Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

June 29, 2020 - The Michael Knowles Show

49:59

Ep. 570 - Say Their Names

Schumer and Pelosi forget George Floyd’s name, progressives cancel progressive president Woodrow Wilson, and rainbow glitter bestows coronavirus immunity at Pride. 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

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	The barbarians who are tearing down our nation's statues and history and entire culture over the past few weeks have pretended that they are doing it sparked by the officer-involved killing of George Floyd.
	That's been the line.
	They've been saying, say their names.
	That's been one of the slogans of the entire rioting.
	However, The national political leaders of this rioting, Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi, when pressed on it, can't actually remember the name of the guy they're saying say their name to prompt all of the rioting.
	For the families of Floyd Taylor, George Taylor.
	I only will do that if you tell me that this legislation is worthy of George Kirby's name.
	Worthy of George Kirby's name.
	George Kirby, by the way, was an American comedian from the 1960s and 70s and also a convicted drug dealer.
	He got pinched by the cops for dealing coke and heroin in the 70s and then later went into schools and told everyone not to do drugs.
	That's sort of beside the point.
	Nancy Pelosi doesn't know George Floyd's name and neither does Chuck Schumer.
	But of course, they don't remember the name.
	Because it was never about George Floyd.
	What is happening still today around the country is an ideological attack on our country, on our culture, and on our civilization.
	We should all say their names.
	All of the names.
	We should say the names of the victims of police brutality, the names of the victims of mob brutality, and most importantly of all, this is probably the least popular group to say their names, we should say the names of the people whose statues are being toppled down, the people who built this country.
	I'm Michael Knowles, and this is The Michael Knowles Show.
	The left does not want to say their names.
	We'll get to why in just one second.
	First, though, I got to thank our friends over at Ring.
	You know that these days, it's good to protect yourself against people who want to steal your packages and shipments.
	We are home a lot more than usual these days.
	And every day, we don't know, are we going to stay home, are we going to go to the office, are we going to be able to go out?
	It's hard to keep an eye on things.
	It's hard to get into a routine.
	Ring is on a mission to make neighborhoods safer.
	Their home security products are designed to give you peace of mind around the clock.
	From video doorbells and security cameras to smart security lighting and alarm systems, Ring has everything you need to make sure that your family and belongings are safe and secure.
	Anytime, anywhere.
	And with the all-new Ring Video Doorbell 3, you can keep an even closer eye on things than ever before.
	I really love Ring.
	I trust these guys.
	I trust them so much that I give out Ring as a housewarming present to my friends.
	Part of the reason I do this is because it's so cool.
	You can check on your home when you're in the office or on a beach.
	The other reason is it's fairly inexpensive so that you get a lot of good credit for giving it to your friends and you don't have to spend too much money.
	You can get a special offer on the Ring Welcome Kit when you go to ring.com slash Knowles, K-N-O-W-L-E-S. The Welcome Kit includes Ring Video Doorbell 3, Chime Pro, all you need to start building custom security for your home today.
	Go to ring.com slash Knowles.
	What's that address?
	ring.com slash Knowles.
	The left does not want to say their names.
	They say they want to say their names, but they don't want to say their names.
	They want to erase their names.
	They want to erase specific names and specific people with general abstractions.
	That's what you see all the time.
	In the cases of allegations of police brutality, if the alleged police brutality doesn't even turn out to be true, doesn't matter.
	What do they say?
	They say, well, forget about that specific instance.
	Just talk about the larger truth, even if they don't have any specific instances to build up to their larger truth.
	And when we're talking about specific cases like the killing of George Floyd, they pretend it's about George Floyd, but it's not really.
	It's about this general ideological idea completely disconnected from facts.
	This has no logical end to it.
	There's no limiting principle, rather.
	Progressives are now willing to erase the names, even, of the most famously progressive president in U.S. history.
	Which one am I talking about?
	I'm talking about Woodrow Wilson.
	Princeton University has a, had, I should say, a school of public affairs and international relations.
	That was named after Woodrow Wilson.
	Had until about three days ago when they renamed the school.
	I cannot believe that I am defending Woodrow Wilson.
	I'm not really defending him.
	Woodrow Wilson is one of the worst presidents in American history.
	But that's not why he's being canceled.
	He's being canceled because...
	Not because of the League of Nations.
	Not because he totally undermined American government.
	Not because he screwed up international relations for a century.
	It's because of another one of his flaws, which is that he was very, very racist.
	And, you know, he's screened movies like Birth of a Nation in the White House, and so now they're canceling him.
	I'm very torn.
	How am I supposed to feel about this?
	I don't like when we topple statues and erase people from history and rename buildings because of changing social mores.
	I also don't like Woodrow Wilson.
	I think he's one of the worst presidents in American history.
	Even conservatives should oppose this kind of thing.
	Even conservatives should defend Woodrow Wilson, who is probably the least conservative president we've ever had.
	Carter and Obama, I guess, are up there too, but Wilson really much worse because of how significant he was.
	When I mentioned that it's probably a dumb idea to rename Woodrow Wilson's school, There was a conservative blogger who took issue with me.
	And he said, look, it's good to lose Wilson.
	Wilson was a bad president.
	Do you agree?
	Do you think Wilson was a good guy or a bad guy?
	Which I think kind of misses the point, in a way he was kind of making my point.
	And then he said, look, at a time where we're so at each other's throats, I think it's just good that we can all come together and dislike Woodrow Wilson.
	And this is the problem.
	This is the trap that some conservatives are falling into, and we're only going to realize that we've fallen into it, I think, once our entire culture is gone.
	Yes, Woodrow Wilson is a president that conservatives don't like.
	But when we tear down his statues, when we rename schools that are named after him, we buy into the left's premises that we need to constantly be toppling statues and liberating ourselves from the oppressive past and looking down on those bad people in the past, those bad ancestors, looking on the tradition in the past with such ingratitude that we rip down their names.
	When we buy into that leftist premise of toppling statues...
	Then any victory we might have over Woodrow Wilson, who cares, is a pyrrhic victory.
	It's a victory in which we actually lose because we've bought into the premise of our adversaries and there's no end to that at all.
	Okay, it's fine that Woodrow Wilson's a bad guy and a Democrat.
	I've been saying that for years.
	But, for instance, what this one conservative blogger said to me, he said, I'm fine with something not being named after Wilson.
	Yeah, me too.
	But that's not the question.
	The school is already named after Wilson.
	The question is, are we going to rename things and pull down statues?
	And if you give in, that's what I've been saying all week on the Lee thing, on General Lee.
	When you give in on Lee, you've given in on Lincoln.
	And you've given it on Saint Junipero Serra, and you've given it on Jesus.
	That's how quickly we've escalated into the attacks on statues, is now they're talking about smashing windows of Jesus.
	And very few people have had the cojones to defend any of these figures.
	But, speaking of Jesus, there was one priest over the weekend in St.
	Louis.
	Even St.
	Louis, another saint, has come under attack.
	And the mob wants to rename the city of St.
	Louis and tear down a St.
	Louis statue.
	So this priest decided to show up, great young priest, and give everyone a history lesson.
	Take a listen.
	I've already been asked questions.
	I'm willing to answer them, but you have to listen to the answers.
	They don't want to listen.
	So, St.
	Louis was a man who had authority thrust upon him.
	He didn't do anything to earn it.
	You're right.
	He didn't do anything to earn it.
	What did he do with that authority?
	Do you know what he did?
	Go down to the St.
	Louis Cathedral and you'll see some of the history that St.
	Louis did.
	St.
	Louis was a man who willed to use his kingship to do good for his people.
	This is shocking.
	They can't imagine a king did good?
	That's not possible.
	St.
	Louis had nothing to do with Africans, okay?
	Do you know who lived in Tunisia?
	Where did he invade?
	Where did he invade?
	Do you know who lived in Tunisia?
	He was bad against Africans because he went to Tunisia.
	But the Arabs lived in Tunisia.
	The Arabs had taken over Tunisia by that century.
	The Arabs had killed all the Africans in Tunisia in the 700s.
	They can't take that fact.
	They don't want to hear anything about that fact.
	So you have this great priest who's a young guy, I don't know, what is he, in his 20s, and he shows up, and he just gives these people a history lesson.
	And he says, what are you, you're angry at Saint Louis?
	Because of what?
	Because he was bad to Africans?
	Africans had nothing to do with the reign of St.
	Louis.
	Oh, well, he went into Tunisia.
	Well, Tunisia was run by Arabs, Arabs who had invaded Tunisia and were not particularly nice to the Africans who were there and sold thousands and thousands of them into slavery.
	It doesn't matter, though.
	This is what happens, by the way, when you take out any kind of historical education from schools.
	I mean, right now, European history is basically not taught.
	Even when I was in school, which, you know, I graduated high school in 2008.
	Even then, European history was not taught.
	It was an AP elective if you wanted to take it.
	But this is what happens.
	People don't know anything about their own culture.
	St.
	Louis was a saint.
	His mother famously said, I had rather see you dead at my feet than guilty of a mortal sin.
	He was very good to his people.
	He was a very just king.
	And here you see a little bit of this abstract ideology of liberalism.
	They don't know anything about St.
	Louis, but they know that, according to liberalism, we always have to be liberating ourselves from the oppressive past.
	Any king must be terrible.
	Any democracy must be wonderful.
	Anything in the olden days must be bad.
	Anything now must be good.
	Though I think with all the rioting and the statue toppling and the madness, a lot of people wouldn't mind living under St.
	Louis right now compared to some of the woke mob that's now taken over our country.
	So what is going to happen about this?
	Finally, finally, the president has signed an executive order to protect the statues.
	Is it too little too late or is it going to do something?
	I think actually it's already turning out pretty well.
	We'll get to that in one second.
	First though, got to thank our friends over at Blink Sale.
	Have you ever had to chase down a client or company that owed you money for your work?
	Maybe you're stuck in the dinosaur age of creating invoices in Microsoft Word.
	I mean, you might as well be etching them onto a stone tablet, having to manually track and organize all of them in your files.
	Just stop it.
	Stop it, man.
	It's 2020.
	If we're going to have to deal with all the chaos of 2020, at least enjoy some of the benefits, okay?
	You should not have to waste time creating ugly invoices in some word processor.
	And you shouldn't have to send nagging emails to get your invoices paid.
	And you shouldn't have to worry about getting paid, period.
	Use BlinkSale.
	With BlinkSale, you can send beautiful, custom, branded invoices and estimates in seconds. And you can stay on top of your outstanding invoices. And you can let your customers and clients pay your invoices online.
	You get instant notifications.
	It's just so easy.
	It's terrific.
	See for yourself.
	Try BlinkSale for free right now at BlinkSale.com slash Knowles, K-N-W-L-E-S.
	That is B-L-I-N-K-S-A-L-E.com slash Knowles, BlinkSale.
	BlinkSale.
	Spend less time billing and more time doing what you love.
	So President Trump just signed this executive order to protect statues.
	The executive order in the 30,000-foot view prohibits desecration of public monuments and vandalism on government property and all of the recent acts of violence that we've been seeing everywhere.
	And crucially, it withholds federal money and funding that is tied to public spaces from state and local governments that fail to protect the public monuments.
	So if the local government, we talked about this when we sat down with Attorney General Bill Barr last week.
	He said that the trouble here is the federal government can't be everywhere at all times, nor would we really want it to be.
	So you've got to rely on state and local governments to protect these places.
	And if they're not going to do it, then we're in a little bit of a bind.
	Well, one thing we can do is withhold money from them.
	It also withdraws federal grants for jurisdictions and law enforcement agencies that fail to stop their desecration.
	So another thing that's been driving us crazy is you see people tearing down these statues.
	It's obviously very organized, and we'll get to just how organized this movement is in a moment.
	And you say, where are the cops?
	Now, I get it.
	The cops are between a rock and a hard place because if they don't do their jobs, I'm going to criticize them.
	And if they do do their jobs, they might get...
	Charged with murder or something, right?
	I mean, they're obviously very unpopular right now.
	They don't have any political support.
	So I sympathize with the cops here.
	But if law enforcement is not going to stop the rioting and not going to stop the desecration, then they're going to lose their funding.
	And really, that's just a political problem for state and local to figure out.
	So I'm glad President Trump did this.
	Actually, he did something over the weekend though that I like even more.
	He tweeted out the images of people who have not been caught.
	They are fugitive criminals who have torn down public property and our history and our culture.
	He tweeted out their photos and he said, we're looking for this person.
	If you can identify them, let us know because we're going to arrest them and prosecute them and throw them in prison for 10 years.
	Love this.
	I It's as though he listens to this show.
	Maybe other people have been saying it too, but I certainly have.
	Which is that conservatives need to buck up and use the institutional power we have, what little institutional power we have, to actually effect our political ends.
	One of which is, save the statues, save our culture.
	Well, how can we do that?
	Local law enforcement has its hands tied behind its back.
	The local and state governments aren't going to help at all.
	The administrative state doesn't particularly want to do anything.
	As I said, the only thing we really have at our disposal is the bully pulpit.
	Talk radio and Trump's Twitter account.
	We can talk until we're blue in the face.
	Well, one way to use those things is to put their photos up there on Trump's Twitter account, which everybody is paying attention to.
	Some conservatives, I think, some of the more squishy types, they don't like this.
	They say, oh, it's too personal.
	It's too, Trump is getting too down in the muck.
	He should not be the one.
	Yes, he should.
	Trump is the actual chief law enforcement officer in the country.
	We refer to the attorney general that way, but who's the attorney general's boss and the executive?
	It's the president.
	Trump absolutely should be doing this.
	I love it.
	I think this kind of thing is exactly what we elected him for.
	This is the right idea.
	And the press is furious because now that he's finally fighting back, after weeks, I think he should have done it earlier, but now that he's finally fighting back, the left is starting to pivot.
	They're pivoting back to coronavirus, and they're pivoting back to Russia again.
	Seriously, they're pivoting back to Russia.
	The New York Times, over the weekend, published this piece, alleging That Russia, quote, secretly offered bounties to Taliban-linked militants for killing coalition forces in Afghanistan.
	Now, I don't know whether or not that allegation is true.
	That on its own is not a news story.
	Russia is an adversary of the United States, so I wouldn't be surprised if they tried to get our troops when they're in Afghanistan.
	As you'll recall, in the 1980s, we spent a good time trying to get their troops when they were in Afghanistan, so this conflict goes back a little bit of a long way.
	Here's the issue.
	The New York Times alleged that Trump knew about it.
	The Times writes, Trump knew about this in late March, and the implication being he hasn't done anything to Russia yet.
	The implication being he's a stooge for Russia, or he's really weak for Russia, or Putin's got something on him, right?
	It's the same trash that we've been hearing for now four years with no evidence whatsoever and a lot of evidence to the contrary.
	And the Times, though, they're so desperate because the statue thing and the coronavirus thing, it didn't work to To completely destroy Trump.
	So they're going back to their old bag of tricks and trying to say that Trump is a Manchurian candidate for Russia.
	Now the director of national intelligence, John Ratcliffe, smacked down this theory.
	He said, quote, I have confirmed that neither the president nor the vice president were ever briefed on any intelligence alleged by the New York Times in its reporting yesterday.
	Somebody's lying.
	Either it's the Director of National Intelligence or it's the New York Times.
	DNI or NYT? My money would be on the New York Times lying.
	Why?
	Because the New York Times keeps getting Russia wrong.
	Do you remember?
	Let me take you back three years, over three years, to Valentine's Day 2017.
	New York Times runs a headline.
	Trump campaign aides had repeated contacts with Russian intelligence.
	They were running with this.
	This is a big story.
	They loved this story.
	And then we got James Comey testifying.
	James Comey, one of their guys, big lefty, hates Donald Trump.
	But because Comey was giving testimony, he had to admit that the New York Times story was not true.
	It was not true.
	They got it wrong.
	The New York Times, whenever they write about Russia, I don't know why, they get it wrong.
	Maybe they've got weak sources.
	Maybe they've got weak journalistic standards.
	I'm not saying that Russia didn't go after US troops in Afghanistan.
	That might have happened.
	But the thing is, we get so much intelligence every day, right?
	There's just a virtually limitless amount of intelligence that comes in.
	The president doesn't get briefed on all of that intelligence.
	And so the claim that's made here is that the president got briefed on it.
	No evidence of that whatsoever.
	Terrible track record at the New York Times.
	And the timing is just so convenient.
	Because as we move on from one completely manufactured crisis from another completely manufactured crisis, now we find ourselves in, you guessed it, a manufactured crisis.
	So that was the New York Times attempt.
	New York Times tried to hit them.
	But obviously there are other hack papers out there that are trying to take down this president.
	So here's another route.
	This is the one taken by the Washington Post.
	This one, even funnier.
	Washington Post publishes a piece over the weekend.
	Trump keeps claiming that the most dangerous cities in America are all run by Democrats.
	They aren't.
	They aren't.
	Okay, no way.
	Well, okay, let's go to the graph that is in the very same article.
	I'll set you up.
	The blue graphs, the blue bars, are cities run by Democrats.
	The gray bars are cities that have a nonpartisan mayor, but really that means left wing.
	And then the red bars are the ones run by Republicans.
	Can you see?
	Can you see what's going on?
	Oh, so it looks as though we have one Republican in Jacksonville, Florida, Then three of the gray, which really means left-leaning, but technically nonpartisan.
	And then all blue.
	All blue.
	Every other one.
	Every other major city, blue.
	And the Washington Post thinks that this proves their point.
	Maybe what they think is you're just not going to read into the article.
	Maybe what they think is you're going to see the headline.
	You're going to scroll past it on Facebook or Twitter or something like that and not look.
	It's pretty funny that they would include the graph in their article.
	This is the kind of thing we're going to see for the next four months.
	And if Trump wins, then obviously for the next four years.
	This is a dishonest headline.
	This headline is a lie.
	They say it's not a lie because there's one city not run by Democrats.
	But obviously...
	The point he's making...
	Maybe change his...
	Let's say virtually all cities.
	Nearly all cities.
	The point he's making is true.
	The point they're making here is a lie.
	Same thing happened with the New York Times.
	They lie to you.
	The media lie to your face.
	And yet now, they want us to believe them on locking down again for coronavirus, or on some crime that President Trump committed, or on why we've got to tear down the statues...
	The media are complicity.
	I watched the movie Richard Jewell over the weekend.
	It was this Clint Eastwood movie about this hero security guard who got smeared as being a murderer.
	And it was so refreshing to watch the movie because in the movie the media are the enemy.
	And they are!
	They are!
	They're the ones doing this kind of thing.
	The mainstream media.
	The guys who pretend to be honest and objective when really they are not.
	So, President Trump's got his work cut out for him.
	And I gotta say, sometimes he doesn't help himself.
	He doesn't.
	You know I love the guy, but sometimes he makes it hard on himself.
	He tweeted out a clip over the weekend.
	It was a group of seniors from the villages in Florida who were protesting against each other.
	One of the guys hated Trump.
	The other one was driving by in a golf cart with a Trump flag.
	Trump tweets out, Thank you to the great people of the villages.
	The radical left do-nothing Democrats will fall in the fall.
	Corrupt Joe is shot.
	See you soon.
	And it included a video which I guess he didn't listen to because in the video the people with the Trump flags were either jokingly or earnestly yelling the words white power.
	Okay, what is going on in this video?
	Do I think that these seniors who are driving by in the golf carts and kind of laughing, saying white power, do I think that they are members of the Ku Klux Klan?
	I don't know for sure, but I don't think so.
	I think what actually happened in this video is they're going by and they've got a little Trump flag, and then this kind of maniac, the left-winger guy, says white power and they're joking.
	They're mocking him.
	The first person to say white power in the clip is not the Trump supporter, it's the Democrat.
	And I think they're mocking him.
	He goes, yeah, you guys are for white power.
	And they're like, oh yeah, we're for white power.
	Oh, we love white power.
	You got us.
	Where's your Klan hood, honey?
	That's what I think this is really about.
	Regardless.
	Probably doesn't help President Trump to tweet this.
	He tweets it out and then takes the tweet down.
	This is easy.
	I've done this myself.
	You retweet something and when you look on Twitter, the sound is not there.
	So all you see is people waving the Trump flag and they're really excited.
	You don't hear it necessarily.
	And I don't think that Trump heard it.
	Some of my Democratic friends, they were saying Trump knew exactly what he was doing.
	It's a dog whistle.
	He's a white supremacist.
	He's a Klansman.
	If that were true, why would he delete the tweet?
	I don't...
	It doesn't help him.
	So I think he just didn't...
	I take him at his word.
	I think it doesn't help him.
	But this is...
	One bit of evidence that he should at least listen to it before he retweets it.
	You know, I'm not of the opinion that he should run his tweets through a committee of professional campaign consultants who couldn't win their way out of a plastic bag, you know, who just don't know anything about actually winning elections.
	I'm not one of these people who say, take the phone away.
	I like that he has the phone.
	I think the phone is largely why he won the first time.
	But he might take an extra second or two before retweeting that because that's an unforced error and one does not need to do it.
	No serious person thinks that Donald Trump is a white supremacist.
	No one ever said this guy's been in public life for 40 years and now only when he runs for president is a Republican.
	Does anyone suggest he's a racist?
	They do it to all of us.
	So I don't take that seriously.
	Ironically, President Trump is one of the last politicians in America who is actually fighting for a colorblind society.
	You hear this all the time when Trump was inaugurated.
	He said, we all bleed the same blood of patriots.
	Doesn't matter if you're black or white or whatever.
	He is espousing this colorblind point of view.
	The left is not.
	Actually, the California state legislature just took language out of its constitution to say that we won't discriminate against people on race.
	They are now openly advocating discriminating against people on the basis of their race.
	Of course, the way the Democrats are doing it is they want to discriminate against whites and Asians in favor of Hispanics and black people.
	But the principle is there.
	You've got Trump saying don't discriminate against people.
	You've got the left saying, and Democrats explicitly saying we need to discriminate against people.
	We'll get to that in one second.
	First, though, I've got to thank you.
	You guys have really turned up my Michael Knowles Show YouTube channel, which is terrific.
	I appreciate it.
	I like that we beat Andrew Klavan.
	That was very important to me, just personally.
	We're closing in on 100,000 subscribers.
	So while you're on the Daily Wire YouTube channel, which if you're watching this on YouTube, you probably are, just go on, type in Michael Knowles' YouTube channel.
	Go there and subscribe.
	We would really appreciate it.
	We had a lot of fun stuff out there, including a clip from my recent interview on Dan Bongino's podcast.
	And go check that out if you haven't listened to it.
	I love Dan Bongino.
	I think that guy totally gets it.
	And I got to sit down with him for, I don't know, 45 minutes or an hour or something last Friday.
	So that was a great time.
	Go check that out.
	We got other clips, too.
	I was on John Spicer's show the other day and just lots of breakout stuff.
	So head on over.
	And if you're not already a Daily Wire member, get a reader's pass at dailywire.com.
	Great value for only three bucks a month.
	And when you sign up, you get the first month for just 99 cents.
	You get access to our mobile app, articles ad-free.
	You get great, important editorials such as this one by Andrew Klavan.
	The Biden campaign proposes on debate moderated by the day nurse Biden calls Nana.
	You know, important, hard-hitting news.
	Head on over, dailywire.com slash subscribe.
	Subscribe, we'll be right back with a lot more.
	They smear Trump baselessly as a racist when Trump is the last politician in America pushing for anti-racism, just about.
	Okay, the left is not pushing for anti-racism or colorblindness.
	They're pushing for a mirror form of racial bigotry.
	Here is until last Thursday what was in the California State Constitution.
	Very simple phrase.
	The state shall not discriminate against or grant preferential treatment to any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public housing, or public contracting.
	Simple enough.
	You know how the left always complains about institutional racism?
	Well, there you have it.
	No institutional racism.
	You are not allowed to discriminate against or grant preferential treatment to any individual or group on the basis of race until the Democrats voted to take that out on Thursday.
	They voted to get rid of that line.
	They voted on Thursday to create institutional racism.
	Now, they won't admit that that's racism because their view of racism is that Racism only goes in one direction.
	Of course, that isn't true, but that's what they want.
	They don't want anti-racism.
	They don't want colorblindness.
	They want laws and regulations that disadvantage white people and Asian people and give advantage to other racial groups.
	This is why the group of Asian students sued Harvard just a little while ago.
	When we talk about institutional racism or bigotry, we're talking about affirmative action, right?
	Affirmative action is a bit of racial discrimination, but it's racial discrimination in a way that the left would prefer.
	And so now that is what they're pushing for.
	Let me show you what I mean, in a more practical term, not just in the laws.
	Over the weekend, we had pride.
	You know what pride is.
	Well, pride is the deadliest of the seven deadly sins, and pride is the queen of all vices, and pride is also now our national secular liberal liturgical celebration that happens every June.
	Coronavirus is super-duper deadly.
	It's so super-duper deadly that you can't go to work, and you can't go to church, and you can't go to a Trump rally.
	But it's not so super-duper deadly that you can't show up by the thousands to celebrate pride.
	Because that's what happened.
	This was from Bloomberg News.
	Live aerial footage shows massive crowds rallying to celebrate pride in Chicago.
	Oh, that's great, isn't it?
	Thousands and thousands of people out there celebrating pride amid the allegedly deadly pandemic that we've got to shut down our whole country for.
	We're shutting down again.
	They're shutting down bars and restaurants all over the country now.
	Texas just shut down again.
	In LA, bars just shut down again.
	Because coronavirus is so super-duper serious, unless you are...
	Unless you're rioting, unless you're looting, unless you're pulling down statues of George Washington, and unless you're celebrating imaginative sexual preferences, then you're allowed to go out.
	This is discrimination.
	The discrimination is if you are a leftist, if you're doing something that the left likes, you're allowed to do it, and if you're doing something that the left doesn't like, you're not permitted to do it, and you're called a grandma killer, and you're blamed for a pandemic.
	Same thing happened in New York.
	New York's official Pride March was relatively quiet this year, they said, because of the pandemic.
	But there was another one, the Queer Liberation March, that drew a large crowd demanding an end to racism and police brutality.
	But it was like, it was that.
	It was just the typical leftist police brutality canard.
	But it was about, like, gay stuff, too, or something, or transgender stuff.
	It was all about the sexual revolution stuff.
	It was presented intersectionally, right?
	So a lot of it, you can hear the chants.
	The chants, they were talking about how black trans lives matter.
	Shut it down.
	Shut it down.
	Black trans lives matter.
	Mostly white people protesting in favor of all of this because when, actually when black voters are polled on LGBT issues, turns out they're not particularly progressive, but white, white So this was presented intersectionally because some...
	Black transgender people, men who identify as women, are killed every year.
	What they don't mention is that they are killed exclusively, almost or actually exclusively, by black men.
	But that doesn't matter to the intersectional mob here because the whole point is just voicing this kind of resentment at the system as it stands so that you can tear it down.
	It doesn't matter about coronavirus at that point.
	The coronavirus hype, not the coronavirus itself necessarily, but the coronavirus hype in the media, the selective hype.
	One week it's going to kill you all, one week it doesn't matter at all.
	That is all political.
	That is all about November.
	If Joe Biden wins on November 3rd, expect fears of coronavirus to dissipate on November 4th.
	We've got to talk about this as two separate issues.
	There is the virus, such as it is, and then there is the hype about the virus.
	And unfortunately, I can't tell you very much about the virus because the media have been so contradictory and so dishonest in their coverage of the virus that we just don't know what to trust.
	They've been wrong about it from the very beginning.
	And then they told us, they actually told us, public health officials and the mainstream media mouthpieces said that it's bad to go out and protest lockdowns, but it's good to go out and protest Republicans and the police departments.
	They said it will help stop the spread of COVID if you go out by the thousands and tear down statues and protest for BLM, which is a Marxist organization.
	We'll get to that in a second too.
	But It will exacerbate coronavirus if you go out and protest the lockdowns.
	So we can't trust them.
	It has become strictly political.
	We know that coronavirus is being used as a political tool by the left.
	But this is not hypocritical.
	This is just plain discrimination.
	And I think conservatives at a certain point, we need to stop pretending that it's hypocrisy.
	The left is not being hypocritical.
	They're actually being honest.
	They're telling us we want one set of standards for you guys and another set of standards for us.
	That's not hypocrisy.
	That's just, I guess you could call it hierarchical.
	You could call it unfair.
	You could call it unjust, but they are being honest about it.
	The premise of affirmative action is this.
	If you're a member of a privileged group, If you're a racial minority or you have imaginative sexual preferences or you're a woman, then you will receive preferential treatment.
	If you are a member of a non-privileged group, namely white, straight, male, guy who thinks you're a guy, or Asians, for some reason they lump the Asians in here, these poor Asians, many of whom are immigrants, many of whom don't have very much money, they still get lumped in as a non-privileged group, then you will be officially disadvantaged.
	And I get it.
	I mean, I understand the arguments they're making for it.
	They're saying to overcome historical wrongs, we need to treat some people better than we treat other people on the basis of race or sex or whatever.
	I get that they're making that argument.
	Those are moral concepts.
	Those are even religious concepts, okay?
	Pride itself is an ethical and religious term.
	Pride goeth before destruction and a haughty spirit before a fall.
	I always thought the LGBT group, they made a little bit of a PR error embracing pride, the deadliest of the seven deadly sins.
	Not, you know, it's...
	And I guess this year we're doing wrath, too.
	Wrath gets lumped in there as well when we're knocking down the statues.
	But this is why separation of church and state, as we refer to it, has never been true anywhere.
	The state always has some relation to religion because the state deals with religious and ethical and moral questions.
	You sometimes hear people say, we can't legislate morality.
	You can only legislate morality.
	All laws derive from moral arguments.
	All civil laws we have derive from the natural law or some relationship and understanding of the natural law.
	Everything, not just abortion and the definition of marriage and capital punishment, all the way down to taxes and parking tickets.
	Those come from moral arguments.
	And so the question is, what kind of morality is your state following?
	What kind of religion is your state following?
	I think a lot of, especially Christian conservatives, have kind of tried to back away.
	They use these lines, they say, politics is downstream of culture.
	They use that as an excuse not to actually worry about politics.
	Or they say you can't legislate morality.
	Well, of course, you can only legislate morality.
	And what that has been is a surrender of our politics to a new religion, a new woke religion.
	Maybe we've got to say its name, that religion, which we will in just one moment.
	Consider the religious rituals that have come about just in the last few weeks, the main one being the mask.
	You know the mask.
	Mask which we were initially told don't wear the masks.
	The masks are bad.
	The masks aren't going to stop coronavirus.
	We have very little evidence that the masks do anything at all.
	Then we were told the masks will protect us.
	Then we were told the masks won't protect us, but it'll protect other people.
	Now we're being told something in the middle.
	And now increasingly we're seeing people...
	Not wearing the masks properly, but just having to have them around as a virtue signal, as a sign that we're on the right side of the ideology.
	Well, Joe Biden has just said if he's elected president, he will, completely unconstitutionally, mandate masks at the federal level.
	If you became president tomorrow, what would you do differently regarding the pandemic and getting these surging cases now under control?
	I would go back to making sure that everybody had masks, that you had PPE lined up.
	We have been making sure we stockpile all the things that we need that we don't have now.
	The one thing we do know, these masks make a gigantic difference.
	I would insist that everybody on public be wearing that mask.
	Anyone to reopen would have to make sure that they walked into a business that had masks.
	Couldn't you use your federal leverage to mandate that though?
	Yes.
	And would you?
	Yes, I would.
	From an executive standpoint, yes, I would.
	So you would, in effect, mandate the wearing of masks?
	I would do everything in my possible to make it required that people had to wear masks in public.
	I would do everything in my possible, and I would...
	So he realizes at the end, because Biden's been around a long time, he realizes, wait a second, I just said that I would mandate masks from the federal level, but I probably don't have the constitutional power to do that, so I would do everything in my possible.
	One thing to note here is the man still can't form an English sentence.
	Even though they're limiting on the campaign his public appearances, every time he appears it's clear this guy is not there.
	He is not with it.
	And he falls apart even at the end here.
	But at the broader level, what he's saying isn't true.
	We don't know that the masks are super-duper effective.
	In fact, all the same people were telling us they weren't effective just a few weeks ago.
	We know very little about the masks.
	And we know that Joe Biden himself, when he was giving a speech just a couple weeks ago, he had the mask dangling from his ear.
	It wasn't on his mouth, so it wasn't preventing the spread of coronavirus, but it wasn't off either.
	Because if it's off, then he's not on board.
	He wore it dangling down from his ear just to show people that he's on the right team.
	People do this now when you're on an airplane.
	I've taken a couple airplanes in the last few weeks or when you're in a restaurant or something, you'll see people wearing the mask below the nose.
	This is what I do as well.
	And you wear it below the nose because this is extremely stupid, this constantly changing standard where you have to wear the mask, you don't have to wear the mask.
	Coronavirus is super deadly, but go out and tear down statues and riot for BLM and show up at Pride, right?
	So it's not not really based on science, but you have to have it somewhere around.
	I was on an airplane and I had the mask.
	I'm not going to wear a mask on my face for five hours.
	I'm just not going to do it.
	And so I had the mask on my chin.
	So my mouth and my nose completely exposed.
	And then eventually I said, this is stupid.
	So I just take the mask off.
	And the stewardess walks up to me and says, you have to put your mask on.
	So I put it back on my chin.
	Obviously not doing anything to stop any of my air coming out.
	She said, okay, that's good.
	It's like wearing a mantilla in a church or a hijab or wearing a yarmulke if you're Jewish.
	It is a quasi-religious symbol saying that we are all on board in the same metaphysics, the invisible enemy that we're all fighting.
	So what's the science say?
	Well, the science says that the left-wing policies that they're all saying are based on science actually have killed way more people than anything else.
	Andrew Cuomo, governor of New York, is being given credit for being the leader on coronavirus, right?
	He's actually been the worst governor in the country on coronavirus, and his state, as a result, got hit the worst.
	He didn't have enough ventilators.
	Then he overestimated how many ventilators he would need.
	He didn't need as many hospital beds as he thought he would need.
	And he sent sick people into nursing homes.
	And the sick people going into nursing homes with the most vulnerable population killed more people than anything else in this virus.
	This is according to the New York Times, believe it or not.
	43% of coronavirus-linked deaths, according to the New York Times, accounted in nursing homes.
	They took place in nursing homes.
	The Times compiled a whole database and they report that about 12,000 nursing homes and care centers have been linked to 282,000 cases of coronavirus.
	Of those cases, 54,000 people have died.
	Shows you something also about who's being affected by coronavirus.
	It's disproportionately very old, frail, and sick people.
	But there are still policies you can put into place that will protect them.
	The left hasn't done that.
	The left sent all the sick people into the nursing homes, and that accounted for a full 43% of the coronavirus deaths.
	Don't let them tell you that they're the great defenders of science here, and you're a science denier because you don't want to wear the stupid mask.
	Tell them to fix their nursing home policies.
	Then you'll talk about wearing this virtue signal mask.
	Speaking of virtue signaling, some bands now are changing their names.
	It's not just the statues coming down.
	It's the bands.
	Dixie Chicks.
	Remember Dixie Chicks?
	They were somewhat relevant 20 years ago.
	I think that was the last time, too, that they were somewhat relevant.
	Well, they're back, kind of.
	They're not back with any music in particular that anyone's talking about.
	They're back changing their names.
	The Dixie Chicks have taken out Dixie because we've got to cancel the South.
	So the Dixie Chicks are just the chicks, which to me is still pretty offensive.
	The chicks?
	They're the only chicks?
	They're erasing the lived experience of all the other chicks?
	They've just got to be chicks.
	But if they're chicks, don't you think that's a little sexist?
	Are they going to be broads?
	Dames?
	I don't think so.
	You think chicks is just referring to birds?
	What about all the other birds?
	Huh?
	What about the eagles?
	Speaking of which, probably got to cancel the eagles.
	So the Dixie Chicks, they're out.
	And Lady Antebellum, a musician that I've never heard of, has changed her name to Lady A. Which is taken by somebody else.
	She didn't look into that, so that's a big issue.
	Because you can't be antebellum.
	That's pre-war.
	Maybe she could be Lady Reconstruction, which is what happened after the Civil War.
	But if she's Lady Reconstruction, let's not forget that Reconstruction is what led to many of the horrors that followed from the Civil War.
	Jim Crow Segregation, lynchings, all that kind of stuff.
	She can't be that.
	Can she be a lady?
	Well, what's a lady?
	Who the heck are you to define to me what a lady is?
	A man can be a lady, thank you very much.
	There's no end to that.
	When you start tearing down the statues, you are left with nothing.
	When you start tearing down the names because one word is offensive, ultimately there's nothing you can say.
	There's no limiting principle to what the left is saying.
	In my hometown, in the town of my birth, Mount Kisco, New York, there's a statue of Christopher Columbus.
	They want to tear it down.
	There's a petition going around.
	I think 750 or 800 people have signed it.
	They want to get it to 1,000.
	It's a relatively small town.
	And they say in it, we are a diverse town.
	Mount Kisco is a diverse town populated with about 10,700 people.
	It is appalling to see a Christopher Columbus statue in this town.
	Then they list all of the crimes that he didn't commit, but they think he committed.
	Christopher Columbus is a tyrant, which is why we need to take down his statue.
	In no way does Mount Kisco represent The atrocities committed by Columbus, so why should there be a statue in our town in his honor?
	What they mean by diverse is that increasingly over the last 20 years or so, particularly because of immigration policies, the town has become largely Hispanic.
	There are a lot more Hispanic people in town.
	I strongly suspect, by the way, that this petition is being pushed by white liberals, because I don't think recent immigrants have very much time to care about these frivolous types of things, these political agitations.
	But they're doing it, at least, in the name of diversity, referring to the Hispanic population, apparently unaware that Hispanic people would not exist without Christopher Columbus.
	Christopher Columbus invented Latinos.
	I've mentioned this in speeches before.
	Some people tell me it's offensive.
	How is it offensive?
	It's simply true.
	What is Hispanic or Latino?
	It's the combination of Spaniards with indigenous populations, specifically in Latin America.
	That would not exist if the Spaniards hadn't come to America, and who brought the Spaniards to America was Christopher Columbus.
	So if you like diversity in Hispanics and Latinos, you have a Latino friend, you ought to support Columbus, because he's the reason that Latinos exist.
	But they don't want diversity.
	This is not what this is about.
	People have to cut it out.
	Well, I support BLM because I think Black Lives Matter.
	BLM has nothing to do with Black Lives Matter.
	Well, I support these tearing down the statues because I support diversity.
	It has nothing to do with diversity.
	This is about a specific plan, a specific ideological strategy and political strategy to tear down our nation and our culture and our civilization.
	We talked last week about how Black Lives Matter is a Marxist organization.
	One of the founders, Patrice Collors, admitted on film, she said, we are trained Marxists.
	We who founded BLM. Well, another one of the founders.
	Because in that case, Patrice was referring to herself and Alicia Garza, another founder, as trained Marxists.
	But the third founder, whose name is Opal Tometi, recently surfaced in a photo with the communist dictator of Venezuela, Nicolas Maduro.
	She's smiling.
	She's got her hand up.
	She's so excited to be with Maduro.
	Black Lives Matter and the associated movements.
	Black Lives Matter in particular is a Marxist organization.
	They say they're a Marxist organization.
	Their founders are admitted, avowed Marxists and trained Marxists.
	Their website talks in Marxist language about doing Marxist things.
	If you support Black Lives Matter, you are supporting Marxism.
	How did Marxism get a hold in 2020 of all places, 30 years after the fall of the Berlin Wall?
	That might have something to do with liberalism and the weaknesses of liberalism.
	We can talk about that as well.
	But there is a plan here.
	There is a strategy.
	There is an ideology.
	We should say its name.
	We should not be cowed into silence.
	We should not be cowed into apathy.
	We should not be, we should not make the opposite, you know, the, the equal and opposite reaction of, of Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer at the top of the show who pretend that they're, they care about saying somebody's name, George Floyd.
	They don't really.
	They're pushing their ideological agenda.
	We should be able to call out that specific ideological agenda.
	While a specific ideology is tearing down statues in this country, tearing down our whole culture.
	If we can't even name that ideology, we can't even name those activists, then we're certainly not going to And then we'll all be sitting around the rubble saying, ah gosh, didn't we used to have a great country?
	Didn't we used to have a great culture?
	Ah well, too bad.
	2020 can't get worse.
	2020 could get a lot better, but we're going to have to step up and take action.
	I'm Michael Knowles.
	This is the Michael Knowles Show.
	I'll show you tomorrow.
	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.
	Executive producer, Jeremy Boren.
	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, Nika Geneva.
	Production assistant, 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.
	Trump is in a slump and he needs to turn it around, but he can't do it alone.
	The right is part of the problem and the right needs to find the guts to stand up to a rampaging left.

▲