All Episodes
Previous Next
June 29, 2021 - The Michael Knowles Show
47:28
Ep. 795 - The NFL Is Gay

The NFL comes out of the closet, a British dude transitions to become a Korean, and Supreme Court “originalists” defend the supposed constitutional right of men to use the women’s bathroom. My new book ’Speechless: Controlling Words, Controlling Minds,’ is now available wherever books are sold. Grab your copy today here: https://utm.io/udtMJ  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
The NFL is gay.
It is super-duper gay.
It is Liberace-level gay.
And that is not my opinion.
Well, that is my opinion, actually.
But what I'm saying is it's not my opinion.
It is my opinion because the NFL says that it is true.
And I'm not saying that the NFL is lame or stupid or...
I actually am saying that the NFL is lame and stupid, but I'm not using the word gay to mean lame and stupid like people do in middle school or anything like that.
I want to be very clear.
I am saying the NFL is gay in the narrow sense of men who are sexually attracted to men because that's what the National Football League tells me that it is.
And not to be outdone, Kermit the Frog is gay as well.
And a British man is now a Korean.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is the Michael Knowles Show.
Two days left in Pride Month.
I don't know that I can keep up.
I don't know what is Kermit, the NFL, the Brits becoming Koreans.
My favorite comment yesterday from The Enforcer, who says, I'm so glad that my kids are back in school.
They were falling behind in their Afro-Indigenous non-binary transsexual studies.
Yes, well, no, it's a big fear.
It's a big fear because, you know, you get about three years of that discipline in school now.
This actually is a very good point that you're making, which is many conservatives pointed out it's cruel to keep kids out of school and away from their friends and sports.
And it's true that it's bad to keep kids away from their friends and their sports and everything, but keeping them out of those schools actually may be a benefit to them.
That's That might be the silver lining in the storm cloud of the coronavirus lockdowns.
Always trying to look for a silver lining.
Well, you know what?
Even in our crazy chaotic world, here's one silver lining.
You can know who's on your doorstep with a ring.
There are a thousand reasons why you want to protect your home.
For me, there's one reason in particular.
Cute little June, my five-month-old baby.
He's so cute.
I want to make sure that no one comes to do him harm.
Maybe that's a burglar.
No, maybe not just doing harm.
Maybe there's a delivery guy.
Okay, then I'll open the door.
Maybe it's my in-laws.
I don't know.
And they love him.
They want to see him.
But it might be...
I just want to know who's outside the door.
Okay, is that so much to ask?
I can do that with Ring.
I can see and speak to whoever is on my doorstep.
I can keep an eye on every corner of my home with Ring.
So simple, so affordable, makes a great housewarming gift, especially because it's not very expensive.
You can see and speak whether you are in your home, at your office, or on the other side of the world, all from a simple app.
Go do it.
You'll feel like you're in the Jetsons.
Start protecting your home today with Ring Alarm.
Go to ring.com slash Knowles, K-N-W-L-E-S. Get your Ring Alarm security kit today.
You can build a system that's right for your home and have it up and running in minutes.
Ring.com slash Knowles, K-N-W-L-E-S. That is ring.com slash Knowles.
I've said it for years.
I've said it for years that football is gay, and I know that that seems ambiguous because I could be referring to soccer.
But I also, I could be referring to the NFL. And people thought I was being insulting.
They thought that I was...
I'm not.
I'm trying to be very specific.
And the NFL has just proven me right, yet again.
NFL coming out with a very important commercial, describing itself, identifying itself as gay.
Football is gay, they write.
Football is lesbian.
Football is beautiful.
Football is queer, exciting, transgender, power, bisexual, strong, freedom, American, accepting, everything.
Football is everything.
And football is for everyone.
The NFL. And at the end here, it says, NFL proudly supports Trevor Project.
LGBT youth with at least one accepting adult have 40% lower risk of attempting suicide.
Go to the trevorproject.org.
Okay.
First of all, This tactic here at the end is the tactic of an abusive husband.
Because what they're saying is, if you do not get on board with Pride Month and you do not say that football is gay and everything is gay and football is everything, if you do not get on board with that, then you are killing gay people.
That's the implication.
They're saying that if you do not get totally on board with Pride Month, Then you are impelling people to kill themselves.
Nobody that I have ever met is suggesting that we should be cruel to people, especially to young people who have unusual sexual desires, that we should ostracize them, that we should be vicious and mean.
Nobody is saying that.
But what this commercial is saying at the very end here, it's almost like a side point.
They're saying, if you do not 100% give in to a very left-wing vision of sex that includes transgender, if you won't trans the kids, I'm going to kill myself!
You're going to make me kill myself!
Why do you make me do this?
I love you so much.
This is the language and the rhetoric of an abuser.
And the left is abusing this country and using all the same manipulative tactics.
But Zoom out a little bit.
Football is gay, lesbian, proud, strong, bisexual, transgender.
The list goes on and on and on.
Football is everything.
Football is not everything.
Football cannot be everything.
Nothing can be everything.
Football, for instance, is not baseball.
Football is not an omelet.
Football is not the number 15.
And this error that the left is making is to erase all distinctions between everything.
You see this obviously in the case of transgenderism, the distinction between man and woman.
You see this obviously in the case of the redefinition of marriage, the distinction between marriage and not marriage.
You see this obviously in the case of, oh gosh, I don't know, local, state, and federal government.
That's all blurring together.
You see this obviously in the case of the various institutions of our government, the various branches of power, even the institutions outside of our government, all kind of blurring together.
The line between big tech and the universities and the government, all a little blurry.
The left is blurring all these sorts of distinctions, and they do it with their language, which, by the way, relates to my book, Speechless, which is now available for order.
It's doing very well in the orders.
Thank you very much for helping me stick a finger at the eye of the left-wing bestseller list.
It would be really fun if we could manage to do that.
We'll see what happens.
This is what they want to do.
They want to blur the distinction between all of these things.
But words, this is why the left focuses on language so much.
Words discriminate.
That is what they do.
The very purpose of words is to distinguish one thing from another.
But the NFL says, no, everything is everything.
There's no distinction between anything.
They're doing it with critical race theory.
They're retreating into this position of nominalism.
They're saying, what is critical race theory?
It's nothing.
What does that word even mean?
Words don't mean anything.
It's all kind of the same, man.
Come on, have a puff.
That is the error here.
This is so far beyond the issue of gay, lesbian, transgender.
It's about everything.
But not to be outdone, Kermit the Frog...
Does not want to be left behind in the woke cloud of dust by the NFL. So Kermit the Frog also doing his part to promote Pride Month.
Hi, Kermit.
What's up?
Well, you see, I have a bit of a style question.
And you, you have such impeccable style, I thought I'd come to you.
You're asking me?
Wow.
You certainly know how to flatter a girl.
You see, I can't decide what to wear for my big number.
I thought maybe you could help me?
Oh, I'd love to, Kerm.
Oh, good.
But why don't you just ask Miss Piggy?
Oh, um, well, I did, but I am not too crazy about her choices.
Take a look at this.
There's this one.
Whoa, wiki wiki, what is that?
Okay, for those who were only listening and not seeing that, you're very lucky.
Congratulations.
Maybe I'll just start listening to this show myself.
There was a giant drag queen with big purple hair wearing a dress, and it's just very, very creepy to have this on children's programming.
But of course the left has to have this on children's programming.
Of course the trans issue has to go to the kids.
There are three positions on this, I think.
There is the left-wing position, which is trans everybody, including the kids.
Then there is the kind of squishy liberal position, center right, center left, which is, well, if adults want to mutilate their bodies, they should absolutely be allowed to do that, but we shouldn't trans the kids.
And then there's the conservative position, which is that this is...
Wrong.
Men are not women.
There is such a thing as truth.
There is such a thing as goodness.
And we should prefer those things to falsehood and not goodness.
And so no, no one should be allowed to mutilate perfectly healthy body parts because of a delusion that they have.
And people are unwilling sometimes on the squishy right to say that sort of thing.
But the problem with the squishy position here, the adults can do it but the kids can't, is that either a man can become a woman or he can't.
And if a man can become a woman, then it actually would It would be better to do that before puberty sets in, right?
That is the left-wing argument on it, and it makes sense if you accept the premise that a man can become a woman.
So certainly, and even beyond that, beyond the question of consent, if we're saying that it's good for a man to become a woman if he feels that he is a woman, then this question of consent goes away.
The issue with transing the kids, the squishy people believe, is that kids can't consent.
But we're already establishing that it is a good thing for men who think they're women to become women.
And so children have decisions made for them for their best on their behalf by their parents all the time.
So there's no reason that transing the kids wouldn't be one of them.
If you stand in the middle of the road, especially on an issue like this, you are going to get hit by a bus.
And the left pushes this stuff in front of kids in no small part because kids' brains are squishy.
Kind of like those other Republicans.
Kids' brains are very malleable.
Kids' brains are easily influenced by what they see, particularly what they see on television.
If anyone who's ever put a kid in front of a TV knows, their brains just turn off.
They start drooling, they start looking, they quiet down, which is very convenient.
So the left has to push this stuff on kids, through the schools, through the mainstream media.
Through these television shows all over the place.
And the conservatives are standing up against it.
But if we don't get some of those people on the center right to come with us as well, we're just not going to have the political power to stop it.
Anyone with two brain cells and a modicum of common sense can look at this and say, this is ghastly.
Get this away from the kids.
Unfortunately, even the conservatives of the Supreme Court Do not appear to have the basic common sense that says a man shouldn't go into the ladies' room.
Yesterday, we got word from the Supreme Court that they are turning down the opportunity to reverse a lower court ruling that forces a school to let men, little boys, students who are men, into the women's room.
It's a little bit complicated because the court didn't rule on the case.
They refused to hear the case, which upholds the lower court ruling, which says that there is a constitutional right for dudes to go into the women's room.
The court declined to hear the case of Gavin Grimm, who is a Virginia female student who identifies as a boy.
So it's this girl who is pretending to be a boy who sued the Gloucester County School Board for stating that restrooms were limited to the corresponding biological genders.
Thank goodness we got Amy Barrett on the court.
Oh, thank goodness we got Kavanaugh on the court.
By the way, thank goodness we got Gorsuch on the court.
Gorsuch has been one of the worst people on these issues.
All of these people told me they were originalists.
Amy Barrett, when she was up for the position, said she was an originalist.
Neil Gorsuch said he was an originalist.
Thankfully, Thomas and Alito held the line, but they dissented.
It didn't do very much.
The others were not.
So if originalism means that there is a constitutional right for boys to use the girls' room, I assume the founding fathers and the framers are rolling over in their graves at that suggestion.
But if that's what originalism means...
I guess I'm not an originalist.
I always thought I was kind of an originalist, but I don't think I am if originalism means pretending that the Constitution guarantees a man's right to go do what he wants to do in the women's room.
That's obviously not true.
Why did the court punt on this case?
I don't think that Amy Barrett and Kavanaugh and Roberts is a lost cause and Gorsuch, I don't think that they punted necessarily because of their deeply principled position.
I suspect they punted because of their cowardice.
I suspect they punted because this is a very tricky issue and it's unpopular and so they just don't want to deal with it.
They don't want their hands on it.
And it actually has the further effect of now enshrining this as law without anyone passing a law for it.
This is how the liberal establishment holds power.
Okay.
When the liberal establishment wants to defend something that is very, very unpopular, that you know that people are going to come out and vote against if it's put up to a vote, they just have the court do it for them.
Because the court is not accountable to the people and they'll give sort of protection.
Now the court will get good coverage in the media.
They'll have the institutions backing them up.
But this is what the liberal establishment does.
They rely on the court to do their dirty work.
They did the same with same-sex marriage.
The idea of redefining marriage was deeply, deeply unpopular.
When it was put on the ballot in California of all places, it was shot down.
And it was in particular unpopular among a core constituency of the Democratic Party, which would be black voters.
So because the liberal establishment, which wanted to redefine marriage, because they had been pushing this through television shows like Will and Grace.
They had been pushing this through the curricula.
They had been pushing this through the courts, though it hadn't gone very far.
They had been trying to do it through the electoral means, but that didn't work.
So because it wasn't working, they just went in and had the romantic poet, Anthony Kennedy, on the Supreme Court redefine marriage.
They did this with abortion.
Abortion, some states were legalizing it, other states were pushing back against it.
Right now, there's no question about it.
If it were put up to a vote, if the Supreme Court had not invented the fictional constitutional right to abortion, there is no question that a huge number of states in this country would outlaw abortion.
Actually, a lot of states have a provision.
Now, in their law, that if Roe v.
Wade is overturned, abortion is automatically criminalized in the state.
So, they did that.
The court just had to do it on behalf of the liberal establishment.
And the same thing is true of affirmative action, also known as anti-white racism, and often anti-Asian racism.
That policy is very unpopular, that people would vote against that.
I suspect people of all races would vote against that.
But certainly whites and Asians who are being now legally discriminated against would vote against that.
And so the court has to defend it.
They keep defending it.
And very often, like Sandra Day O'Connor when she was on the court, they will even admit this is obviously unconstitutional.
This is obviously wrong.
But to rectify past wrongs, we're just going to have this policy for a little bit longer.
It's just a temporary policy.
And so they'll argue for that, and then the temporary policy never goes away.
Very unpopular stuff.
Now, sometimes...
What the liberal establishment is pushing is so deeply unpopular that they have to reverse course.
And when they reverse course, they just blame Republicans for the policy in the first place.
Nowhere is this clearer than on defund the police.
The Democrats, leading elected Democrats, have been calling now for a year, at least, to defund the police.
When squishier Democrats have tried to pull back from that a little bit, you'll have AOC and the others come out and say, no, no, defund the police means defund the police.
It means taking away their money and abolishing the police departments.
So...
This policy doesn't play very well in Peoria.
Turns out that when you've got crime spikes around the country, first of all, when left-wing terrorists burn your country down for a year, and then there are crime spikes afterward, 50% up in shooting and murders in Chicago, for instance.
Then all of a sudden, the Democrats say, gosh, this isn't looking very good.
So Jen Psaki, White House spokesman, I kid you not, just blamed Republicans for defunding the police.
Well, the President did mention that the American Rescue Plan, the state and local funding, something that was supported by the President, a lot of Democrats who supported and voted for the bill, could help ensure local cops were kept on the beat in communities across the country.
As you know, didn't receive a single Republican vote.
That funding has been used to keep cops on the beat.
But at the time, that was all that these local police departments might have a pandemic-related budget shortfall, not we need to keep cops on the beat because there's a crime wave.
I think that any local department would argue that keeping cops on the beat to keep communities safe when they had to, because of budget shortfalls, fire police is something that helps them address crime in their local communities.
The White House's argument was the American Rescue Plan is going to be $1,400 checks.
It's going to be vaccines, vaccinators.
It's going to put us on the path to beating the virus.
It did those things as well.
It was a pretty good bill and piece of legislation.
It was really good.
And if you don't vote for this one particular funding bill where we just give a bunch of money from the federal government to these local governments, aren't you kind of defunding the police?
No, we're not.
You guys voted explicitly to defund the police, and we opposed you when you did that.
And now you're just pretending that if we don't give some more stimulus cheese to the local governments, that we're defunding the police.
No, the policies were made by these Democrats.
Now you're pretending any funding for state...
Well, it could have been used to defund the police.
Yeah, okay.
I don't think so.
They can't...
Run away forever from the conclusions of their crazy policies.
My favorite example, it's not my favorite, it's actually a very sad example.
But it's the clearest one in a long time.
He's a British-born influencer.
He's a social media guy who just went viral after completing his 18th plastic surgery to look like a member of the Korean pop band BTS. This man now...
His name is Ali London.
He also uses plural pronouns.
That's like the 17th strangest thing about this story.
He now identifies as Korean, and he shared his new self-identity journey on social media.
I identify as Korean.
That's just my culture.
That's my home country.
That's exactly how I look now.
And I also identify as Jimin.
That's my Korean name.
But not only that, I just...
I know it's a little bit confusing for some people.
Nobody's ever come out as Jimin or Korean.
But this is something that you guys know if you've followed my journey for the last eight years.
I've really struggled with identity issues.
He's really struggled with identity issues and now he's Korean.
Some people are saying he's just doing this for attention.
Well, I guess he does everything for attention because he's a social media influencer.
But he's clearly got something going on here in his head.
He's had 18 surgeries to do this.
And people are really upset on the left about this.
And people are really befuddled on the right about this.
But the fact is, this British dude identifying as Korean makes much more sense than transgenderism.
It is much more believable that a white guy can become a Korean guy than that any kind of guy can become any kind of woman.
Because race is much less important to identity than sex.
The fundamental distinction among people is sex.
The sexes are complementary.
They together form the fundamental political unit, the family.
They got different potty barts, do different things, and together they make babies.
The races have differences, there's no question, much less distinct, much less important.
And the left is very upset about this because they've identified racism as the worst possible sin.
They've kind of redefined all sin as just racism.
And especially if a white person does anything to appropriate a culture of another.
If a white person enjoys the culture of other people, that's called appropriation.
If a white person doesn't care about the culture of other people, that's called erasure.
So the white guy can't do anything right.
Anything he does with regard to race or culture is considered wrong and evil and bigoted.
But this makes much more sense.
Now of course the guy is not really Korean.
And of course the man who thinks he's a woman is not really a woman.
But if you accept the logic of transgenderism, you certainly must accept that this guy is Korean.
He's obviously got identity issues.
We've all got identity issues these days.
This is, I think, because of the deeply religious confusion of our society and the question of what human nature really is.
But that question of who are we is now being accelerated by the courts, by the establishment, which is buying into these delusions.
You know, there's one guy in the court who's standing firm.
That would be Clarence Thomas.
And there's a great movie about Clarence Thomas called Created Equal.
Unfortunately, Amazon does not want you to hear the story of Clarence Thomas.
Created Equal was up there on Amazon, and then Amazon just took it off during Black History Month, of all things.
So Daily Wire decided, you know, we think people should be able to see this movie.
So we've got it streaming right now at dailywire.com slash subscribe.
Head on over, get 20% off your new membership with code JUSTICE. And while you're at it, You can go order my book, Speechless, Controlling Words, Controlling Lines, available everywhere right now.
You can get it at your local bookstore, at Barnes& Noble, at Amazon.
I think you can still get a signed first edition at Premier Collectibles, though they did sell out of the first run.
So if you order it now, I think you will still get it.
But you've got to order it now.
Also, you can get the Kindle edition if you want to read it right away.
Maybe get multiple editions.
Get the Audible.
Get all of them.
Head on over to go get Speechless today.
We'll be right back with a lot more.
The liberal regime, which does not operate like we thought it did, you know, it does not operate which does not operate like we thought it did, you know, it does not operate like they told us, I am a bill up on Capitol Hill and like they taught us when The regime operates a little bit differently.
The administrative government, the agencies that are unaccountable to anyone control a huge portion of political power in this country in tandem with, of course, the other institutions, the universities, big tech, woke corporations, the media, all sorts of things.
Well, now we've got a report from Tucker Carlson that he has definitive proof that the NSA, once known as No Such Agency, National Security Agency, is spying on him.
But it's not just political protesters the government is spying on.
Yesterday we heard from a whistleblower within the U.S. government who reached out to warn us that the NSA, the National Security Agency, is monitoring our electronic communications and is planning to leak them in an attempt to take this show off the air.
Now that's a shocking claim and ordinarily we'd be skeptical of it.
It's illegal for the NSA to spy on American citizens.
It's a crime.
It's not a third world country.
Things like that should not happen in America.
But unfortunately, they do happen, and in this case, they did happen.
The whistleblower, who is in a position to know, repeated back to us information about a story that we are working on that could have only come directly from my texts and emails.
There's no other possible source for that information, period.
The NSA captured that information without our knowledge and did it for political reasons.
The Biden administration is spying on us.
We have confirmed that.
I have no reason not to believe Tucker here.
A lot of people are skeptical of Tucker's claim.
Why would you be?
First of all, he's a pretty straight shooter.
Guy is a straight shooter especially when it comes to people on television.
He's one of the best, if not the best.
And is your claim that the NSA wouldn't do this sort of thing?
They already do.
They're spying on everybody.
They are intercepting virtually all the data that are going around the internet in the United States.
And we know in many cases the intelligence community has been weaponized against opponents of the dominant liberal regime.
This happened in 2016.
Do you remember the FBI... We've had reports out during the Obama administration that
the agencies were spying on Other journalists, other journalists at conservative outlets, you know that the IRS was weaponized against conservatives during the Tea Party movement.
This happens all the time.
The conspiracy theory is that somehow this whistleblower got Tucker Carlson's text through some other means.
Of course, it's so obvious that Unless Tucker is just completely fabricating the whole episode, which I don't think that he is, then this should worry everyone.
And there's a kind of irony here because, do you remember, this is actually, I think, emblematic of the broader shift in politics.
During the early 2000s, during the Bush years, Republicans were the defenders of the national security state.
Republicans were defenders of the intelligence community.
Gone back and forth over the years.
Who's defending the CIA? Who's defending the FBI? Is it Republicans?
Is it Democrats?
But now I think it is pretty clear.
It's obvious.
The Republicans, the conservatives, are treated as dissidents in the liberal regime.
They are.
If you go out and burn down a city on behalf of the left, you will be let off the hook.
In Manhattan and in the Bronx, the majority of BLM rioters and looters had their charges dismissed.
And then most of the rest of them had their charges pled down to offenses like trespassing, which don't carry any jail time.
Meanwhile, if you put on a horn helmet and go dance around on Nancy Pelosi's desk and maybe take her lectern, you will rot in prison for years.
You will be hunted down by the feds.
You will be dragged in front of very serious prosecutors, people who prosecute terrorism.
And you will rot in prison.
Because the left burning down the country, even though they killed many more people, even though they caused far more damage, even though they threatened more government buildings, and certainly way more private businesses, they are ideologically aligned with the regime.
And the right-wingers are not.
And the people in the horn helmets and whatever and dancing on the desk are not.
And so there's going to be a different standard here.
So it's just very strange for conservatives to be defending the national security state.
Unless, as we've said for a long time, they're not really conservatives.
They're kind of court jesters in the kingdom of liberalism.
Their job is to give the appearance of opposition to the liberal establishment, but really ultimately to lose.
When push comes to shove, their job is to lose with dignity.
They don't have any dignity when they do it, but that's their job.
I think that's what we're seeing.
So much of the jockeying right now on the right, what is the right?
What is conservatism?
What is our view on immigration?
What is our view on trade?
What is our view on manufacturing?
What is our view on the country?
What is our view on anything, basically?
So much of that jockeying is between people who want to play along with the establishment and lose, but be basically taken care of, and people who want to push back and who want to win.
You know, I thought there was a little hope yesterday.
For about, I don't know, four or five hours, there was some hope yesterday that maybe some left-wingers are going to face some consequences from some of the dominant institutions.
Because YouTube banned an organization called Right Wing Watch.
Right Wing Watch is a leftist operative group that exists to get me fired and Ben fired and basically everybody on the right.
And it's kind of like media matters.
They go out, they watch a lot of conservative shows, then they post clips and they try to get us all fired.
So YouTube banned their channel.
And I thought, huh, that's pretty good.
That's pretty good stuff.
And it raised this other point, which is the thesis of my book, which is that some people on the left were criticizing the Republicans who were happy about this.
They said, well, hold on, you're for cancel culture when you're canceling your enemies and your opponents, but you're against cancel culture when they're canceling you.
Yes, that's right.
You got it.
You nailed it.
I'm glad you finally heard me.
You must have read my book.
Yes, I strongly, strongly support canceling certain people and ideas.
I, like William F. Buckley Jr., like virtually every conservative in the country until about five minutes ago, strongly support standards and taboos and ostracizing certain people and ideas.
Because I do think we should, by definition, a society has to agree on some things.
Bill Buckley launched the conservative movement on that idea with God and Man at Yale, and after that with a book defending Joe McCarthy, for goodness sakes.
Yes, that's a good thing.
But I knew.
I knew.
I looked at that.
I said, oh, they banned Right Wing Watch?
It's not going to last.
It's just not going to last.
It must have been an accident.
And it was.
The reason they banned Right Wing Watch is because Right Wing Watch posts videos of conservatives.
So YouTube has already reinstated their channel.
And YouTube basically said, I'm so sorry.
Our algorithm caught a bunch of Right Wingers doing things.
So we tried to ban all of them.
So we didn't know.
If we had known that you were posting them ironically to try to get those people fired, obviously we would have left the channel up.
If only.
Now, you know, there are plenty of radical, radical leftists on YouTube who say many heinous, vile, terrible things.
And they, generally speaking, don't have their channels taken down.
But if a conservative goes on and says anything from the vile and the heinous and the kooky to just perfectly ordinary mainstream things, they will very often face consequences.
Speaking of the viral videos of the libs, I wish I didn't have to play this.
This video was going around TikTok.
And I thought, in a month that is already full of a lot of really weird videos, where you've got frogs talking to men who are identifying as women, and you've got the NFL identifying as gay and transgender, and you've got British people identifying as Koreans, I thought, I must have seen it all, right?
But I hadn't, because some lib guy decided to do a little dance and do a little song number about how he's waxed and vaxxed.
But still wearing a mask.
I'm faxed, waxed, wearing slacks.
Going on TikTok, dropping facts.
The CDC says, hey, you can relax.
But when I go, I'll still rock the mask.
Because I don't want to be mistaken for a trap supporter.
That second dose hit like a good With all the aches and the fever of a hundred and two But I would do it all over again Just to chill with my friends It goes on.
You know, you gotta give the guy credit.
It's actually kind of a catchy tune compared to a lot of these.
But I actually, as cringe-inducing as the video is, I appreciate the honesty.
Because what this guy's admitting is that the mask is not, it's what I've been saying from the very beginning, the mask is not primarily a scientific or medical tool.
It is primarily a political symbol.
He's saying he's waxed, vaxxed, wearing slacks, and when he goes outside he still wears a mask because he doesn't want to be confused with a Trump supporter.
He's saying the CDC tells me that I don't need the mask.
The mask doesn't do anything.
But I'm not wearing the mask because it does anything.
I suspect a great many people were not wearing the mask because it actually did anything.
They're wearing the mask because it's a political symbol to show you that you are a good person.
You know, recently, some stores have not been able to keep it up.
People are just going to take the masks off.
So they put up signs.
They say that if you are vaccinated, then you do not need to wear a mask.
So when you go into stores now, you'll see some people are wearing masks, some people are not.
And the irony, of course, is that every single person who is not wearing a mask is unvaccinated.
And every single person, without much exaggeration, every single person who is wearing a mask is vaccinated.
I've overheard people saying this.
I know many people are going to the stores.
This is a political distinction.
Because the neurotics who really were afraid of the Wu flu from the very beginning are, of course, going to continue wearing masks, either because of their fear of the virus itself, their completely irrational fear, or their phobia, you might say, to use a popular word, or because they don't want to be associated with those terrible Trump supporters who weren't wearing masks from the very beginning.
So, okay, I'm glad we all agree that it's primarily a symbol.
Liberalism is very, very effective.
The liberal establishment is very, very effective.
The one thing, though, is that it's not stable.
The liberalism that we're seeing around us is of the pull-down-the-statues variety.
So the revolution will always come for its own.
And Whoopi Goldberg just pointed this out.
I'm not saying she actually just pointed this out.
I'm saying there's a video going around that sort of surfaced of Whoopi Goldberg discussing this problem of young liberals who are just not happy with Biden.
They're saying he's not going far enough.
And Whoopi says, hey, wait a second.
Come on, we were the revolutionaries in our day.
How come you're coming after us now?
We did our part.
Why are you so ungrateful?
Look at what's happening with the Democrats.
You have two existing bodies.
You got the new woke party, that movement, and then you got the establishment.
And they're eating each other alive.
You know what?
That's the truth.
That is not so.
It is not so.
Stop listening to the media who is leading you in a direction that is bull****.
That's what you're hearing.
The way they talk about Joe Biden, they're like, I cannot f***ing stand the establishment.
I'm sorry, that might be the VP. I don't want to f*** them back.
I don't want to f*** them back.
But here's the thing that you're missing.
We've been doing all that work.
That all these five-year-olds say, well, y'all haven't been doing that.
Bulls***.
What do you think?
How do you think apartheid changed?
We did that.
That's what Joe Biden did.
Nobody does everything the way you want him to do it.
Do not put down the people whose shoulders you're standing on.
You are standing on our shoulders, and we are holding the line.
And for people to say, you're an uninspiring, f*** you, uninspiring.
What are you inspiring?
Actually, a very conservative point.
So Whoopi Goldberg says, she's yelling at some young lib, and she says, how dare you say that we aren't going fast enough or far enough?
How dare you?
You're standing on the shoulders of people who are doing a lot of great work.
How do you think apartheid ended?
We did that.
So Whoopi Goldberg identifies as ending apartheid.
Okay, a British guy identifies as a Korean, men identify as women, and Whoopi Goldberg identifies as ending apartheid.
Fine, whatever.
The point she's making is a very conservative one.
It's one that I make quite a lot.
When I defend Christopher Columbus, for example, or George Washington against ridiculous attacks, I say, how dare you people?
You're standing on the shoulders of giants, these great men who gave you your country, and you think that you're flying.
You spit on them.
And that is what the left is doing.
And Whoopi says, how dare you do that to us?
Well, the problem, of course, is conservatives, you would hope, would not do that sort of thing.
Conservatives have a reverence for the past.
They have gratitude.
They have humility.
They feel a sense of obligation.
And they feel quite at home in the democracy of the dead.
The idea that the past has something to say.
People who have gone before us actually have something to contribute to the present day.
And we have something that we need to bequeath on to future generations, and they ought to be grateful to us.
We have this sense of continuity.
But the left, by definition, doesn't have that.
The left is always trying to revolutionize.
It's never good enough.
Because we're never really living in utopia.
So in order to push forward the revolution, the past has always got to be evil and oppressive and enslaving.
The present always has to be a crisis.
And the future always has to be utopia.
And now, those chickens are coming home to roost, whoopie!
That's a problem.
That's the one glimmer of hope that I do have that the liberal regime, no matter how much it's spying on Tucker or going after Trump or going after conservatives, the one thing that does give me hope here is it is unstable.
It's just intrinsically unstable, unlike conservatism.
And so there are going to be opportunities every now and again to go in there and give a little sucker punch to the system and try to shape it a little bit more in the direction that you would like.
You're seeing this now with Trump.
From the moment he left office, the left has been trying to throw this guy in prison.
Lock him up, lock him up, that sort of thing.
And they took it very serious.
I mean, there was never really a strong move to throw Hillary in prison.
Trump had that good line at the debate where she said, I don't want to live in an America where Trump is president.
He said, yeah, because you'd be in jail.
And everyone applauded and hooped and hollered, but no one ever took it seriously.
There was never any actual movement to throw the Clintons in prison.
Namely, because they know their way around the place pretty well.
You know, they go in and have Jeffries in there.
They go in, take care of him.
John McAfee.
No, I'm kidding.
I'm kidding.
Am I kidding?
I'm kidding.
Hillary, please.
We're family.
Don't come after me.
So there was never really a strong movement to throw Hillary in prison.
There was a serious movement to throw Trump in prison.
I mean, there really were the Southern District of New York, various other places were looking into charging Trump with crimes.
And the Manhattan DA, Cy Vance, just came out and said he does not currently plan to charge the Trump organization with crimes related to allegations of hush money payments and real estate value manipulations, according to a personal lawyer for Donald Trump.
Now, just to begin, I don't think we should throw ex-presidents in prison yet.
Even if they commit crimes, by the way, I still don't think we should throw them in prison.
Absent very, very specific circumstances, I think that's banana republic kind of stuff.
Increasingly, we're living in a banana republic, so that's too bad.
We're living in a banana republic where the federal agencies spy on journalists and where we can't even agree that men are not women and Brits are not Koreans.
But I'd like to stave that off as far as we possibly can.
Want to maintain a somewhat civilized system of politics.
Trump blasted the Manhattan DA. He said, quote, And who have just announced that they will be releasing hundreds of people involved in violent crime back onto the streets without retribution of any kind are rude, nasty, and totally biased in the way they're treating lawyers, representatives, some of the wonderful long-term employees and people within the Trump Organization.
after hundreds of subpoenas, over 3 million pages of documents, 4 years of searching, dozens and dozens of interviews, and millions of dollars of taxpayer funds wasted, they continue to be in search of a crime and will do anything to frighten people into making up the stories or lies that they want.
They've been totally unable to get it.
In an unprecedented move, they retained an outside never-Trumper lawyer from a Trump-hating law firm to work on the case.
It's a continuation of the greatest witch hunt of all time.
This is true.
No matter what you think of Trump, there was a witch hunt.
They really did go after him, and they continue to go after him, and they continue to go after his supporters, and they continue to go after people in the media who in any way support the sort of thing that he supports.
This is really, really bad stuff.
They say that you can indict a ham sandwich, right?
And this is especially true when there are many, many, many complicated regulations and laws that one could be violating at any given time.
And so this is one of the arguments for limiting the scope of the government so that they don't have ways to entrap people, for people to commit crimes, sometimes even accidentally.
And this is why there needs to be even enforcement.
But right now there's not even enforcement.
If you loot on behalf of BLM, you get off the hook.
And if you steal Nancy Pelosi's elector and you go to prison for decades, absolutely outrageous.
Speaking of bogus crimes right now, Justin Trudeau, the prime minister of Canada, looks a lot like Fidel Castro.
It's kind of weird.
Justin Trudeau demanded that Pope Francis fly to Canada to apologize on Canadian soil because they discovered some graves at an old Catholic children's school, and they were graves of indigenous Canadians.
Now, the story is so convoluted, it's so strange.
There was a school for Indian children, and there were some graves, and some of them were not marked.
But they sort of had been marked for a while, but then I guess they lost some of the markers.
And anyway, Justin Trudeau is demanding that the Pope apologize.
This, by the way, as Catholic churches are being burned to the ground.
Two Catholic churches, two more Catholic churches on indigenous land in British Columbia's interior burned to the ground on early Saturday mornings.
There's this big struggle against the Catholic church in Canada.
Huge suppression of Christians in Canada.
We've I've played some of the videos on this show.
A real fear here that Christians are going to have to go underground in Canada like it was communist China or something.
The Pope, not that I'm telling the Pope what to do, not that he's asked my opinion, but he absolutely should not apologize.
This is not about a serious apology.
This is not about grace.
This is about a huge political attack on the church, which is what I think all of this ultimately comes down to.
I think all of these moves that we are seeing in the culture, in our schools, in our politics, ultimately, because all human conflict is theological, it is an attack on truth.
And it's not just political truth or cultural truth.
It's all the way down to religious truth, which is why the church always seems to bear the brunt of this from the French Revolution up until the present.
All aiming at that.
So are we going to stand for anything?
Or are we just going to go along with it?
I think the options are really that stark.
Stand for something.
Stand for objective truth.
Or Brits are Koreans and football's gay and Kermit's a drag queen.
And every one of us is up to the whims of the liberal regime.
Whether we're Tucker Carlson or Donald Trump or just a regular old conservative.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is the Michael Knowles Show.
show.
I'll see you tomorrow.
If you enjoyed this episode, 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 Boring.
Our technical director is Austin Stevens.
Supervising producers, Mathis Glover and Robert Sterling.
Production manager, Pavel Vidovsky.
Editor and associate producer, Danny D'Amico.
Audio mixer, Mike Coromina.
Hair and makeup by Nika Geneva.
And production coordinator, McKenna Waters.
The Michael Knowles Show is a Daily Wire production.
Copyright Daily Wire 2021.
Today on The Ben Shapiro Show, California extends its travel ban on state employees to red states with 105 million American citizens.
Wenberry milks her anti-American moment for all it's worth, and the Supreme Court decides to leave girls unprotected in their locker rooms.
That's today on The Ben Shapiro Show.
▲
Export Selection