?
Well, I think, you know, first off, to be fair about this, the Trump administration has had, I think, a history of a little bit of bad communication, especially with its policy matters, right?
They could have been more clear about what was happening.
Mattis could have come out sooner.
There could have been more clarity.
I mean, there's millions of people who follow Trump on Twitter.
This could have been clarified a lot sooner.
But at the same time, I think the media, we can't act as if they're not acting with a specific agenda with the purpose of trying to delegitimize the presidency and make it look like Trump is doing a horrible job.
So, yeah, I mean, I think.
Roman, you said that in a very diplomatic way, which is that there has been some perhaps not excellent communication from the White House.
Ali, is there any disagreement between the tweets about policy and the actual policy agenda itself?
There's never any disagreement between reality and what Twitter says.
That is where I go for my daily dose of reality is Twitter.
He sort of makes reality as he says it and tweets it.
Exactly, exactly.
But this whole story, obviously, as we know about Mattis freezing, this is absolutely not true.
He really didn't have any option or any wiggle room in the memo of whether he was going to be able to freeze it, stop the ban or anything like that.
That's not even possible.
The only thing that he was actually able to do was to maybe advise Trump otherwise, but he didn't really have any wiggle room in what Trump told him to do.
He is absolutely going to carry this out, and I'm not really sure where the loss of translation happened.
Amanda, this raises an important question.
Shouldn't the Democrat hacks who play journalists on TV be focusing on other more plausible fictional non-traversies like the Russia hacked the election narrative?
Yeah, they should definitely go back to that.
They got a lot of mileage out of that one because it was so ambiguous and there's a lot of, like, You know, criminal, they just throw in the word criminal, gets everyone all fired up.
They got a ton of mileage out of that.
I mean, it's come to a close since we're seeing like ties with the Clinton side and all this other stuff.
But yeah, they got a lot more mileage out of that.
I mean, this lie that they told because they're trying to show that there's, you know, a lot of volatility in the Trump administration and Mattis was sticking it to Trump, which is not true.
You know, they tried that and it got Outed real quick.
I mean, even Vox, which is basically fake news in and of itself, called out this lie.
So this is not...
They need to go to more ambiguous things, not something so concrete that be disproved so quickly.
The ambiguity is the key on these tactics because you never really knew quite what they were saying about Russia.
It was Trump colluding with Putin.
Was the campaign trying to get some new benefit to the Trump corporation?
Were they this, that?
It was really good.
They only got one day out of this maddest fake story.
But we have to move on to much less important issues.
As Kim Jong-un shoots test missiles over Japan, the United States has successfully shot down a medium-range test missile near Hawaii.
One of our own test missiles, not one of Kim Jong-un's.
Ali, is this all to show that miniature Stalin that we mean business, that he won't be able to attack another island successfully?
Or are we actually gearing up for war here?
I think that it could be a little bit of both.
Now, it's hard to absolutely say, but I think Trump meant what he said when we will meet North Korea with fire and fury if we have to.
Now, they've also said that it's not possible to run out of diplomatic options, that all options are on the table.
I don't think that they're going to wait around any longer and waste their time with cheap talk.
When people's lives are at stake, especially our own people's lives.
So whether it's just a form of intimidation or saying, hey, we're gearing up for something big, obviously, I think North Korea should probably watch out.
That would be the safe bet for little Mr.
Un.
Roaming, this story has gotten significantly less media attention than Melania Trump's heels.
Oh, no, we lost roaming?
All right, I'm leaving.
Get me out of here.
Get out of here.
I don't want any more part of this.
Okay, I'll...
I'll stick on you for that, Allie.
You're going to settle for us, Michael.
Hey, that is fine by me.
This is what I love about the all-female panel of deplorables, because if I had Paul and Jacob on right now, I would cancel the show indefinitely.
Well, Romy didn't have the right opinion, so she's gone.
Yeah, speaking of Stalinism, Ali, this story, this Kim Jong-un story, has gotten significantly less attention than Melania Trump's heels.
Do we just need to...
Of course.
Do we just need to burn the whole MSM to the ground and create a new one and just start all over again?
Wait, is that not why your show exists?
I thought that's why you did this whole thing.
That is the reason I wake up in the morning.
I think I can start watching you.
That is true.
We might need better digs, you know?
We've got this brick wall over here.
But hey, maybe after time we can move into the Washington Post studios or the New York Times.
That'd be great.
Amanda, will this test succeed at putting our allies at ease?
Or are they still nervous about Mr.
Trump and our willingness to stop an attack on them?
No, I think, I mean, I think it helps.
I think the plan is, from the Trump administration, is that because this problem has been kicked, you know, they kicked the candle on the road so many times, so many different administrations, it is kind of on Trump right now.
So Trump is talking tough as he should, and he's showing, you know, doing these tests to show force and kind of like ease our allies.
In the meantime, he's working diplomatically, and he's working with China, which is what he has to do.
So This stuff for show is good and it's important, but in the meantime, President Trump is working with China to put pressure on North Korea, you know, to stop providing them all this monetary support.
This way they can, you know, their nuclear utility, they can kind of drop down on the nukes.
That's kind of what's going on right now.
And then eventually we can handle them.
Possibly militarily or get rid of whatever nukes they have.
So that's kind of the plan right now.
So this stuff seems for show, but it's all part of a bigger overlapping plan.
That is the show business strength of President Trump, right?
He does his crazy dance over here.
And then in the meantime, he has his negotiators working with China and working with North Korea and with our allies.
And again, it's very strategic.
And speaking of show business, we have to talk about gays.
Left-wing leaders in the mainstream media, but I repeat myself, are up in arms after a coalition of evangelical leaders issued a statement affirming traditional Christian views regarding homosexuality and transgenderism.
Specifically, I'm shocked.
I'm sure we're all shocked about this.
Amanda, the Nashville statement centers around issues of sexuality, desire, orientation, gender identity, as we now call it.
But while it speaks at length about homosexuality, which Jesus does not explicitly discuss in the Gospels, it doesn't mention divorce.
It doesn't talk about divorce, which Christ speaks explicitly to in the New Testament.
Is this statement myopic?
Was there mention of adultery?
I read the statement quickly, and it's basically about the complementarity of the sexes and about sexual desires.
It might be in there.
I read it quickly, but I don't remember any particular descriptions of adultery and how the evangelical churches will deal with that.
Yeah, I mean, so overall, I thought it was a good statement because this is the kind of stuff that's slipping from our grip is that these differences in biology that the left just doesn't want to acknowledge.
So I thought it was good in that sense, and especially because this transgender movement is moving so fast, like a freight train, and it's affecting even children.
I mean, five-year-olds are not exempt from the transgender movement.
I mean, we're seeing this in kindergartens.
So it was an important statement and very useful.
I think they could have even gone farther and talked about adultery and divorce and things of that nature.
But yeah, overall, this was needed and this was a breath of fresh air to see, you know, Christian leaders actually combating this and going full force at them and saying, this is what we stand for and we're not going to bend.
It's kind of a step towards taking back the culture.
And I should correct that a little bit.
I should say it does talk about, as Christ talks about, marriage and sex outside of marriage and sex within marriage.
So I suppose that could be read to mean adultery, that could be meant to describe sex before marriage.
And a lot of times when people are discussing Christ talking about homosexuality, they talk about sex outside of marriage and the definition of marriage.
But it does seem to be a pretty basic statement of the...
Traditional Christian and traditional Western view of sexuality and of gender.
Yeah, this was not anything new, and that's why the heads exploding is rather odd, because this is...
I don't understand what's so crazy about this.
I mean, this has been Christianity forever, so...
Do you think the media are feigning the shock?
Do you think the lady doth protest too much, methinks?
Or do you think they really are just ignorant of the history of their civilization?
Um, it could be both.
I wouldn't put ignorance past them.
Um, but, but I don't know, you kind of see this with, with feminists a lot, like they'll project a lot, like, cause they want, you know, they kind of like yearn for that strong male figure that they can't grasp.
So they're just like, I don't need it.
Um, so, you know, it could be a little bit of that where that's just like projection and actually the stuff does seem kind of nice.
Um, you know, they have these differences with the sexes, so they just bash it when, when they hear it.
So it could be a combination of both.
It is always back to the feminism with this one.
It is always back to the feminism.
Ali, how come all anybody on the left wants to talk about these days is unconventional sex?
If you talk about tax rates, if you talk about healthcare, nobody cares.
You can't really get them that riled up.
But when you start talking about specifically homosexual sex and transgender identity, which affect less than 2% of the population.
Homosexuality engages 2-4% of the population.
Transgenderism would engage less than 2%.
Why is this all they care about when it's such an apparently minor issue?
Yeah, I think that's a pretty...
Easy question to answer.
I think it's because the left, not just politically, but ideologically, theologically, wed sexuality with identity, which God is very clear about that in the Bible, that your sexuality is not your identity, especially if you're a believer, your identity is in Christ.
And when your identity is in Christ, that comes along with some things.
Jesus is very clear, maybe not about specifically homosexuality, but by following him, you're denying yourself, not just gay people, but anyone denying yourself, taking up your cross and following him.
For some reason, there's been a loss of translation between that and homosexuality and transgenderism.
And those sins, which Christianity laid out very clearly, that's what it is, are no different than anyone else's sins, but they are still sins.
And we are so afraid of saying anything is right and wrong.
We're so afraid of laying out morality.
We're so afraid of being called bigots.
That we're especially not going to say that someone's sexual identity is wrong and that it's antithetical to Christ's teachings.
So I completely agree with Amanda.
A refreshing just reminder of the sanity of the Christian church, especially if you are a believer.
It was nothing new.
It just reiterated everything that the Bible says.
And for people who are believers, they also read this through the lens that this is the most loving thing that you can tell anyone, no matter what their sexual orientation is, because for the believer, we believe that there is freedom and joy found in obeying Christ.
I really like what you said about identity because a lot of times I think people, especially on the left, focus a little too much on sex.
They're always so consumed with the idea of sex.
But the real issue is the identity here.
And this is true of the white identitarians on the fringe of the right.
This is true of the cornucopia of intersectional identities that people have on the left, is they attach their identity to some creation, to some creature.
So you can always think of that kid in high school who's so frustrating and so annoying because...
He likes that one band, you know, and you've never heard that band before.
And that's really where he finds his identity.
And the same is true of all these other basically superficial things like my skin color or my Rachel Maddow glasses or something to that effect.
And I'm sorry, did I cut you off, Amanda?
Did you have something to say?
Oh, yeah, no, no.
That's a fantastic point.
Just wanted to add that it also kind of kicks the heck out of moral relativism.
There are actually moral standards that we should uphold.
And that is really frightening to the left because then, you know, if you fall short, then you feel bad about yourself and nobody should be shamed and you need to get rid of anything that would ever deter your actions.
You should be free to do whatever you want, which again does not produce any real happiness as we've seen.
So, you know, that really startled them as well, that there are actual standards and everything is not relative.
You know, there are actually things that must be upheld, which bothers them to no end.
The truth above all things.
Absolutely.
Ladies, thank you for joining.
Allie Stuckey from The Blaze.
Amanda Presto Giacomo for The Daily Wire.
You know, if all female panels of deplorables is feminism, then sign me up.
but it's not feminism, so I need to put on my smart glasses for the final thought.
Ideologies, by definition, oversimplify and therefore pervert our view of the world.
Oakeshott in Rationalism and Politics defines ideology as the formalized abridgment of the supposed substratum of rational truth contained in the tradition.
By the end of that process of theorizing, the world becomes, to varying degrees, unrecognizable.
And this is the trouble with feminism.
The vision of the world that feminism presents simply isn't true.
It is particularly destructive because it undermines the atomic human relationship between a man and a woman.
It claims that the sexes are either irreconcilably at odds, or conversely, that they're the same, indiscernible from one another.
But every one of us knows that, in reality, neither of those are true because, fundamentally, men and women complement one another, and what a joy that is.
At least, that's what I keep telling these all-female panels of deplorables.
