AOC’s boyfriend goes viral for castigating his fellow white people as hopelessly racist. We will examine the dangers of toxic effeminacy. Then, Squad Member Ayanna Pressley whines on the floor of the House, Elizabeth Warren takes money from a broke student, and President Trump teaches us all a lesson when the media ask him what lessons he learned from impeachment.
Check out The Cold War: What We Saw, a new podcast written and presented by Bill Whittle at https://www.dailywire.com/coldwar. In Part 1 we peel back the layers of mystery cloaking the Terror state run by the Kremlin, and watch as America takes its first small steps onto the stage of world leadership.
If you like The Michael Knowles Show, become a member TODAY with promo code: KNOWLES and enjoy the exclusive benefits for 10% off at https://www.dailywire.com/Knowles
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
AOC's boyfriend goes viral for castigating his fellow white people as hopelessly racist.
We will examine the dangers of toxic effeminacy.
Then, squad member Ayanna Pressley whines on the floor of the House, Elizabeth Warren takes money from a broke student, and President Trump teaches us all a lesson when the media ask him what lessons he learned from impeachment.
All that plus the mailbag.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is the Michael Knowles Show.
Ooh, we got a lot to get to today.
Not going to give you a lot of hope for millennials, but maybe, maybe a lesson for our whole culture.
We'll get to all that in a second.
First, I got to thank our friends, a new sponsor to the show over at Fairway Meat Market.
You know me.
I pretty much eat a carnivorous diet.
My diet is pretty much meats and occasionally a little bit of cheese and some booze.
Fairway Meat Market is a family owned grocery chain that has been in business since 1938 where each and every cut is hand-cut by their highly experienced team of butchers.
You know, I was in D.C. for about three weeks.
I was shooting my other podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
I come back and Fairway had sent me this amazing selection of meat, of beef, premium beef, all natural pork, which is raised by family farmers and sourced straight out of corn country, which gives you access to the highest quality meat in America.
They got ribs, they got ribeyes, they got pork chops, they got beef tenderloin, they got every style and cut that your kitchen can possibly handle.
And fairwaymeatmarket.com also has the best recipes.
It's got great cooking tips to make sure that you and your friends and your family have a meal that they won't forget.
Go get it.
These guys are so, so cool.
This week, my listeners can get the Heartland package valued at $230 for just $99.99.
Plus, you get free shipping when you enter Knoll's, K-N-O-W-L-E-S at checkout.
Heartland package includes eight 8-ounce all-natural boneless pork chops, six 8-ounce USDA choice ribeye steaks, one mouthwatering side dish, loaded potato bake, gourmet cheesy corn, or brisket baked beans.
That's more than 50% off the best meat in America, plus free shipping.
That is fairwaymeatmarket.com, promo code Knolls, and look out for the Heartland package.
AOC. AOC and her boyfriend.
I wasn't ever going to mention AOC's boyfriend because, you know, you want to think that boyfriends and girlfriends and wives and husbands are off limits.
That's a rule I generally abide by.
Except sometimes politicians decide to thrust their...
Significant others into the political spotlight.
And AOC has done this more than anyone.
She's just put her boyfriend on camera, on the internet, to parrot her political points of view.
Trouble is, the points of view that she's having him espouse are not only wrong, they're absolutely humiliating for her boyfriend.
Here is AOC and her love interest.
Riley, what has been helpful to you in combating racism?
I think it's helpful and important to talk to other white people about racism.
And I think a lot of people, they don't want to be racist.
They don't think that they're racist, but they also don't know some of the things that they believe or say are and can be racist.
And I think one of the effective ways is just to talk And kind of help teach them about why some of the things they believe or say or think are wrong.
Not necessarily racist, but that they're wrong.
And that'll sort of like chip away and And it's just always being open to learning about racist things that we may have said or done without judgment and defensiveness.
Oh, gosh.
If you couldn't, if you're listening, if you haven't seen this video, You could probably hear it, but AOC's boyfriend is like the whitest guy who has ever walked the face of the earth.
Very light skin and red hair, and he's very white.
And the irony here is that his thesis, which is really her thesis, I suspect, because she's sitting there filming him, waiting for him to say it, kind of nodding along when she approves.
The irony is that his thesis is racist.
Right?
His thesis is that a group of people are flawed by their skin color.
And they're flawed pretty much irreparably, right?
His idea is that white people are by definition racist, and it's all of them, right?
The ones who don't know that they're racist are probably the most racist of all, and that you can't really fix it.
He says you're not going to make someone not a racist overnight.
Or over a few days, meaning that no matter how much you talk to them, there will still always be this vestigial racism.
They're sort of depraved to their core, and all you can do is try to help the problem along a little bit.
That's the irony of the clip.
The sadder part of the clip is that he's participating in this at all.
The sadder part of the clip is that he is allowing his girlfriend to humiliate him in front of millions of people.
That's humiliating, right?
To have your girlfriends holding a camera to her millions of followers and basically saying, okay, tell everyone how bad you are.
And tell everyone how bad everyone who looks like you is.
And tell everyone how they're never really going to get better.
And when you say something I agree with, I'll nod approvingly.
But you better say it.
It's like a forced confession under a dictatorship or something.
It's so humiliating.
It's not respectful.
This is toxic effeminacy.
Okay.
We hear a lot about toxic masculinity.
This is toxic effeminacy.
And it's funny, I'm doing the PragerU book show.
So we're doing once a month, we read one of these great books and talk about it with people.
The one that we're just about to film is the book of Genesis.
And the book of Genesis actually has a lot to say about toxic masculinity and about toxic effeminacy.
This video is, AOC and her boyfriend is like a live-action production of the third chapter of the book of Genesis.
In the book of Genesis, God tells Eve, after Eve and Adam have sinned and God is doling out their punishment, God tells Eve, as part of her punishment, her desire shall be for her husband.
What that statement means is that she will have a kind of appetite for her husband.
She'll want to control her husband.
She'll want to devour him.
Think of a praying mantis, the female praying mantis devouring the male in the act of love.
That's the punishment for Eve.
Then he tells Adam, as his punishment, that Adam will have to toil the earth.
This tells you about two flaws, categorically, in men and women.
The flaw for women in this chapter is that women will want to domineer.
They'll have desire for their man.
They'll want to devour their man.
And that the flaw of men is that they're lazy.
Okay?
Those are the two flaws.
Being domineering, being lazy.
Actually, in that very chapter when God is doling out the punishment to Eve, the punishment is, your desire will be for your husband, but he shall rule over you.
And some people reading this for the first time might say, oh, it looks like he's giving Eve a punishment, but Adam a reward, because Adam gets to rule over Eve.
Not really.
That's a misreading of Adam's desires.
Adam's desire here, and the desire that is therefore being described of all men, is not to rule over people.
Actually, the real desire of men is to sit on the couch and eat potato chips and watch TV. And it's actually a punishment that he will rule over her.
It's a punishment for both of them.
Toxic effeminacy, toxic masculinity.
Obviously in this clip you were seeing this guy's girlfriend just totally domineer him, humiliate him, mock him on video.
But you're also seeing that same masculine flaw in his performance because he's just going along with it.
He's just lazy.
He's shrinking into himself.
He's being cowed.
He's allowing himself to be humiliated because he doesn't want to stand up for himself.
Compare that video to a video of our president.
President Trump was asked during a press conference yesterday, I believe it was, What lessons he had learned from impeachment?
This is a question being asked by the media, assuming a Democratic and anti-Trump Republican premise, which is that Trump needed to learn a lesson.
And so they don't even say, did you learn a lesson?
They jump right past accepting the premise into saying, what lesson did you learn from impeachment?
And Trump shoves it right back in their face.
Lisa Murkowski earlier said that you shouldn't have gotten involved with the Roger Stone case.
She said it's just bad.
Some Republicans have said they hoped you would learn a lesson from impeachment.
What lesson did you learn from impeachment?
The Democrats are crooked.
They've got a lot of crooked things going.
That they're vicious, that they shouldn't have brought impeachment, and that my poll numbers are ten points higher because of fake news like NBC, which reports the news very inaccurately, probably more inaccurately than CNN, if that's possible.
MS, DNC, and your MS, and if you take a look at NBC, no, I think they're among the most dishonest reporters of the news.
Absolutely the right answer.
Thank you, Mr.
Trump, for showing us how to shove this right back in their face.
The question that's being asked more or less is, hey, Mr.
Trump, when did you stop beating your wife, right?
It's a question where any way you answer, you're accepting the premise and it makes you look bad.
The premise being you needed to learn a lesson from impeachment because you made a big mistake.
And he just says, no, I'm not taking your premise.
Here's the lesson I learned is you people are all corrupt.
You people are all absolute hacks.
And you're incompetent, too, because you tried to take me out and instead my poll numbers are ten points higher.
That is some virtuous masculinity.
That's manliness.
That's standing up for yourself, shoving it right back at them, not allowing yourself to be humiliated and cowed on national television.
An important Lesson.
And I guess one way to recognize that there can be a virtue to manliness too, just like there can be toxicity to effeminacy, is to realize that there are some toxic women out there too.
There's some toxic men, there's some toxic women.
There's...
Racism from one race, there's racism from other races, too.
We'll get to all of that in a second.
First, I've got to thank our friends over at Ring.
Ring's mission, you know what it is, it's to make neighborhoods safer.
Now, you probably already know about their smart video doorbells and cameras that protect millions of people everywhere.
Ring helps you stay connected to your home anywhere in the world.
So, if there's a surprise visitor, maybe your mother-in-law or something like that, if there's a package delivery, or if there's a burglar trying to do you harm, I don't know which one is scarier.
You will get an alert.
You'll be able to see here and speak to them all from your phone.
Doesn't matter where you are.
In your home, in your bedroom, in your office, in your beach, house, wherever you are, you can check in on your home.
As a subscriber, you have a special offer on a Ring welcome kit available right now at ring.com slash Knowles, K-N-O-L-E-S. This kit includes a video doorbell and a Chime Pro, which is just what you need to start building a ring of security around your home today.
We don't hear about the other side of it very much.
So I wanted to highlight a toxic woman who also went viral yesterday.
This is squad member.
She's like the minor member of the squad.
She's the Ringo Starr of the squad, Ayanna Pressley.
She took to the floor of the House of Representatives to wine.
The great poet and pioneer of righteous rage, Audre Lorde, once said, quote, I am not free while any woman is unfree, even when our shackles are very different from my own, end quote.
The year is now 2020, and here we women are, still in so many ways, not fully free, still shackled.
Today, I rise to affirm the humanity and the dignity of all women.
I rise in strong, unapologetic, righteous support of H.J. Res.
79, which will strike the arbitrary deadline for ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment, an amendment that should already be the law of the land.
The American Constitution is sexist by its very design.
Okay, where do we even begin with all of this?
First of all, she begins, she says, quoting Audre Lorde, the pioneer of righteous rage.
By the way, when people refer to themselves as righteous, that's usually a good clue that they are being unrighteous.
But she's coming out and saying, I'm full of rage.
She's just describing this vice, this awful temptation.
And then she goes on and says, America's sexist from the very core and women have no rights in America and everything's terrible.
This while, she's standing on the floor of the House of Representatives.
This while, she's one of the most prominent members of the Democratic Party, only by virtue of her association with three other people, AOC, Ilhan Omar, and Rashida Tlaib.
All women, by the way, who are much more prominent faces of the Democratic Party, some of the most prominent politicians in America.
But women have no rights.
What rights do women lack in America?
None.
Absolutely none, of course.
But she's angry and furious anyway and willing to denounce her whole country for it.
She then goes on to endorse the ERA. This is the Equal Rights Amendment.
It's got a really nice-sounding name, but it's a horrible, terrible idea.
This was a dumb law that was defeated decades and decades ago, mostly by women.
One woman in particular, a conservative pioneer named Phyllis Schlafly.
And then it's come back in recent years and it's gaining some popularity on the left.
It's a terrible idea for a law.
It would force women into the draft.
It would force women to be drafted into the military.
It would absolutely abolish same sex restrooms and same sex schools and any kind of same sex facility.
And it would enshrine into law the right to kill babies through abortion.
Everything about this law is terrible.
It was rightly defeated decades ago.
Now it's coming back up.
That's the specific point on the law.
On the larger point, what these radicals are saying is that any suggestion that men and women are in any way different is sexist.
And you know, by a very narrow definition of sexism, I guess that's true.
What is sexism is to discriminate, to be discriminating, to see differences between men and women.
So I guess technically that is sexist.
It's not bigoted.
It's not harmful.
It's not injurious to recognize that men and women have biological differences.
Often they have differences of desire.
But I guess there are differences.
For these radicals, absolutely that has to be abolished.
That is a real form of toxic effeminacy.
If a man had gone down to the floor and given that speech, he would be rightly mocked for it.
This brings us to another toxic woman, Elizabeth Warren.
Elizabeth Warren's campaign in recent days for president has just collapsed, absolutely.
She's doing anything she can to try to remain relevant.
She told a story on MSNBC last night about how she's on the campaign trail and a young girl comes up to her and says, listen, I'm completely broke, but I've given you what little money I have so that you can keep running for president.
Elizabeth Warren believes this is some sort of inspiring story.
There are so many people who are in this fight for all the right reasons.
You know me, did the speech and then afterwards did a selfie line and we were there for over an hour.
People are coming through and they're saying thank you and they're giving hugs and talking about what's important to them.
A young woman came up by herself and she said, I'm a broke college student with a lot of student loan debt.
And she said, I checked and I have $6 in the bank.
So I just gave $3 to keep you in this fight.
That's what we've got to do.
We've got to stay in this fight with people who are counting on us.
This isn't about fighting other Democrats.
This is about fighting for the America we believe in.
You took her money?
What kind of monster are you?
The poor girl has only got $6 in the bank, and you, a very, very wealthy woman Harvard professor, took half of her money, $3?
What a monster.
Now, I don't think any of her story is true.
Elizabeth Warren has a little bit of a difficult relationship with the truth.
Difficult relationship with her DNA. Lies about her DNA for decades to get professional advantage.
Lies about being fired because she was pregnant.
Lies about sending her kids to public school.
Lies about pretty much everything.
And she's probably lying about this too.
But even beyond the story, even the points she's making in it are not true.
She says this race is not about fighting other Democrats.
No, it is.
That's what a primary campaign is.
A primary campaign is when you battle people of your own party, and then one of you gets nominated, and then you battle the people of the other party.
Also, almost certainly untrue is that the girl had $6 in the bank.
Why is that untrue?
Because very few people have $6 in the bank.
Now, some people are broke, but they don't have $6 in the bank.
Some people, maybe they have...
I don't know, $200 in the bank or $1,000 in the bank, and they got a ton of debt, so they're broke, but they have more than $6 in the bank.
Some people are overdrawn on their bank accounts, right?
It's in the negative.
But very few people have $6 specifically in the bank.
That seems like it was a number that was constructed to tell a, well, ultimately not very convincing political story.
If the story is true, Elizabeth Warren should not have taken the money What is she thinking?
First of all, her campaign is over, more or less.
After her dismal performance in New Hampshire, it's probably not going on very far.
But also, it's just wrong to do that.
Liz Warren is not some messianic religious figure, okay?
Liz Warren is not...
She's a politician, okay?
I mean, the story that she's telling is sort of like the story of the widow's might in the Gospels.
Christ talks about how this poor widow gave what little she had and gave it as an offering, and that this was worth so much more than what the wealthy people had given because she'd given so much of what she had.
Well, Elizabeth Warren isn't Jesus, right?
Okay?
This isn't a sacrifice that you're offering to God.
You're making a donation to some political campaign, and in this case, one that's going to lose.
But that is how Elizabeth Warren is portraying it.
It's so ravenous.
It's so filled with rage, to use Ayanna Pressley's term.
It's so aggressive.
This is toxic.
It's toxic effeminacy.
Different than toxic femininity, okay?
It's not feminine.
It's effeminate.
It's not womanly.
It's womanish.
What's the difference?
What we're seeing here, from AOC's boyfriend, to Ayanna Pressley, to Liz Warren, we're seeing specifically among men in this country, is all the worst characteristics associated with women, with none of the good characteristics.
What we're seeing here is that leftism is intrinsically effeminate.
All the worst characteristics of women, none of the good characteristics.
Leftism is not nurturing.
It's not beautiful.
It's not particularly good at multitasking.
It's not fruitful.
What it is, is overbearing and desirous of dependency.
It is toxic.
Now there's a bad kind of masculinity too, right?
There's a masculinity that's toxic.
That's called machismo.
Men have bad tendencies as well as good tendencies.
And when you take all the bad tendencies and just make them all go together, that's toxic.
But our threat in our culture is not from toxic masculinity.
Our culture does not suffer from being too masculine.
The threat here is really from toxic effeminacy.
And you can see that toxicity in certain women, but you see it in certain men, too, who are willing to take all of these awful, awful characteristics and none of the good ones.
There's one last example of this that really shoots down all of the claims that AOC's boyfriend is making.
It really makes that video look even more ridiculous than it already is.
That's a story out of UVA where a student there speaking at the Multicultural Student Center insisted that the white people got to get out because there's too many white people.
We'll get to that in a second.
First, got to thank our friends over.
It keeps two out of three guys will experience some form of male pattern baldness by the time they're 35.
But with today's advancements in science, Keeps offers proven treatments that can combat the symptoms of hair loss and help you keep the hair you have at half the cost of your local pharmacy.
People think this is complicated, but it's not.
You can keep your hair.
Prevention is key.
Keeps is up to 90% effective at reducing and stopping further hair loss.
So the sooner you start, the sooner you go get your Keeps, the more hair you'll save.
So you've got to act fast.
Keeps now offers a prescription shampoo that keeps your scalp healthy too.
Thanks to Keeps, you no longer have to go to the doctor's office for your hair loss prescription.
Now you can visit a doctor online.
Get your hair loss medication delivered directly to your home.
If you're ready to take action and prevent hair loss, go to Keeps.com slash Knowles, K-N-O-W-L-E-S. Receive your first month of treatment for free.
That is K-E-E-P-S dot com slash Knowles, K-N-O-W-L-E-S. Head on over.
Do it now.
There's this video just came out of UVA. And it's from the Multicultural Student Center.
The Young Americas Foundation obtained the video.
I guess a student secretly recorded it.
This is of a young gal...
A woman of color who stands up there and says that this is the multicultural student center and therefore you can't have that many white people here.
Now you might think multicultural means all different kind of cultures, all different kind of people who all look different.
No, that's not how she's interpreting it.
She's saying more or less we need to have a segregated student center and white people need to get lost.
Public service announcement.
Excuse me!
If y'all didn't know, this is the MSC, and frankly, there's just too many white people in here, and this is a space for people of color.
So just be really cognizant of the space that you're taking up, because it does make some of us POCs uncomfortable when we see too many white people in here.
It's only been open for four days, and frankly, there's the whole university for a lot of y'all to be at, and there's very few spaces for us.
So keep that in mind.
Thank you.
Too many white people.
Get those white people out of here.
So, if racism has a definition anymore, and the left has pretty much degraded that word down to nothing, but if racism has a definition, that is racist.
That is the textbook example of racism.
But you don't hear that description in the AOC boyfriend video, do you?
Now, in the AOC boyfriend video, it's only white people who can ever be racist, who can ever harbor bigotry.
And white people can never get rid of it.
And nobody else could have it.
That's so silly.
That's so unbalanced.
It's so wrong.
I think there's this idea that comes out of this toxic effeminacy that you've just got to surrender yourself entirely.
You've just got to give away any backbone you might have.
You can never have an opinion.
If you're a white person, you're bad.
If you're a man, you're bad.
If you're straight, you're bad.
And your opinions are invalid and you can't say anything.
And this is based on a theory of Historical injustice and present victimhood that comes together in the left-wing ideology called intersectionality.
It's just victim politics on steroids.
And so you see it in AOC's boyfriend.
He just says, I just talked to white people.
We're just so bad.
We'll never be better, but I'm trying.
Please, I'm trying.
You don't see AOC make a similar acknowledgement.
Say, you know, I've got my problems too.
I've got my flaws as well, and maybe I should look into myself and convince my fellow Congresswomen or my fellow women, whoever, that we've got stuff to work on too.
No, it's only in one direction.
I mean, obviously, if a white student stood up at any center on any university campus and said, hey, we don't really like that there are so many non-white people here, so this is a space for white people and everyone else has to leave, that would be an international incident.
You'd have the UN investigating it or something.
But But in this case, it only goes in one direction.
I think if you want to restore a sense of justice to the country, then you've got to...
You can't let it get to an extreme like that.
I don't think there's anything wrong with acknowledging that there are some bad traits of men.
And if that's all that toxic masculinity means, okay, that's fine.
I accept that.
But likewise, you've got to recognize there is toxic effeminacy.
If you're going to say that one group can harbor racial biases, then you have to acknowledge that other groups can harbor racial biases as well.
But unfortunately, that's not the situation we see because of leftism.
Because leftism makes it so one-sided.
It's so domineering.
It's so ravenous.
It's so desirous of consuming everything in its wake.
Leftism will not be the answer to that.
The irony of that UVA video is that it's at the Multicultural Student Center.
The theory of multiculturalism is that you're going to bring everybody together and you're all going to sing Kumbaya, but what's the practice?
The practice is actually increasing racial division, actually increasing bigotry.
You see it all around.
The idea of feminism is that everybody's going to be equal and Kumbaya and come together.
What's the practice?
Division, rancor, rage, as Ayanna Pressley is describing it.
That is not the answer.
We have to restore some balance, and you need to see where the threat really lies.
Is the threat in toxic masculinity?
When you look at those videos, do you think that we have a surplus of masculinity, or does the threat lie on the opposite end?
We have got to get to the mailbag, but first, I've got to tell you about a new podcast, The Cold War, What We Saw, hosted by our friend Bill Whittle.
If you love history and you just despise communism like I do, then you're going to want to check it out.
Bill captures what it was like to live through major events such as the Berlin Airlift, the Korean War, the Cuban Missile Crisis, and the Space Race.
And really what you would call it is the apocalypse that never happened.
So if you're around my age, you were not alive for any of those events.
The story is told so well.
The setting is so brilliantly set that as you go through these events, you'll feel like you were there.
You'll start to understand the battle, not only for economic freedom, but for civilization itself.
So they've already released two episodes of this 12-part series, and you've got some to catch up on now, so head on over.
It's a great time to listen as the 2020 election starts to heat up and we can see where the left has gone.
Full-blown commie in so many of their policies and their language, especially as Bernie Sanders is beginning to run away with the Democratic nomination.
Head on over to dailywire.com slash coldwar and start listening to this incredibly important story.
That is dailywire.com slash coldwar.
Head on over now.
We'll be right back with the mailbag.
Let's get into the mailbag.
From Kyle.
Cordial greetings, Michael, Archbishop of the Diocese of the Daily Wire.
Wondering if you can summarize some of the key political policies of the Whig Party and how they compare to the two major extant political parties.
On which issues would Whigs and Republicans clash?
On which contemporary issues would Whigs and modern Democrats clash?
Love the show and everything you guys do.
So now we have two major parties, the Democrats and the Republicans.
Before the Republicans, you had two major parties, the Democrats and the Whigs.
The problem with trying to draw an exact line or analogy between these parties is that politics change over time.
This is one of the struggles of the Trump era, is you have some kind of boomer Republicans being really upset that political positions ever adjust to changing circumstances.
So they'll say, no, we used to...
Have this policy, but now, 30 years later, we have this new policy, or we've changed the policy a little bit.
But that's what happens in politics.
So broadly speaking, you could say that the Republican Party was the successor to the Whig Party, that the Whigs were the forerunner of the Republicans, but there were some similarities and there were some differences.
So the Whig Party broadly was founded as a kind of nationalist party.
In that way, I guess they have a similarity to the current Republican Party.
They had a lot of support in the North, but they actually, the Whigs did fairly well in the South as well.
They had a real ability to compete there.
The Whigs were founded on law and order.
The Whigs were founded on preserving tradition.
The Whigs were founded on, in many ways, they were the successor of the Federalist Party, which was the kind of founding party of America, and they defended the Constitution.
The Democrats accused the Whigs of being the successors to the Federalist Party.
And so, in that way, there's a real similarity to the Republican Party.
Now, maybe a difference would be that the Whigs were very pro-tariff.
They were founded as a pro-tariff party.
And if you thought about the Republican Party from, say, 1950 to 2015, you would say they were the anti-tariff party.
But even that doesn't tell the whole story because the modern Republican Party from the days of Abraham Lincoln was pro-tariff.
Abraham Lincoln said, you give me a tariff, I'll give you the greatest nation on earth.
Then, in the middle of the 20th century, it became very anti-tariff.
Now it's kind of pro-tariff again under President Trump, or at least it's unclear.
You can't tell if he just wants to use tariffs as a strategy or as a tactic to negotiate, or if he thinks that it's actually good for the economy.
That's a long answer to a simple question, but what I really want to show you here is that political parties are not so simple, and they're not stagnant.
They don't remain exactly the same as they always were.
They develop over time.
This is why the Democrats say that the Republican and the Democratic Party switched.
They didn't really switch.
Of course, no one came together one day and said, hey, from now on, you Democrats are going to be Republicans, and we Republicans are going to be Democrats.
That obviously is ridiculous.
They didn't really switch on their core principles either.
The Republican Party was founded to defend freedom.
It was founded on the issue of slavery, and they've taken that principle throughout the course of their existence.
But regional support has changed over time.
The Democratic Party has become far leftist, and that irritated people who were slightly more socially conservative, and so some of them, especially in the South, became Republican.
They change over time.
That is why occasionally political parties collapse, like the Whigs, and new parties come up to address new challenges, like the Republicans.
From Michael.
Hey Michael, when arguing religion with someone the other day, they challenged me to prove Jesus was a real person without pointing to the Bible.
My question to you is, other than religious texts, is there any proof that Jesus was a real person?
Thank you.
Yes.
I think it's kind of silly to say, hey, ignore the most famous texts about this person that rely on 500 eyewitnesses, which is what we're talking about when we're talking about the New Testament.
But even so, there are non-Christian sources that attest to the existence of Jesus.
Most prominent is probably the Jewish historian Josephus, who wrote an account of Jesus within 60 years of the crucifixion, so within a lifetime of the crucifixion.
Josephus knew people and spoke to people who had seen and heard Jesus, so he was exposed to these first-hand accounts.
The historian Tacitus, writing about 80 years after the crucifixion, wrote an account of Jesus, so also, you know, about within a lifetime.
This was also around the same time that the Roman governor Pliny the Younger wrote about Jesus, and also around the same time that the historian Suetonius refers to Jesus.
So there are multiple non-scriptural sources of the existence of Jesus and Because of that, certainly because of that, but even on its own, I would then say you shouldn't be so quick to dismiss the New Testament accounts because the New Testament accounts are written by people who had seen Jesus, who had heard Jesus, and who knew Jesus.
From Page.
Hey, Michael.
When I was growing up in Central Texas, my father worked for a large company that had at least one family-oriented activity a year.
My husband and I work in a major tech company that has numerous employee activities.
However, nothing is family-focused.
Family isn't invited at all.
During your shows, you guys were talking about nuclear families and how they've changed over the years.
Why do you think companies have shifted to not include the employees' families?
Do you think it has something to do with the cultural shift of having kids later in life?
My husband also points out how almost nobody wants anything to do with their co-workers outside of the office.
Look forward to hearing what you think.
That's an excellent question.
The reason that family-oriented events have fallen apart at companies is because the left has given us political correctness and the left has attempted pretty successfully to destroy the family.
And those two have to go hand in hand because now it's considered politically incorrect to refer to somebody's wife or husband.
If you assume that somebody would have a wife or husband, you're assuming their sexual preferences.
You're assuming that they don't want to remain single for their whole lives.
You're assuming a moral order that is traditional that we can all participate in.
The left has attacked the family by redefining the family, right?
By redefining marriage itself.
For all of human history everywhere in the world, sexual difference was fundamental to the definition of marriage.
Marriage had to involve husbands and wives.
And then within the last seven or eight years, the left completely obliterated that.
Now we don't really know what the definition of marriage is.
They've redefined it to just be monogamous unions of either people who are the same sex or different sex.
But even that is kind of dissolving.
Now there are laws being considered in this country to legalize polygamy.
Now there are throuples, including from members of Congress, who are in kind of unconventional relationships.
So that definition has just completely broken down as conservatives predicted that it would.
The other aspect of this though, by breaking down the moral order and by breaking down traditional social mores, is it's all been in pursuit of a hyper-individualism.
The left has always gone after this.
It might seem counterintuitive because the left also loves collectivism, basically forcing everyone under the federal government, forcing everyone into these collectives.
But the first step to bringing anyone under a collective is to destroy all the barriers to that, namely...
Local attachments and the most local attachment which is the attachment to the family so that then you get a society of just atomized individuals who have no relation to one another whatsoever and then they can all be brought together again under a collective.
So now you have a lot of employee events because we're all just viewed as individuals, and we can never presume that anybody's got any sort of attachments to anybody else.
That's the leftist dream.
I mean, Justice Anthony Kennedy, when he was writing the Planned Parenthood v.
Casey decision, He said that the Constitution gives us a right to define reality as we see fit.
I don't know where in the Constitution he found that, but that's...
I think the end of the leftist dream is that we want to redefine reality itself.
That's the end of hyper-individualism.
And it would make you mad if you didn't have any reality to grab onto.
If you were just kind of swimming in your own head and your own fantasies, that would truly drive you insane.
But I guess it has for many people on the left.
And that's why you're not going to see it anytime soon.
It's also why...
Conservatives need to recognize that the cultural issues are the most important ones and the political or economic issues fall downstream of that.
If we don't defend traditional institutions, if we don't defend our cultural inheritance, if we don't defend the family itself, Then all those other things that we want are going to be meaningless because the left will have won the decisive battle.
From Paul.
Hi, Michael.
Big fan here.
My sister and brother-in-law recently contacted my wife and I to let us know that my 15-year-old niece wants to transition to a boy, and after going to group counseling for a while, they're going to support her.
I have many thoughts on this, and I do feel comfortable approaching my sister about that decision.
My question is, should I? She's not my child, so it's not really my place, but she is my niece and I've heard stories of increased suicide rates for trans teens.
I'd hate for something like that to happen and for me to have said nothing that may have helped prevent it.
So should I say something?
Thanks.
Yes, you should prevent it.
You should say something, at least.
You should say that boys cannot...
Magically become girls.
Girls cannot magically become boys.
Men and women are different.
You should say that the ideology that is behind transgenderism is extraordinarily new, and it's changing all the time, and it's internally contradictory.
Because on the one hand, we're told that gender is nothing.
Gender is socially constructed.
It doesn't matter at all.
On the other hand, we're told that gender is so innate, so important, so essential that we've got to go through expensive and painful mutilations to try to make our bodies fit closer to our minds.
You should show your family that the idea of gender and sex being different doesn't make any sense because the ideology tells us that sex is biological.
You know, I look like a man.
I've got male genitalia.
I've got a Y chromosome.
But gender is in the mind.
It's not physical.
It's actually metaphysical.
But, of course, if that were true, it'd be much easier just to change your mind, right?
Because it's a lot simpler to change your mind than it is to go through these expensive mutilations.
Except when you tell that to people who push this gender ideology, they then completely move the goalposts and they say, no, no, no, it's not just in your mind, it's physical too, it's in your brain.
People who are born with, who are, have a male sex but a female gender, their brains actually look more like women.
But if you say, okay, if it's in the brain, that's physical then, so it's biological as well.
And then this distinction between sex and gender completely breaks down.
And then, on the most personal level, what you should tell them is that the pioneer of the transgender surgery, Dr.
Paul McHugh at Johns Hopkins, head of psychiatry at Johns Hopkins, started the gender clinic there, and he shut it down.
He shut it down years later because he realized it was medical malpractice, because he realized that what you cite, those high rates of suicide among teenagers with gender dysphoria, which is a real condition, those high rates of suicide did not go down after the surgery.
Rates of stress, anxiety, depression, even suicidality did not go down.
The surgery did nothing.
And in some cases, it caused profound regret.
We're now seeing huge rates of regret of people who have transitioned, so-called, or been transitioned.
And you should tell them that 15-year-olds are not in the position to make these kinds of decisions that will inevitably affect the rest of their lives.
We have an age of consent for a reason.
If you're a 25-year-old guy and you sleep with a 15-year-old girl, you'll go to jail, rightly.
You'll go to jail because 15-year-olds are deemed not able to make those sorts of decisions that could affect the rest of their lives.
But what on earth does a one-night stand compare with fundamentally mutilating your body and going on hormones and stopping puberty and making yourself infertile?
I mean, it's a one night stand is as far less permanent deleterious effects than doing something like radically changing your body.
So by any standard, by any measure, what, what the gender ideology movement is doing to teenagers is criminal.
It's immoral.
It is indefensible and it is ruining lives.
And you should at least present that kind of information to your family.
Really so that you can try to help your niece, but if for no other reason, so that you can rest easy and let your conscience go easy, that you did what you could to stop this terrible idea.
Alright, from Anonymous.
I was reading AOC's profile on Wikipedia, and it says she graduated from Boston University with honors in international relations and economics.
I find it very difficult to believe that AOC has a degree in economics.
Is there any way to confirm that she has a degree in econ from BU? If so, remind me not to send my kids there.
Thanks.
It would appear that she does have a degree in economics from BU, and perhaps you shouldn't send your kids there.
Uh...
Or perhaps she was just a terrible student.
The real problem is not just at BU, but at universities all around the country.
Standards have fallen so dramatically, and grade inflation has gotten so rampant, that you can graduate now from Yale with a degree in English summa cum laude and not have read William Shakespeare.
Okay, that's not just a BU problem.
That is a problem at universities overall, and it means that maybe when you're thinking about which school your kid's going to go to, you're going to have a much harder issue than just avoiding BU. Last question from Nick.
I have a common problem.
I really enjoy having a cigar on the weekends.
The issue is my girlfriend doesn't approve and said it's either her or the cigars.
With all the extra money I have now, which cigar brands should I stock up on?
Thanks.
A great question.
You should stock up on my father.
You should stock up on Tatuaje and Padron and Flor Dominicana.
You obviously have the right idea on this, and it's an idea that I think you have received from the great poet Rudyard Kipling, who wrote a famous poem on this called The Betrothed.
It's one of my favorite poems, and it's about...
How a guy has to choose between his fiancée Maggie and his cigar.
His fiancée Maggie has given him an ultimatum, and he's got to choose.
And the poem goes on and on and on.
It's very profound, but it concludes.
A million surplus Maggies are willing to bear the yoke.
And a woman is only a woman, but a good cigar is a smoke.
Light me another Cuba, I hold to my first sworn vows.
If Maggie will have no rival, I'll have no Maggie for spouse.
That's our show.
That's our week.
We'll be coming back on Monday.
In the meantime, I am going to go smoke a cigar.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is The Michael Knowles Show.
See you next week.
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 Ben Davies.
Director, Mike Joyner.
Executive producer, Jeremy Boring.
Senior producer, Jonathan Hay.
Supervising producers, Mathis Glover and Robert Sterling.
Technical producer, Austin Stevens.
Assistant director, Pavel Widowski.
Editor and associate producer, Danny D'Amico.
Audio mixer, Robin Fenderson.
Hair and makeup, Jesua Olvera.
Production assistants, McKenna Waters and Ryan Love.
The Michael Knowles Show is a Daily Wire production.
Copyright Daily Wire 2020.
Hey everyone, it's Andrew Klavan, host of The Andrew Klavan Show.
Democrats say they're worried about Bernie Sanders because they don't think he can win.
But maybe they're really worried because they think he can.
