All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 10, 2019 - The Michael Knowles Show
47:47
Ep. 412 - The Libs Who Cried Wolf

No one shows up to an "Impeach Trump" rally in DC, Democratic presidential frontrunner Joe Biden collapses in early primary polls, and Tulsi Gabbard gets woke. Finally, the NYT publishes the dumbest article on the Internet today! Date: 09-10-2019 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
An impeach Trump rally in Washington, D.C. draws a record crowd of zero people.
Democratic presidential frontrunner Joe Biden collapses in early primary polls.
We examine what that means for the candidate at the party in 2020.
Then another Democratic candidate, Tulsi Gabbard, gets woke on borders and late-term abortion.
And finally, the New York Times gives us The single dumbest article on the internet today.
And there was a lot of competition.
All that and more.
I'm Michael Knowles and this is the Michael Knowles Show.
So much to get to today on this overarching topic of the Democrats who cried wolf.
Of what it seems to be from the presidential race, to the impeach Trump movement, to the mainstream media.
The Democratic base just seems to be tired of being lied to.
So we'll get to that in a second.
First though, we got some breaking news that just came out.
President Trump has fired his national security advisor, John Bolton.
He released the news on Twitter, of course.
Where else would he release it?
And President Trump tweeted, I quote, I informed John Bolton last night that his services are no longer needed at the White House.
I disagreed strongly with many of his suggestions, as did others in the administration.
And therefore, I asked John for his resignation, which was given to me this morning.
I thank John very much for his service.
I will be naming a new National Security Advisor next week.
This is a bad move for the administration.
This is really bad news.
It's too bad.
John Bolton was one of the sharpest people in the White House with the greatest grasp on international politics.
He was despised by the left and many people on the right, which is how you know that he had done a pretty good job.
I would imagine the timing of this firing has something to do with the Taliban dust-up.
There was going to be this Taliban meeting, secret negotiations at Camp David, and it looked like the State Department under Mike Pompeo was pushing for that.
It looked like John Bolton as a national security advisor was pushing against that.
Then the meeting was put off.
Looks like John Bolton won that battle, but he may have lost the war because he is out.
It was always a little bit of a strange move for John Bolton to be picked as the national security advisor to President Trump.
And the reason for this is that President Trump ran in 2016 essentially as a dove.
He did say he wanted to destroy ISIS, so he had a little bit of that hawkish rhetoric, but broadly he was an anti-war candidate.
John Bolton has always favored a more aggressive foreign policy.
I think he wrote an op-ed in the New York Times when the Iran deal was being discussed that said something to the effect of, to stop Iran's bomb, bomb Iran.
So it always seemed like a little bit of a strange match, but I was glad that he was in the administration just because he's super smart.
Even if Bolton was an odd choice, it was healthy for Trump to have him there because it gave some balance to the White House and because the guy's just so sharp and so experienced.
But I guess when I saw this news on Twitter, it occurred to me that today is just going to be defend John Bolton against Species Attacks Day because there is a popular narrative on the right That John Bolton is basically Bill Kristol with a mustache, or that John Bolton is a neocon warmonger, or that John Bolton is some awful, terrible person.
And it's just ridiculous.
John Bolton, one of the lines that he brings up a lot in politics is that politics is complicated.
Geopolitics is complicated.
And to try to put him in one of these little categories as neocon or paleocon or something is ridiculous.
He isn't...
In any way, easily categorized because he's an advanced and sophisticated mind.
The one way I think you could describe John Bolton's view of the world is to put American interests first.
I mean, you could describe him as an American first thinker.
And when John Bolton was the ambassador of the United Nations, this was very clear.
He was not confirmed.
President Bush had to appoint John Bolton as a recess appointment.
And earlier, when...
When Ambassador Bolton, I guess is how you would now refer to him, earlier when Ambassador Bolton was speaking to the UN, he made very clear his view of America's role in the world, and it was a view that I think most Trump supporters would agree with, which is that there is no such thing as the United Nations.
There is the interest of the United States, which may or may not coincide with the preferences of the international community, but regardless of what all those other countries want, the U.S. will pursue her national interest.
That I want to leave with you in this very brief presentation is where I started.
There is no United Nations.
There is an international community that occasionally can be led by the only real power left in the world, and that's the United States, when it suits our interests.
And when we can get others to go along.
The secretariat building in New York has 38 stories.
If you lost 10 stories today, it would make a bit of difference.
This kind of mindless The creation of the United Nations as something different than what it's in the United States' interest to do isn't going to sell here or anywhere else.
The only question, the only question for the United States is what's in our national interest.
And if you don't like that, I'm sorry, but that is the fact.
Love that guy.
The only way that I'll be okay with him leaving his NSA is if they put him up to be the UN ambassador again.
That's my view on John Bolton.
But today's show is not about the Trump administration.
It's about the alternative.
It's about how the left seems to be collapsing.
And it seems to be collapsing rather quickly, all at once.
What's going on?
We'll get to it in a second.
But first, I've got to thank our friends over at ExpressVPN.
This...
Topic is now more important, now more than ever, because everybody wants your data.
You can't trust certain elements in Silicon Valley to treat conservatives fairly, but if you can't do that, then how can you trust them to handle your privacy and personal online data?
That is why I strongly recommend using ExpressVPN every time you go online.
I know what you're thinking.
I used to think it too.
Oh, nobody wants my data.
Nah, me?
They don't care what I'm looking at.
No, no.
That's okay.
BS. Big tech companies can use your IP address to match your internet activity to your identity or your location.
And if you aren't listening to this show, something tells me, you look at some pretty weird stuff online, okay?
I know what you do.
You go into that incognito tab and then you start looking at all those seedy websites like dailywire.com.
When I use ExpressVPN, search engines and media sites can't see my IP address at all.
My identity is masked and anonymized.
ExpressVPN has the added benefit of encrypting 100% of your data to keep you safe from people who you don't want to have your data.
Guys, just do it right now.
One tap of a button and you are protected.
Make sure that you protect your data because there's a lot of stuff on there that you do not want getting out to other people, especially people who are not friendly to your political points of view or not friendly to you, period.
ExpressVPN is the answer.
Protect your online activity today with the VPN that I trust to keep my data safe.
Visit expressvpn.com slash michael.
To claim an exclusive offer for my listeners.
That is expressvpn.com slash michael, M-I-C-H-A-E-L. For three months free with a one-year package, visit expressvpn.com slash michael to get started.
Today's show is not about the Trump administration.
We have plenty of time to talk about the Trump administration.
It's about the alternative because when I look around, not just the rank and file left, not just the presidential candidates, not just the mainstream media, I see it all collapsing at once.
You know, like Ernest Hemingway said, gradually, then suddenly.
There was an impeach Trump event yesterday in D.C., Or at least there was supposed to be an impeach Trump event yesterday in D.C. It was going to be outside of the Capitol...
Where all the lawmakers are going to gather because Congress is back in session and they wanted to send a message to impeach President Trump.
This was supported by some of the biggest organizations on the left.
By Indivisible, by MoveOn.org, by Need to Impeach, Stand Up America, March of Truth, By the People, Common Cause, Free Speech for People, Democracy for America.
How many of these organizations do these people have?
Progressive Democrats of America, Credo, and Democrats.com.
Here's what the website read.
In advance of this event, quote, the president, vice president, and all civil officers of the United States shall be removed from office on impeachment for and conviction of treason by bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors.
The charge of high crimes and misdemeanors covers allegations of misconduct by officials such as perjury of oaths.
Abuse of authority, bribery, intimidation, misuse of assets, failure to supervise, dereliction of duty.
They go on all these awful, terrible things that Trump is alleged to have done.
There was just one problem with their event.
Nobody showed up.
Nobody showed up.
Zero people.
This was a big event that had been promoted by a lot of very big groups.
Why did nobody show up?
You know, Breitbart was the one who figured out that this event was a total flop.
And then the reporters at Breitbart reached out to some of the people who were putting it together.
No response.
And then immediately after this was reported on, the website took down the event.
They wanted to forget about it.
Why did nobody show up to this event?
Is it because all of a sudden everybody loves Trump?
I don't think so.
Is it because nobody in the country wants to impeach Trump?
No, I don't think so.
I think it's because even leftists are tired of being taken for suckers.
And they're tired of being taken for suckers by their own alleged leaders.
You know, the left has cried wolf for three years.
More than three years.
This is the result of that.
The left put all their eggs in one basket and that basket was the Russia collusion narrative.
We're going to impeach Trump because he's a traitor, because he colluded with Russia and it just didn't happen.
So then it was Stormy Daniels.
Trump slept with a porn star and we're going to take Trump down for that.
Then it was his finances.
Then it was back to Russia again.
Then it was racism.
Then he called neo-Nazis very fine people, except then you look at the tape and he didn't call neo-Nazis very fine people.
He explicitly condemned them.
And then, and then, and then, and then, there was never any argument for impeachment.
And the left knows this, and the rank and file knows this, and they're sick of it.
Look, it's not that the left doesn't want to impeach Trump.
It's just, you know, you've got to put on your pants in the morning.
You've got to walk out the door.
You've got to take the bus.
You've got to go over to the Capitol.
You've got to hold up the signs and impeach Trump.
And they don't believe it anymore because it's not going to happen.
It is not going to happen.
The anti-Trump rhetoric from the mainstream media and Democratic candidates is still in a fever pitch.
But it doesn't correspond to reality.
Compare the resistance, the Trump resistance, to the Tea Party.
Think about these two things.
Tea Party, 2010, even a little bit before that.
Totally legitimate movement rose up in opposition to a massively unpopular law called Obamacare that tried to take over a sixth of the economy that took away Americans' doctors, that made prices go up, made the quality of care decrease, that unconstitutionally forced Americans to buy a private product.
From the federal level.
Also, the Tea Party was running against a terrible economy.
Barack Obama comes in in a recession, sure, but then because of his awful economic policies, there was no recovery.
Slowest recovery in history.
They also, in the Tea Party, were running against a very unpopular corporate bailout.
So, the big banks, I mean, there were several bailouts, but there was the bailout of the banks, and then there was the unpopular stimulus plan.
The banks, in part, get us into this mess, and then what do we do?
The federal government uses our tax dollars to bail them out.
There was this slush fund stimulus package that didn't bring with it any jobs.
They also were running against expanded wars in the Middle East.
Barack Obama expanded wars in the Middle East almost immediately after he got elected.
And what did the Tea Party do?
They had these legitimate grievances.
They were very specific.
They were very particular.
They organized.
They rallied their candidates.
They won 1,000 seats around the country.
That's impressive.
And the thing I always noticed about Tea Party rallies, I went to a number of them.
You know, all the campaigns, I was working on campaigns at the time, they would all stop by these Tea Party rallies.
The Tea Party, they'd show up and they'd leave their rallies and the place looked cleaner than it did before they got there.
You know, they were very well behaved.
Say whatever you will about the ideology of the Tea Party, which I think was really positive for the country.
But they were well-behaved.
They were serious people.
Compare that to the resistance.
The resistance is a bunch of aggrieved ex-hippies and blue-haired feminists who don't like Trump's mean tweets.
That's it.
What are they running against?
Are they running against some unpopular law?
What's the unpopular law?
Tax cuts?
Yeah, we need to sweep the country because Trump let us keep more of our money.
Is it the economy?
No, the economy is doing great.
Is it wars in the Middle East?
If anything, President Trump has curtailed wars in the Middle East.
They're not running against anything real.
It's not even that the left doesn't want to impeach Trump anymore.
It's just that many of them are very tired of having their time wasted.
And you see this in the presidential polls.
You know, you see this, the Democratic frontrunner right now is collapsing.
Terrible polls coming out for Joe Biden out of Iowa and New Hampshire must win early primary states.
We'll get to that in one second.
But first, two to three guys will experience some form of male pattern baldness by the time they're 35.
Okay.
That's the bad news.
The good news is, with today's advancements in science, Keeps offers proven treatments that can combat the symptoms of hair loss.
Let me tell you guys.
Look at me.
I'm not, like, the biggest Adonis in the world, okay?
I'm not the biggest athlete.
I was not the captain of the football team.
But I always did pretty well with the ladies.
How?
Because I've got, you know, a pretty solid head of hair over here.
Keeps has revolutionized the way that men are treated for hair loss.
You used to have to go to the doctor's office for your hair loss prescription.
Now, thanks to Keeps, you can visit a doctor online and get medication delivered to your home.
No more waiting rooms, no more pharmacy checkout lines.
Get doctor attention and discreet drug delivery, all from the comfort and privacy of your own home.
Prevention is the key here.
You can do it.
Keeps treatments really work.
They are up to 90% effective at reducing and stopping further hair loss.
But the sooner you start using Keeps, the more hair you will save.
You've got to act fast.
You've got to act now.
Many men will experience hair regrowth even with Keeps treatments.
It's really important, guys.
It's the same thing.
I talk about this so much, especially for guys.
We just get a little task lazy.
You know, we just get a little, we don't want to take the five minutes to go and take some action.
This can really change your life.
If you are ready to take action and prevent hair loss, go to Keeps.com slash Knowles, K-N-W-L-E-S, to receive your first month of treatment for free.
That is K-E-E-P-S dot com slash Knowles.
Bad news for Joe Biden, Democratic frontrunner.
According to new CBS YouGov polls out of Iowa and New Hampshire, early primary states, Biden's lead has all but vanished.
This is the new poll.
Biden, 29% in Iowa.
Do you know where Bernie Sanders is, number two?
26%.
3% difference?
That is nothing.
That is zero.
How about Elizabeth Warren?
She's down there at 17%.
New Hampshire, Warren is actually leading now, 27%.
Biden is in second place in New Hampshire, 26%.
Bernie at 25, so it's more or less a three-way tie.
Nevada?
At least Biden's going to win Nevada, right?
No.
Sanders is up 29.
Biden is second at 27.
Warren is down there at 18.
Only in South Carolina does Biden have a commanding lead, 43%.
Sanders has 18.
Warren has 14.
And...
Why is that?
The reason, this is still the one good news for Biden, is that the other candidates have very little black support.
Democratic Party, you need black support to win.
Biden still has black support.
There are more black voters in South Carolina, so he's doing better.
The bad news for Biden is that Democrats are now rejecting the electability argument.
They're clearly rejecting it.
Biden's only pitch is, vote for me, I'm the best guy to beat Trump.
Why am I the best guy to beat Trump?
Is it because my policies are the most exciting?
No.
Is it because my policies are the most popular?
No.
Is it because I've accomplished the most?
No.
It's because I'm the most electable.
Okay, the minute that you fall down in the polls, the minute you lose Iowa, you're no longer the most electable.
The minute you lose Iowa and New Hampshire, you're definitely not the most electable.
It is a house of cards that Joe Biden is standing on right now.
I think it is the same reason.
I think basically Democrats are sick.
The Democratic base, the left-wing base, they're sick of being played for suckers.
Could you imagine being told Joe Biden is the most electable?
Joe Biden ran for president in 88, didn't get anywhere because he lied and plagiarized.
Then he ran in 2008, didn't get anywhere because he's nobody, because he's nothing.
And now you're going to say after two different times, in the 80s, in the 2000s, now...
Ten years later, all of a sudden, Joe Biden is the most electable candidate.
People aren't going to believe that.
You can't just keep lying to them all the time.
Same thing, not just in the presidential race.
This is true at the governor's level.
This is true at the Senate level.
Stacey Abrams.
Do you remember Stacey Abrams?
Stacey Abrams ran for governor of Georgia.
She was like a...
Representative in the Georgia House of Representatives.
Stacey Abrams runs for governor of Georgia against Brian Kemp, and she loses in 2018.
She didn't even lose by a little.
It's not like it was 300 votes that separated it.
She lost 50.2 to 48.8.
So, you know, close election, but not that close.
Didn't even trigger an automatic recount.
If it had been closer, it would have gotten an automatic recount.
She was trying to get recounts to get to the automatic recount.
Then, after it became clear that she lost, she wouldn't concede.
She still hasn't really conceded.
She still pretends that the election was stolen from her unfairly.
Now she's coming out with a new book.
I kid you not.
Stacey Abrams.
Georgia House of Representatives.
Failed candidate for governor.
This is her new book.
The Abrams Playbook.
The Strategy and Path to Victory in 2020.
She better lawyer up.
Because I am going to sue Stacey Abrams for plagiarism.
Because I suspect that the content in her book is exactly the same as the content in my best-selling blank book, Reasons to Vote for Democrats, A Comprehensive Guide.
The Abrams playbook, The Strategy and Path to Victory in 2020.
The O.J. Simpson playbook, The Strategy and Path to a Happy Marriage.
Absolutely absurd.
She lost.
She lost.
But every single time, the Democrats go all in.
She didn't really lose.
Stacey, this is it.
Okay, we lost this race.
We lost that race.
We lost 2016.
We lost this one after that, this one after that, this one after that.
But Abrams, she's going to be the one.
Put all your money here.
Donate all your money here.
Go out.
This is it.
This is the turning point in America.
And then she loses.
But they can't admit defeat.
They can't admit that they failed.
So they say, no, she didn't really lose.
The base is tired of being lied to.
The Republican base gets tired of being lied to sometimes.
I think that was a lot of the frustration that led to President Trump, is at least Trump offered something different.
He offered different policy proposals.
No matter what other people tell you, other people say Trump only got elected because, you know, he made jokes on the campaign trail.
President Trump offered actually different policies than other candidates in that race and than other candidates in recent memory.
And they went for him because people on both sides of the aisle are tired of being lied to.
And speaking of Georgia, Democrats now have a new Senate candidate in Georgia.
And second verse is the same as the first.
The guy who's running for Senate in Georgia now, see if you remember this name.
John Ossoff.
Do you remember that name?
I do.
I miss John Ossoff because John Ossoff in 2017, he was the Democrats' it boy.
He was Stacey Abrams before Stacey Abrams.
He was Beto O'Rourke before Beto O'Rourke.
John Ossoff was the guy.
He was running in Georgia's 6th congressional district, I think, which had been Tom Price's seat.
Tom Price had left it to go serve as HHS secretary.
Before that, it was Newt Gingrich's seat.
This was a hot seat.
Democrats run this nobody pretty boy named John Ossoff.
For six months, Ossoff was the biggest name in town.
The race ends up being the most expensive House race in U.S. history.
Costs $55 million.
Democrats, put all your money here.
Here's how you're going to win.
This is it.
This is the referendum on Trump.
Sure, we lost in 2016, but now, the first election after that, we're going to win this, and they accept he lost.
He lost.
It was not the beginning of the resistance.
He lost.
So now, what?
He lost.
What's going to happen?
He's going to run again, of course, and this time he's running for Senate.
This time it'll be different, guys.
This is Beto O'Rourke syndrome.
This is Democrats failing up.
This is Democrats relieving themselves on your thigh and telling you that it's raining.
Remember, Beto was going to be the next big thing.
Dumped all that money into Texas, and then he's not.
Then he loses.
Beto loses his Senate race in Texas, so he runs for president.
John Ossoff loses his House race in Georgia, so he runs for the Senate.
They want their candidates to fail up.
And the whole Ossoff campaign was dishonest.
Even right down to his engagement.
John Ossoff is this kind of weird, single, nothing guy.
And so as he's running, he decides he's going to get engaged to his longtime girlfriend.
Okay, that's good.
That was two years ago.
The guy's still not married.
It was all just a farce.
It was all just a fake.
He was just a total empty suit.
Even that part of it was a sham.
And the Democrats, to their credit, are tired of being lied to.
You see this with one of their presidential candidates, actually.
Tulsi Gabbard.
Who is now being kept out of the next Democratic debate, is basically saying enough is enough.
She is the one Democratic candidate to come out and start challenging Democratic, leftist, radical 2019 orthodoxy.
We'll get to that in one second, but first, I have to thank our friends over at Paint Your Life.
I love this product.
If you want to give a truly meaningful gift, you've got to try paintyourlife.com.
Paint Your Life is incredible.
You can have an original painting of yourself, your children, your family, a special place, or a cherished pet done for you at a price that you can afford from PaintYourLife.com.
I was very skeptical of this.
When I first heard about Paint Your Life, I said, there's no way I'm going to get a real painting, a real true painting done by hand, world-class artist created from a photo.
You do.
It's a real painting.
I got mine.
It was an oil painting.
Makes the perfect gift.
So I said, okay.
My stepbrother got married.
I was the best man in the wedding.
So one of the gifts I get him is this really nice, it was a photo from Grand Central of him and his bride.
And I sent it in and I said, okay, do a painting out of this.
I was floored with how incredible this painting looks.
It is unbelievable.
He was floored.
She was floored.
I am using them again.
I'm paying more money, commissioning more art.
It's just amazing.
And you work with them throughout the whole process.
They'll send you proofs.
Every detail will be perfect because you will be seeing it at all these different steps of the way.
There is no risk.
If you don't love the final painting, your money is refunded.
Great for decor.
It is an actual work of art.
It's just an amazing service.
With Paint Your Life, you get your favorite memories transformed into a work of art that will be cherished forever.
Truly special gift for someone you love or for yourself.
Get it today.
It is right now for a limited time.
You'll get 30% off your painting, 30% off your painting, and free shipping to get this offer right now.
Stop what you're doing.
Text Knowles, K-N-W-L-E-S, to 484848.
That is Knowles to 484848.
Text K-N-O-W-L-E-S to 484848.
Message and data rates may apply.
We've got a lot more to get to.
We've got to get to woke Tulsi Gabbard.
We have got to get to the dumbest article on the internet today.
We have so much more, but you've got to go to dailywire.com to do it.
You get me.
You get the Andrew Klaven show.
You get the Ben Shapiro show.
You get to ask questions in the mailbag, which is coming up on Thursday, by the way.
You get Another Kingdom, which we've started recording season three.
It's super fun.
And you get the Leftist Tears Tumblr, which is so important.
You can probably hear I'm a little under the weather today.
I'm a little stuffy.
So some people like to make a hot toddy.
I love a good hot toddy.
You put a little bourbon in there.
You put a little honey.
You put some lemon.
The key is the saline solution.
The greatest saline solution, of course, are leftist tears.
Go to dailywire.com.
We'll be right back with a lot more.
All right.
So we have got to get to...
woke Tulsi Gabbard.
Tulsi Gabbard, you'll remember, she is, I think, wanted for murdering Kamala Harris during that presidential debate a few weeks ago.
She came out and just absolutely went for the jugular on Kamala's career.
And Tulsi, I think probably as a result of that, is being kept out of the Democratic debates.
She's probably the most interesting candidate in that party right now.
Very dovish on foreign policy.
Nearly isolationist, you might say.
Though she has military service herself, so she's got some sort of personal credibility.
She went on Dave Rubin's show.
As far as I can tell, the only Democratic candidate to do that.
Andrew Yang did as well.
And Tulsi goes on Dave Rubin's show.
She finally, unlike every other candidate on that stage, decided to break from the radical, increasingly radical, leftist orthodoxy, actually on a few different issues, beginning even with the central anti-Trump democratic issue, open borders.
We've heard now from a lot of people on the left, they'll say, open borders isn't real, It's a Republican talking point.
It's propaganda.
Nobody really is calling for open borders.
Now, of course, they are.
I mean, they're openly calling for the decriminalization of border crossings.
They're calling for massive amnesty.
They're calling to halt deportation.
They're calling to abolish immigration and customs enforcement.
They are certainly calling for open borders.
But so far, the Democratic Party has been in lockstep denying this.
Tulsi Gabbard comes right out on The Rubin Show and admits the Democrats are for open borders and she's not.
I don't support open borders.
Without secure borders, we don't really have a country.
And while some of the other Democratic candidates will say, well, open borders, that's a conservative argument, and that's not really what's being advocated for.
If you look at the practical implications of some of the things they're pushing for, it is essentially open borders.
Absolutely right.
By the way, just as a practical note to the other Democratic candidates, We're not talking about John Hickenlooper.
We're not talking about Tim Ryan.
We're not talking about Eric Swalwell.
I think he's out of the race.
We're not talking about Jay Inslee.
We're not talking about Amy Klobuchar.
We're just not talking about these people because they're not serious candidates.
We are talking about Tulsi Gabbard, who's also polling very low.
Why?
Because while all of those other candidates are trying to be the poor man's Joe Biden, or the poor man's Liz Warren, or the poor man's Kamala Harris, Tulsi Gabbard is her own woman.
She is her own candidate.
I don't agree with her on most things, but at least she's offering something different.
She's actually giving voters a choice, not an echo, what the conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly talked about at the beginning of the post-war conservative movement.
Tulsi Gabbard's offering something different, and I think it makes her much more interesting.
I think it's her best shot.
I think a lot of these other candidates should try to break lockstep if they want to break out as well.
And Tulsi Gabbard didn't just touch open borders, which is a major democratic issue, a third rail, you know, at least on the left, where you can't touch it or you'll zap yourself.
She even went after abortion at a time when the left...
is moving dramatically into not just they support abortion or late-term abortion or abortion at the point of birth or post-birth abortion.
In the case of Ralph Northam, governor of Virginia, abortion as babies are being born.
If you look at Andy Cuomo, governor of New York, Tulsi Gabbard comes out and says, yeah, I think that abortion should really not be permitted in the third trimester.
A woman should have the right to choose, and I will stand up and fight to protect her right to do so.
Do you have a cut-off point for that?
I think the third trimester, unless a woman's life or severe health consequences is at risk, then there shouldn't be an abortion in the third trimester.
This is obvious.
This is common sense.
You shouldn't kill babies that obviously look like babies, that are in every way recognizable as babies.
I mean...
People wouldn't have really disagreed with this years ago, but now for her to say that is radical.
I give her a lot of credit for it, because maybe it's not going to do her favors in terms of winning the nomination, but it makes her her own person, and I hope it's really what she believes.
Now, the thing you've got to remember, though, while we're talking about how great woke Tulsi Gabbard is, is she's still...
Terrible.
She's still awful.
She's not someone who should ever be the President of the United States.
Sometimes conservatives fall into this trap.
We fall into the strange new respect trap.
The strange new respect trap is that you almost always see this on the left, which is that the minute that a Republican starts criticizing other Republicans, or the minute that a conservative starts criticizing other conservatives, the left will say, wow, I have a strange new respect for John McCain.
See, they hated him before when he posed a threat to them, but now that he's being useful to them, they will praise him.
Oh, yeah, I called Bill Kristol a Nazi warmonger a few years ago, but now I have a strange new respect for Bill Kristol.
And sometimes people on the right can do this, too, and we shouldn't fall into that trap.
Tulsi Gabbard says, yeah, we shouldn't kill babies, like, as they're being born, and we say, wow, great job, Tulsi, oh my gosh, wonderful.
Yeah, I think a nation should have borders.
Oh my God, it's stellar, amazing.
No, she's still a radical left-winger and she still supports abortions up until the very end, you know, up until the third trimester.
She still doesn't think that we should...
She doesn't do anything seriously to reduce the number of foreign nationals in our country or seriously to secure our border.
She hasn't made any hard proposals.
She's opposed the wall.
So she isn't that great.
And she makes this clear when she's talking about abortion because she kind of gives away the whole argument.
She doesn't speak about the baby, really.
She just talks about the mother, and if the baby's got to die, the baby's got to die.
What would you say to the people that would say, well, wait a minute, the government's supposed to protect life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
What about the life of the fetus?
You're just having that supersede.
You're having the woman's rights just supersede.
A woman is the one who's got to live with whatever decision that she makes.
And that's where I draw the line and say that the government should not be in the position of telling that woman what choice she must make.
The woman is the only one who's got to live if she kills her child.
Right.
If the mother doesn't kill her child, then both of them got to live.
It's an amazing little Freudian slip that Tulsi Gabbard has there.
Look, yeah, of course I support a mother's right to kill her own child because the mother's the one who's got to live with it.
No, she's only the only one who's got to live with it if she kills the other person involved.
Even to use the phrase, who has to live with it, what you're saying is, the baby doesn't have to live with it because the baby doesn't get to live because the baby is being killed.
So, Gabbard's still, you know, terrible candidate, should never be president.
But I do give her credit here.
And I give her credit.
It's worth watching this whole interview.
I mean, Dave does such a good job with these.
But...
She came out against identity politics.
She said identity politics was a big problem.
She came out against her rivals speaking Spanish on the debate stage.
She kind of made fun of them for that.
I think that's great.
I encourage a little more diversity in the Democratic Party.
Certainly wouldn't be my preference to have any of them in office, but at least if there's some debate, it means that there's an intellectual life there.
They're not just hacks.
They're not just living in a world disconnected from reality.
They're actually grappling with real issues in real time and real people.
And this is the reality of it.
I mean, this is what Tulsi Gabbard is speaking to.
The vast majority of people in this country oppose open borders.
They think there should be some restrictions on abortion.
They think people should speak English when they're running for president.
They don't like being pandered to.
Okay?
That's the vast majority of people.
Left, right, and center.
The vast majority of people in this country also don't think Trump is Hitler.
I know that the impeach Trump crowd, they say that Trump is Hitler.
Most people don't think that.
They don't think that even about most Republicans, but Donald Trump is an A-list celebrity.
We've known him for 40 years.
He's been in the tabloids since at least the 80s.
People don't think that guy is Hitler.
You're not fooling anybody.
And people don't like being lied to.
Look, the Democratic Party is always going to try to lie to me or about me.
The left is always going to try to lie to or about me.
But they're losing their own supporters, I think.
People might not like Donald Trump.
People might prefer other candidates to Donald Trump.
But they don't think he's Hitler.
They don't think he's a Russian stooge.
And if you're going to be the hack who keeps pushing that narrative, you are not going to have any credibility.
You've got to run on reality.
And if Democrats can't get that message, they're going to have a bad time in 2020 because in the long run, reality wins.
And if Democrats don't get that message, then President Trump will win reelection.
And what are the Democrats going to do?
They're going to pretend.
That they did win.
They're going to pretend that Trump didn't win.
They're going to pretend all of those things on the fantasy pages of the New York Times.
Speaking of which, this gets us to the dumbest article on the internet today, which I have got to get to, because this was a very stiff competition today.
There was an article in Vox.com about how we should lower the voting age to zero.
That was out today.
There were a lot of articles on the internet that could have won, but the one that takes the cake was from the old gray lady, the New York Times.
This is the article.
What draws atheists, Jews, and Catholics to a Presbyterian church?
That was the headline on the internet.
The headline in the print edition was, United by Cause, If Not by Faith.
And this article is about a church...
Put it in quotes.
In a sense, it's a church.
In Manhattan, it says it's a Presbyterian church that doesn't really talk about God.
You don't really need to even believe in God, much less Presbyterianism.
You just need to believe in leftism.
And it's amazing because it shows you the state of religion today and the state of politics today.
Politics is religion for the left.
And real religion has been dismissed.
This is the article.
At Rutgers Presbyterian Church in Manhattan, social justice and environmental issues unite the congregation.
There's Bible stuff, too.
That's good.
Observant Presbyterians are always part of gatherings at Rutgers Presbyterian Church, but much of the time, so are Roman Catholics and Jews, as well as a smattering of people who consider themselves vaguely spiritual.
Valerie Oldtarsh McCarthy, of course she's got a hyphenated last name, of course, it goes without saying, A few points of correction here.
Observant Catholics do not go to this church.
Because observant Catholics cannot participate in other religious practices.
They cannot go to other churches that are not Catholic churches.
So by definition, if a Catholic is going and participating in these services, they are not observant Catholics.
I simply don't have the expertise on Jews.
You'd have to ask our yarmulke-wearing colleague over here, but something tells me a similar thing could be said there as well.
These other congregations, these other denominations that are coming in to this quote-unquote church are not Actually Catholics.
Or actually practicing Jews.
They are practicing a religion, but it's not the religion they're pretending to practice.
I mean, imagine this.
A Sunday sermon on the perils of genetically modified vegetables.
Back in the old and bad days, we used to have sermons on The existence of evil in the world, on pride, on the virtues and on the vices, on how we can live in holiness, on man's fallen nature, on our salvation, on the profound and eternal questions.
What is justice?
What is fairness?
What is our life?
Who am I? And what is my relation to the great I am?
Which is how God describes himself.
I am that I am.
Those were in the olden, bad, stupid days.
You know, those silly days when people believed in religion.
Now we can talk about profound things like genetically modified vegetables.
Finally, now we can get to some real deep conversation.
The article goes on.
Typically, the connective tissue of any congregation is an embrace of a shared faith.
Yet Rutgers Church, a relatively small church on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, has rejected that.
Not quite.
They say they've rejected their shared faith because some say they're Jews, some say they're Christians, some say they're atheists, some say.
They do have a shared faith.
We'll see what that is.
Sharing a belief in God, any God at all, isn't necessary.
Instead, the community there has been cobbled together by a different code of convictions, pulled in by social justice efforts, activism against climate change, meal programs for the homeless, and a task force to help refugee families.
They are brought together by a shared faith.
It's the shared faith in leftism.
What you have seen, we talk about how the left goes in and hollows out institutions from the inside.
So they go into Harvard and they just, like a bunch of termites, they hollow out the inside of Harvard.
So from the outside it still looks like Harvard, but the inside it's not.
It's been eaten away by the left.
That's what they've done to this church.
So from the outside I guess it looks like a church, Presbyterian church, but it's not.
And it's not the case that they're not united by a shared faith.
They are.
It's the shared faith in leftist politics.
They go on.
They say To address shrinking congregations, some pastors are searching for new ways to use their churches and redefine what fellowship means.
Churches have the space and the goodwill, after all, to commit to community works, social justice or arts, and educational products.
And opening their doors in this way can bring in those looking for more than a Bible study class.
Yeah, it'll bring in people explicitly who aren't looking for a Bible study class.
They're trying to address shrinking congregations.
Talk about mission drift.
They're just trying to sell whatever they can.
They're trying to redefine what fellowship means, but churches are not there for fellowship.
Church is to worship God.
The mass is the highest form of prayer.
The mass existed uninterrupted in an uninterrupted form for at least 15 centuries.
It then has existed in a few different forms, or has had some changes to it, and some breakaways and some dissent to it, for another 500 years after that.
That's what it's about.
It's about worship.
You know, this is for Catholics.
This is one of the big problems we have with some of the changes of the Second Vatican Council, is they took this beautiful Mass and they made it just about us.
So, for instance, in the old days, the priest used to face away from everyone else in the Church.
He would face away because he's not there to entertain us.
He's not there to do a little soft shoe and sing a little song.
He's not there to make us laugh or clap.
He's there to lead us in the person of Christ in worship.
He is there...
To lead us to the sacrament.
We're actually doing something.
But when the church just becomes about you feeling good about yourself, well then you get to redefining what fellowship means.
Then you say, why do we need all this God stuff when we can just commit to community works or arts or educational products or educational projects rather?
The pastor, I put that in quotes of this church, says you just welcome those who are seekers.
Seekers of what?
You know, burglars are seekers of jewels and money.
Do you welcome them?
You've got to be seeking something.
To seek means you have an object.
And in this case, what we're seeing in the traditional church versus the church of leftism is we're seeing those who seek God versus those who seek simply themselves and their own little political preferences.
So it goes on, a large Black Lives Matter banner hangs from the front of the church.
Okay, if you're going to have these political statements, why not all these different political statements?
Don't all lives matter to a church?
Nearby are colorful Tibetan prayer flags.
Oh, I thought it was a Presbyterian church.
But the Presbyterian church has Tibetan prayer flags because the Presbyterian church doesn't really believe in the Presbyterian church.
But if the Presbyterian church is going to have Tibetan prayer flags, why isn't it just a Tibetan church?
Inside, there are buttons for worshipers to declare their gender identity.
He, him, she, her, they, them, really gives new meaning to the phrase, in the beginning, God created man, both male and female, he created them.
I guess he created them as both male and female all at once.
They're exactly the same.
This is a contradiction.
If you're going to have 56 genders, that is a contradiction of the book of Genesis.
During services, worshippers recite alternatives to the Lord's Prayer.
The Lord's Prayer.
The one prayer that Jesus actually gives himself verbatim.
They recite alternatives to the Lord's Prayer that use more inclusive language.
And then you get to the punchline.
One of the congregants there says, I'm more into the social aspect.
I care about a lot of the people, and they care about me.
Me, me, me.
The church of the self.
And that is what you see.
Of course, the New York Times loves this.
They love changing the church, which is essentially about selflessness.
I wish to dissolve, as St.
Paul said, giving yourself away, committing yourself to God and worshiping God, to the church of the self.
We know from St.
Andrew Breitbart, politics is down from culture, culture is down from religion.
No wonder the New York Times, as a cultural institution, is celebrating this major religious shift because it has big, big effects on our politics.
Politics where I think everyone is, regardless of what the New York Times says, regardless of what a few aging hippies on the Upper West Side say, I think people are tired of being lied to.
That's true in religion.
That's true in culture.
That's true in politics.
That's good news for us.
That's bad news for the left.
That's our show.
No show tomorrow, by the way, but we will be back Friday because we have to cover that wonderful Democratic presidential debate, which should be a lot of fun.
In the meantime, I'm Michael Knowles.
This is The Michael Knowles Show.
See you then.
If you enjoyed this episode, and frankly, even if you didn't, don't forget to subscribe.
And if you want to help spread the word, please give us a five-star review and tell your friends to subscribe.
We're available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and wherever else you listen to podcasts.
Also, be sure to check out the other Daily Wire podcasts, including The Ben Shapiro Show, The Andrew Klavan Show, and The Matt Walsh Show.
The Michael Knowles Show is produced by Rebecca Dobkowitz and directed by Mike Joyner.
Executive producer, Jeremy Boring.
Senior producer, Jonathan Hay.
Our supervising producer is Mathis Glover.
And our technical producer is Austin Stevens.
Assistant Director Pavel Wydowski, edited by Danny D'Amico.
Audio is mixed by Mike Coromina.
Hair and makeup is by Jesua Olvera.
And our production assistant is Nick Sheehan.
The Michael Knowles Show is a Daily Wire production.
Copyright Daily Wire 2019.
▲
Export Selection