Ep. 874 - Injecting Kids With The Fauci Ouchie Gets The Greenlight
The FDA approves the Fauci Ouchie for kids aged 5-11, Ted Cruz destroys Biden’s attorney general Merrick Garland, and Twix candy bars reveal an uncomfortable truth about radical leftism and the occult.
Daily Wire just signed ousted ESPN sportscaster Allison Williams who resisted Disney’s vaccine mandate for a new sports series. Take back your content from the Hollywood elites - get 25% off a Daily Wire membership with code DONOTCOMPLY: https://utm.io/udJyw
My new book ’Speechless: Controlling Words, Controlling Minds,’ is now available wherever books are sold. Grab your copy today here: https://utm.io/udtMJ
Subscribe to Morning Wire, Daily Wire’s new morning news podcast, and get the facts first on the news you need to know: https://utm.io/udyIF
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
The FDA has officially voted unanimously to approve the Fauciouchie for kids between the ages of five and 11.
A couple of days ago on this show, we heard from Yale epidemiologist Harvey Risch, who said that he recommended homeschooling any healthy children who were mandated to get the vaccine, pull them out of school.
He just felt it was not worth any potential risk given that healthy children face very, very little risk of serious illness or death from COVID.
Well, the FDA inadvertently seems to have proven Professor Risch's point when one of the FDA panel members who voted to inject the kids gave this rationale for it.
We're never going to learn about how safe the vaccine is unless we start giving it.
That's just the way it goes.
That's the only way?
Did Dr.
Fauci run out of beagles or something?
The only way to test the safety of a vaccine is to inject it into a bunch of kids?
This is like that time Nancy Pelosi said the only way to find out what was in the Obamacare bill was to pass the Obamacare bill.
Except in the case of Obamacare, the worst case scenario just involves a lot of wasted spending and constitutional fighting and things like that.
In this case...
It involves injecting your kids with an experimental drug that they almost certainly don't need.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is The Michael Knowles Show.
Welcome back to the show.
My favorite comment yesterday is from Shady Ganley, formerly Jaquarius.
Okay, that's fine.
Who says, even Hunter's artwork requires him to blow through a pipe.
That's true.
See, these are constant themes.
There are these motifs moving through all of Hunter Biden's work, whether it is on the canvas or whether it is on Skid Row.
If you want to be able to make it around your community, your country, especially with all this crazy Bidenflation going on, You've got to check out GetUpside.
I am thrilled to introduce a very, very timely app that you are going to want to get this very second.
GetUpside.
What is GetUpside?
GetUpside allows you to make up to 25 cents for every gallon of gas every time you fill up.
You download the free GetUpside app in the App Store or Google Play right now.
You use promo code Knowles, K-N-O-W-L-E-S. You get a bonus 25 cents per gallon on your first fill up.
That means up to 50 cents cash back per gallon.
Do not pay full price at the pump anymore.
Get cash back using GetUpside.
Download the app for free and use promo code Knowles, K-N-W-L-E-S, to get up to 50 cents per gallon cash back on your first tank.
Some people who drive a lot are making as much as $200 to $300 a month in cash.
There is no catch.
The cash gets right added to your bank account.
It can be put through PayPal.
It can be put through an e-gift card for Amazon or other brands.
Super simple.
Don't leave money on the table.
Download the free GetUpside app.
Use promo code Knowles to get up to 50 cents per gallon cash back on your first tank.
That is code Knowles.
They want to test their drug on your kids.
Remember the other day we were all up in arms?
That Dr.
Fauci performed experiments on beagles.
Oh, the poor little...
Well, right.
Now they want to do that on your kids.
And the FDA panel member is saying that himself.
He goes, well, the only way we're going to know if it's safe is if we inject all your kids with this stuff.
And then we just see what happens.
What could go wrong?
It's not my kids.
It's your kids.
Well, I don't...
You know, if it were my kids, maybe I'd be a little more worried.
But it's your kids, so whatever.
That's what they're doing to your kids' bodies.
Now, what are they doing to your kids' minds?
It's even worse.
Okay, speaking of what your kids are being taught, there's a professor at Rutgers right now.
She just went on a show, The Root.
And this Rutgers professor was pontificating about white people, about race and society.
And to cut to the chase, she don't like white people very much.
I think that white people are committed to being villains in the aggregate, right?
The real sort of issue here, you know, I've heard people sort of say it, is one, I think that white people viscerally fear.
It's not that white people don't know, right, what they have done.
They know.
They fear that there is no other way to be human but the way in which they are human.
You talk to white people and whenever you really want to have a reckoning about it, they say stuff like, you know, it's just human nature.
If y'all had all of this power, you would have done the same thing, right?
And it's like, no, that's what white humans did.
White human beings thought there's a world here and we own it.
Prior to them, black and brown people have been sailing across oceans, interacting with each other for centuries without total subjugation, domination and colonialism.
I do think that all of us can sort of agree that a politics that says like there are superior and inferior human beings just isn't the way to go.
And that's the thing that white people don't trust us to do because they are so corrupt.
You know, their thinking is so morally and spiritually bankrupt about power.
It's wrong to say that some people are better than other people, you know?
You know, that's wrong.
And you know who does that?
Those corrupt, evil, villainous, smelly, dirty, rotten, awful white people.
They all those horrible, disgusting, filthy, cockroach white people.
They say that some people are better than others.
You know, man, I hate those white people.
So, from the historical perspective, what this lunatic is saying is just not true.
She's saying that before European colonization and exploration, black people, untouched by the evil white man, had been sailing across oceans and living in some sort of Edenic paradise.
None of that is true.
Look, I know they say Christopher Columbus discovered America.
Some people say it was Leif Erikson.
But...
I don't think anyone is claiming that someone from sub-Saharan Africa who had never met the evil, awful white man actually discovered America or something like that, right?
So that is not the case.
And that if they had, they would not have engaged in colonialism or imperialism or anything.
Everyone would have lived in Kumbaya.
That's not even true in Africa, right?
I mean, what is at the heart of this crazy racial politics is the slave trade and colonialism and imperialism, as she's alluding to.
Where did that slave trade come from?
Did it come because the white man showed up in Africa and then just threw a big net on people and just took them away?
No, there was a pre-existing slave trade in Africa among Africans.
A lot of it was controlled actually by North Africans, but there was a huge slave trade in sub-Saharan Africa.
There still is slavery in Africa to this very day.
So historically, that doesn't make any sense.
But whatever, who cares?
I mean, this lunatic professor who probably shouldn't have graduated high school is now teaching students.
I'm sure she has advanced degrees.
And she's pushing the same kind of ridiculous racial nonsense that goes back to this professor Leonard Jeffrey's You sometimes hear this from people like Nick Cannon or other black nationalist types, that the white people are villains, they're just evil, they're just so corrupt, they're spiritually bankrupt, and the black people are good.
And the white people are the ice people, and the black people are the sun people.
I mean, this kind of craziness has actually been taught for a number of decades.
But my point is actually, even outside of the academy, my point is this.
On a political level, we are told...
That white people are the absolute top of the privilege hierarchy.
They are the oppressors.
They can do no wrong.
They get all the special privileges.
We are told that men are the very tippy top.
We are told that straight people are the very tippy top.
We're told that cisgender people, people who know what sex they are, they're at the very tippy top.
And yet, could you say these sorts of things in public about any other race?
Of course not.
You could not go out and make a bunch of disparaging comments about black people and call them villains and call them murderers and call them evil and spiritually bankrupt and corrupt.
You couldn't do that.
You would be ostracized.
You'd be certainly fired from your teaching job.
You'd be ostracized.
You might be charged with some kind of hate crime.
You couldn't do it about Asian people.
You couldn't do it about Hispanic people.
You can only do it about white people.
Because what we are told is that white people are the most powerful, dominant group in the whole world who can get away with anything.
But in fact, they're the only race of people that you're publicly allowed to and actually encouraged to criticize and taught that should be abolished.
We need to abolish whiteness.
We need to eradicate whiteness.
Obviously, you couldn't say that about any other race.
Same is true on sex.
You're not allowed to criticize women.
You are almost obligated to criticize men.
Same is true on sexual desire.
You're not allowed to criticize homosexuals or polyamorous people or transgender people.
You're not allowed to raise any question about these things.
That could get you criticized, banned, ostracized, charged with a hate crime.
But you can do that to straight people.
The reality of hierarchy in the country is radically different from what we are told the hierarchy is according to the intersectional left, critical race theory, the gender ideology.
It's actually the opposite.
Speaking of young people being unfairly characterized, do you remember Kyle Rittenhouse?
Kyle Rittenhouse was this young man who during the BLM riots went out and tried to put out some fires as there were arsonists running roughshod and people destroying property and threatening people and killing people.
And when some of the Antifa lunatics came after him, he shot them in self-defense.
I mean, we have videos of these things.
It looks like he shot them in self-defense.
So they're trying to prosecute him.
He's a young, evil, white guy conservative.
I mean, he checks every box for throw this guy in jail and throw away the key.
The prosecution is really going after him.
And as the trial begins, the judge actually is mocking the prosecution for their ridiculous ideology.
If there were any evidence in this case...
And I would love to hear it, because I haven't seen it.
If there was any evidence in this case that Mr.
Rosenbaum physically attacked anyone else that night, chased anyone else that night, assaulted anyone else that night, threatened anybody with a weapon that night, we can talk about that.
But I don't hear any evidence to that effect.
All we're talking about is arson.
We're talking about being loud and disorderly.
We're talking about, you know, being...
I can't believe some of the things you're saying.
I mean, all we're talking about is arson.
Come on!
I love that judge at the end.
All you're talking about is arson?
Come on.
I mean, this guy, this prosecutor here, he is the guy from MSNBC. They're not literally the same guy, but it's the exact same point.
You remember the guy from MSNBC? He's standing in front of a burning building.
He's saying these are fiery, but mostly peaceful protests.
I would say other than the arson and the looting and the mugging and the beating and the murdering, it's mostly peaceful.
So if you can show me, Judge, that these guys were doing anything other than burn and pillage and kill and steal and anything else, then we can have that conversation.
In the Kyle Rittenhouse trial, as the prosecutors are talking to the judge and trying to get this kid thrown in prison forever for what would seem to be defending himself, The prosecution is attempting to frame the debate, and we know that whoever frames the issue wins the debate.
So what the prosecution is trying to do is say that the people that Kyle Rittenhouse shot were victims.
Now, of course, Rittenhouse's point is, no, no, they were coming after me, they were chasing me, these were very violent people, they were burning stuff down, and I shot them in self-defense.
And what the prosecution wants to do is call them victims, the judge having none of it.
This is bad character evidence, Your Honor.
This is an attempt to tell the jury Mr.
Rosenbaum's a bad guy and deserved to die.
That's really what it is.
He was an arsonist, he was a rioter, he was starting fights, or not starting fights, he was starting problems, he was disorderly, he was loud, he was whatever.
This is really bad stuff, Your Honor.
Okay, what you're doing is you're prejudicing the jury against the person that I'm representing just because he was a filthy, degenerate criminal who was burning stuff down and committing crimes in the moment and was chasing this kid who then shot him in self-defense.
Okay, judge, that's so wrong.
Now, of course, what the prosecution is trying to do is, and actually the judge just shut this down, is bring up a bunch of other problems that Kyle Rittenhouse had had that were not related to this moment.
But in this prevailing ideology...
If you are a white, certainly, you just heard it from that professor, a white conservative, oh my gosh, that's awful.
That's probably worst of all.
Because you can be black and a conservative, and if you're a black conservative, you're a white supremacist.
They do that to Candace all the time, or Larry Elder, or anybody.
So if you're a white, conservative, male, straight guy, you know, you are presumed guilty until proven innocent.
And even if you shoot someone in self-defense, that is not permitted.
And the force of the state will come after you for that.
Now, speaking of criminal justice...
There was a really...
There's so rarely good news these days.
But there was some really wonderful fireworks yesterday on Capitol Hill.
Merrick Garland, the supposedly moderate Attorney General for Joe Biden, showed up to Capitol Hill to be grilled by the Senate.
Merrick Garland had to answer because he sent out a memorandum describing parents...
Who went to their school boards and questioned radical racial theories like the ones that we heard from Rutgers or radical sexual theories like transgenderism.
Questioned that being taught in schools.
The parents said, we don't really like that.
We don't like being told that boys can become girls.
We don't like our kids being taught that white people are evil, that America's evil.
We don't like that.
Merrick Garland described them as domestic terrorists.
So he was dragged before Capitol Hill.
Senator Tom Cotton ripped him a new one.
One of the news reports cited in that letter, which you presumably mean, is from Loudoun County, Virginia.
No, that is not what I was talking about.
Well, you keep citing news reports, and that's the most prominent news report that anyone in America has seen.
That refers to Scott Smith, whose 15-year-old daughter was raped.
She was raped in a bathroom by a boy wearing girls' clothes, and the Loudoun County School Board covered it up.
Because it would have interfered with their transgendered policy during Pride Month.
And that man, Scott Smith, because he went to a school board and tried to defend his daughter's rights, was condemned internationally.
Do you apologize to Scott Smith and his 15-year-old daughter, Judge?
Senator, anyone whose child was raped is a most horrific crime I can imagine and is certainly entitled and protected by the First Amendment to protest to their school board about this.
But he was cited by the School Board Association as a domestic terrorist, which we now know.
That letter and those reports were the basis for your judgment.
No, no, Senator.
That's wrong.
Judge, this is shameful.
It is shameful.
It is disgraceful.
Cotton did great here.
Merrick Garland kept trying to evade the issue, and he does a very good job, Garland, of pretending to be the, look, I'm just the reasonable, quiet, nice, moderate guy.
He's not moderate at all.
He's describing these parents as domestic terrorists.
And Tom Cotton was absolutely right to call him out.
What I'm more interested in here, though...
Than just what a juror Arland is and how much Tom Cotton totally owned him is the media aspect.
To me, the big story here is the story.
The Daily Wire broke this story about the rape in Virginia.
That the school covered up because it didn't want to have to answer for its transgender bathroom policies.
Okay, the Daily Wire broke that story.
It wasn't the New York Times, it wasn't the Washington Post, it wasn't NBC News, it wasn't any of the very well-funded investigative news outlets.
It was us, little old us, here, at a website that was just a tiny little blog five years ago.
Now that story is dominating the national conversation.
It dominated Capitol Hill yesterday.
It might cost Terry McAuliffe the Virginia governorship.
That entire race right now, the Virginia governor race between McAuliffe and Youngkin, is coming down to education, whether parents have the right to have some say in the way their kids are taught, and specifically coming down to this story.
And I'm not saying it just to toot our own horn here at the Daily Wire.
I'm saying it to make a point.
Conservatives very rarely do investigative journalism.
It loses money.
It's a very expensive endeavor.
We don't have the infrastructure anywhere close to what the left has to do investigative journalism.
But just this one story has totally transformed the way we're talking about this issue.
It might transform who's the governor of Virginia.
There's a lesson to be learned here.
We need to do a lot more of this.
This was just one story.
How many more stories are there like this?
If we do a little investigative work and we start to set the conversation, we don't just react, we don't just criticize, we start to set the conversation.
We start to pick what stories we're going to focus on.
We start to uncover things that the left is trying to cover up.
How much more powerful would that be?
How many more races could we win?
How many more issues could we win on?
Really good stuff from Cotton.
Although, the prize of the day, I think, I have to give to my friend, Ted Cruz.
Garland had a real rhetorical beating up there on Capitol Hill.
Ted Cruz was the one who would not let him evade the point.
You saw with Tom Cotton, he keeps trying to pin him down, and then Garland keeps evading, and then finally Cotton goes, all right, whatever, this is disgraceful.
You're a disgrace judge, you should resign.
Fair enough.
Cruz asks Garland a very specific question.
Garland has a conflict of interest, it seems, because his son-in-law has a business interest in a critical race theory company.
So, then Garland goes out and he starts pushing critical race theory in the schools.
Obviously, that's a conflict of interest.
Ted Cruz had a simple question.
Hey, Judge, did you...
Look into the ethics of this and try to get approval from an ethics body on your decision to send out this memorandum.
And he will not let the issue go.
Did you seek an ethics opinion?
Judge, you know how to ask questions and answer them.
Did you seek an ethics opinion?
You asked me whether I sought an ethics opinion about something that would have a predictable effect on something.
This has no predictable effect in the way that you're talking about.
So if critical race theory is taught in more schools, does your son-in-law make more money?
This memo has nothing.
If critical race theory is taught in more schools, does your son-in-law make more money, yes or no?
This memorandum has nothing to do with critical race theory or any other kind of curriculum.
Will you answer if you sought an ethics opinion?
I am answering the best I can.
Yes or no?
Did you seek an ethics opinion?
This memorandum has nothing to do with...
General, are you refusing to answer if you sought an ethics opinion?
I'm telling you that there's no possible...
So you're saying, no, just answer it directly.
You know how to answer a question directly.
Did you seek an ethics opinion?
I'm telling you that if I thought there was any reason to believe there was a conflict of interest, I would do that.
Why do you refuse to answer the question?
Why won't you just say no?
I'm sorry.
You're not going to answer the question?
I'm sorry.
Ask the question again.
Did you seek an ethics opinion?
I'm saying again.
I would seek an ethics opinion.
So no is the answer, correct?
Senator, your time is up.
Is this Garland guy stupid?
Is he just a little thick?
That he doesn't know what question Ted Cruz has been pestering him with for several minutes at that point?
Gosh, he must be the dumbest guy in the world.
Well, maybe not.
Maybe he's not.
I actually don't think he's a dumb guy.
I think he's got really stellar credentials.
I think he went to really fancy schools.
I think he's been a federal judge.
And I think he's playing dumb.
Ted Cruz is asking, did you seek an ethics opinion before you sent out this memo that was going to benefit your son-in-law?
Merrick Garland answers, it's not going to benefit my son-in-law.
Ted Cruz says, that's not the question I asked you.
I said, did you seek an ethics?
It's a very simple question.
It's like, did you eat eggs for breakfast this morning?
Did you seek an ethics opinion?
I'm not saying, what should the conclusion of the ethics opinion be?
I'm not saying, did you need to get an ethics?
I'm just asking, did you do it?
No, Senator, I'm answering you.
I just didn't know.
Senator, I'm...
And then he says, can you answer the simple question?
He goes, I'm sorry, what was the question?
You've been asked the question a hundred times.
Did you seek an ethics opinion?
But Merrick Garland is a very shrewd politician.
And Garland knows that if he gives that answer, it's going to look really, really crooked.
Which it is.
If you have not heard already, the Daily Wire has signed Allison Williams to lead a very special sports series exclusively for our members.
I was really hoping that I would lead the sports series.
You know, I was going to talk about the home runs, you know, and the slam dunks and stuff.
But that's okay.
we got Allison.
She was an ESPN seasoned sports reporter.
She announced her resignation last week because Disney, which is ESPN's parent company, is forcing their employees to get the Fauciouchie or get fired.
Here at the Daily Wire, leftist elites do not dictate our content.
You do.
So if you want sports content without the woke, become a member at dailywire.com slash subscribe.
Use code DO NOT COMPLY. Check out for 25% off.
What's that URL?
Dailywire.com slash subscribe. Use code DO NOT COMPLY for 25% off and join the fight.
All Also, check out Morning Wire.
Great show.
Get it on Apple, Spotify, wherever you get your podcasts.
Leave a five-star review if you like it.
We'll be right back with a lot more.
Twix wants to trans your kids.
Twix.
You know the delicious, crunchy candy?
Probably going to get a lot of that at Halloween.
Twix.
They want to trans your kids.
There was an ad that came out for Twix.
In the ad, a little boy dresses like a little girl.
But he's not dressing like a little girl for Halloween.
He's dressing like a little girl because I guess he thinks he's a little girl and he has abusive parents.
So, in the ad, he gets a new babysitter, a new nanny.
And the babysitter and the nanny is a witch.
You buckled?
I'm still wearing my princess dress.
Do you want to wear it?
Hey, you...
Princess!
You look like a girl.
Why are you wearing that?
Dressing like this makes me feel good.
Is that your nanny?
She looks weird.
You look weird, your nanny looks weird, you guys are both weird.
No, we're just different.
Boys don't wear dresses.
Whoa!
Whoa!
Where is it coming from?
What's happening?
Whoa!
We should go.
Will we come back?
Yeah, probably.
Come on.
So, this ad from Twix.
I don't know.
I saw this from Libs of TikTok, one of the greatest accounts on Twitter.
I don't...
I guess Twix made it.
If not, some...
But it looks like it's a Twix ad.
It looks...
I don't really watch TV a lot, but it looks legit to me.
In the ad, a witch...
Seriously injures or possibly kills a child for telling another child that boys should not dress up like girls all the time.
And so the witch attacks him.
This is a perceptive ad.
This is a really perceptive ad.
Because witchcraft is on the rise.
People are going to say I've got a tinfoil hat on or something, that I sound like a crazy person.
I'm quoting The Atlantic.
The Atlantic magazine, just last year, comes out with an article, Why Witchcraft is on the Rise.
And you see this, by the way.
You can read about this in journals.
You see a lot of it on social media.
There is a rise in witchcraft, in the Wicca, sort of witchy religion.
People will describe themselves as witches, and there's all sorts of kooky New Age spirituality here.
And all this creepy sex stuff has a relation to it.
It has a relationship to the occult.
I mean, the very idea of transgenderism has a relationship to these strange Gnostic religions, which say that your body has nothing to do with who you really are, and that actually there's this secret knowledge, esoteric knowledge, that you can only access if you deal in these kind of weird ideologies.
It reminds me of one of the greatest lines ever uttered in politics.
This is a line we have returned to on this show a number of times.
It was from Pat Robertson.
He's the very aged host at the 700 Club.
He ran for president before.
He was a very prominent evangelical leader.
And in 1992, Pat Robertson said, quote, The feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women.
It is about a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism, and become lesbians.
And it's very easy to say that this is a crazy, insane, lunatic line, right?
But it's harder to point out the flaw in his reasoning.
Where's the flaw?
Feminism and socialism overlap a lot.
That's true.
Think of the most radical feminists.
Often they are more open to things like socialism.
It's anti-family.
Well, that's certainly true.
A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle.
That was Gloria Steinem.
Encourages women to leave their husbands.
Same point.
Kill their children.
Is feminism pro-abortion?
Yeah.
Destroy capitalism.
Well, yeah, we just talked about that with the socialism thing.
Become lesbians.
Yeah, I'm not saying all feminists are lesbians, but there's definitely some overlap.
And then the one that people always thought was the most over the top was practice witchcraft.
But this is rising.
You'll read about covens and things like that in Brooklyn.
You'll hear people describe themselves as witchy women and that sort of stuff.
And what they will tell you is, oh, Michael, don't take this seriously.
This isn't like a real religious thing.
It's more of a kind of political statement.
It's kind of like atheists just saying, you know, this is my...
It's hearkening back to old mythology and old pagan ideas.
Right, I know.
That's right.
Of course it is.
It happens to be the case that there's more between heaven and earth than is dreamt of in our philosophies, but...
Moreover, even if you're doing this thing ironically, there was a Satanist movement in the 20th century that was kind of ironic.
They didn't really believe in the existence of God or Satan.
They just believed that you should do all the things that Satanists do.
You should pursue your own selfish interests.
You shouldn't care about others.
You should pursue your own basest appetites.
So it's kind of ironic Satanism.
It's kind of ironic witchcraft sometimes.
And the thing is, if you do something ironically for your whole life, It's just sincere.
It's earnest.
You're actually just doing it.
And this is true.
Everybody's got to serve somebody.
The great political philosopher Bob Dylan understood that.
Everybody's got to serve somebody.
So you might be thinking, oh, I don't believe in all that kooky nonsense.
I don't believe in religion.
I'm just pragmatic.
I'm just realistic.
I'm just whatever.
But you do.
As they say, politics is downstream of culture.
Culture is downstream of religion.
Cult and culture come from the same root word.
What you do, the way you live your life, because we're incarnate beings and we also have ideas and we are motivated by ideas and we do things in the real world, it is going to have some religious significance.
And in this case, it's a bunch of witches.
Bad idea.
It's not good stuff.
Don't hang out with the witches.
Pat Robertson called it in the 90s.
We should have listened.
Speaking of creepy, weird gender ideology, the State Department is buying into this.
The State Department now is announcing for the first time it will allow a third gender option for U.S. citizens on their passports.
They have now issued one.
It is the first of its kind, and on your passport, you can either identify yourself as a male, M, a female, F, or something else, X. This has been building for a long time.
In a way, it's the logical consequence of the homosexual rights movement from the 90s and 2000s.
And really, that's a consequence of the feminist movement.
All of which hold as their fundamental premise that men and women are basically the same.
That men and women are basically interchangeable.
They're not complementary.
They're not totally different.
Anything a man can do, a woman can do, the differences are only superficial.
So naturally you would redefine marriage.
Naturally you would redefine sex itself.
If M plus W equals M plus M equals W plus W, if they're all the same, then M equals W and they're interchangeable.
So, the State Department has bought into this.
What does this mean for you?
One, it seems like there's a little bit of a security risk issue here.
If you no longer need to identify your sex and you can just pretend you're some other sex on your passport, that would seem to pose some security problems.
But it's also ridiculous from a philosophical standpoint, and it's also now part of the governing ideology.
The regime has now officially adopted transgenderism as its governing ideology, meaning that you don't really have a right to question it.
And you've been seeing this more and more in recent years.
Five years ago, if you said a man is a woman, you would be laughed at.
Ten years ago, people would consider committing you to an insane asylum.
Now you would still be...
Five years ago, you'd still be laughed at.
Today, it is taken as common sense.
Increasingly, if you say a man is not a woman...
You'll be censored on social media.
You'll be asked to leave the classroom.
You will have professional consequences at your job.
If you do that in government, you could be accused of discrimination.
Pretty soon you won't really be allowed to do it at all.
We talked yesterday about the regime.
What's a regime?
A regime is that which transcends the partisan disputes.
The Republican wins.
The Democrat wins.
It doesn't matter.
Certain things remain the same.
Now transgenderism is about to be part of that.
It's on the passports.
It doesn't matter if a Republican wins and says this is bunk.
It's on the passports.
Soon enough, the Squishes will be defending this.
Okay, and what you're going to hear, mark my words, save this episode.
I don't know if it will come true in five years or ten years or even sooner than that, maybe.
But what's going to happen is the squishes are going to say, Oh, you know, look, maybe I don't agree with transgenderism.
Okay, I don't practice transgenderism myself.
But people have a right to choose if they want to say that they're transgender.
Okay, and that's just their right.
And that's just liberty.
And it's on the passports.
Okay, and that's the government is protecting that individual right of men to pretend that they're women.
All right, now I might not agree with it, but that's liberty.
That's a blessing of liberty.
You will be hearing that probably sooner than many of us think.
The ruling class is really, really weird.
It's getting really bizarre, really out there.
Okay.
And at the international level, the level of these groups that transcend nations like the United Nations, one of their obsessions is climate change because climate change used to be global cooling, then it was global warming, then it was climate change.
Now I guess they call it climate crisis or climate catastrophe.
It is this apocalyptic prediction that tells us the end of the world is imminent unless we give them all the money and all the power.
And so we got to just go along with it.
They are now playing at the UN for world leaders, a really scientific erudite, serious video of a dinosaur lecturing everybody about extinction.
Listen up, people.
I know a thing or two about extinction.
And let me tell you, and you'd kind of think this would be obvious, going extinct is a bad thing.
And dropping yourselves extinct in 70 million years, that's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.
At least we had an asteroid.
What's your excuse?
You're headed for a climate disaster, and yet every year governments spend hundreds of billions of public funds on fossil fuel subsidies.
Imagine if we had spent hundreds of billions per year subsidizing giant meteors.
That's what you're doing right now!
Think of all the other things you could do with that money.
Around the world, people are living in poverty.
Don't you think helping them would make more sense than, I don't know, paying for the demise of your entire species?
Let me be real for a second.
You've got a huge opportunity right now.
As you rebuild your economies and bounce back from this pandemic, this is humanity's big chance.
Three really important aspects here to the dinosaur lecturing the world leaders.
A sentence I never thought I would utter.
First of all, he goes back to this ridiculous, the dinosaur does, he goes back to this ridiculous talking point that you hear a lot from the environmentalist lunatics, and he says, you're subsidizing fossil fuels!
Oh my, your governments, your taxpayer dollars are subsidizing rich old Uncle Pennybags at the oil company.
What does that mean?
That obviously isn't true.
So what does he mean by that?
We're just giving direct payments to the oil tycoons?
That's what's going on?
Why are we doing that?
Why would taxpayers and why would the government, just even from a political optics standpoint, why would they subsidize the oil companies?
Because they are paying for poor people to heat their homes, among other things.
What do you think oil subsidies means?
The government is paying oil companies and buying oil.
One, because it has its own needs for oil.
But two, as part of a welfare program for poor people to heat their homes.
So is your argument, no, the poor people should freeze.
That way the sun monster won't be angry and we can appease the great sun god and then he won't destroy the world in 18 months or 12 years or whatever.
They keep changing the number.
No, I don't think that.
I am more interested in helping the poor people heat their homes in the winter, helping widows and orphans stay warm in the winter, than I am in protecting a rock, or the Delta smelt, or even the polar bears, who are doing just fine, by the way.
That's the first part that's so ridiculous.
The second part that is so ridiculous is that he's already, by the end, the dinosaur is, already taking it beyond climate change, beyond this one issue of, he says, this is an opportunity.
This pandemic, it's an opportunity for a, would you say, a great reset?
I don't know.
For a way to transform the economy, to transform.
It's a great opportunity.
And the third thing that is really important about this is that it's a video of a dinosaur lecturing world leaders.
And not a scientist.
Not an expert.
A cartoon dinosaur.
Because these are not serious people.
This is not a serious issue.
This is a power grab based on fear-mongering and bread and circuses and fantasy.
The environmentalists.
Who are pushing for this imminent destruction of the world or pushing for massive global action, the upending of societies to stop the end of the world.
They are not serious people.
Environmental activists from the group Extinction Rebellion have just had a big protest.
And the way they protested fossil fuels and pollution in the atmosphere is to set up a prop boat and set it on fire and then fill the air with a bunch of pollutants and smoke.
And that's going to protest filling the air with a bunch of pollutants and smoke.
Is it?
Now that would be self-undermining, I think.
That would be like animal rights activists protesting the harm done to animals by killing a bunch of animals.
Which is literally what they do, by the way.
That's what PETA does.
PETA kills animals.
It's a good example.
They actually should look into that there as well.
These are not serious people.
This is not a serious movement.
It's not even opposed to the ruling class.
I just read a That Greta Thunberg, who is the most prominent young...
The left really exploited her when she was a kid.
Now that she's...
I think she's 18 now or 19.
Now that she's no longer a kid, they talk about her less.
They're going to find some other kid to exploit.
But I read some headline that said Greta Thunberg is going to be appearing at and protesting the climate summit.
What do you mean she's not protesting the climate summit?
What do you mean protesting?
She's invited.
All the world leaders, they're all on the same team.
The activists and the politicians and the media and every powerful institution in the whole wide world and corporate America and big tech and the universities, they're all in agreement.
There's no protest.
It's theater.
It's kabuki theater.
But who are they protesting?
All of those powerful groups are protesting you.
All the people with the power are protesting you who want to keep your way of life and your liberties and your system of government and who have observed that all of the kooky environmentalist claims of Armageddon that they've been pushing since at least the 1970s and actually much longer before that haven't come true.
It was all a bunch of bunk.
People are recognizing that.
You know, even some leftists are recognizing that.
There was a host on MSNBC who called out her leftist guest from the Democratic Party and said, hey, all you guys seem to be running on is orange man bad.
All you're doing is you're running against Trump.
Trump's not even in office anymore.
Trump is a looming threat, but he's not in power.
Democrats are.
And right now, Democrats have not gotten anything done on infrastructure, voting rights, gun reform, and police reform.
How do you get voters energized in Virginia for democratic ideals, not just against Trump?
So, the guy doesn't have a good answer on any of these things, and it's not really important what he says.
He ends up going, he says, well, you know, Democrats did this one thing, or they sometimes do this, but, you know, yeah, we gotta...
Trump's really bad.
Trump's really bad.
But you know the Democrats are in trouble when MSNBC is worried about it.
Right.
And you can just see it.
On every issue, Joe Biden's numbers have tanked.
Joe Biden, who won Virginia by 10 points, is now underwater there by 10 points.
Joe Biden is underwater on every single issue.
He used to be above water on COVID. That was the one issue that people approved of him on.
He's now losing even on that issue.
His approval rating is in the 30s.
So I don't think the MSNBC host is necessarily calling out the strategy because she's worried about fairness or justice.
But at the very least, she's worried about her own party.
And she's saying, guys, this is not a winning strategy.
You got deep blue Virginia very possibly might give the election to a Republican because of how much you guys are screwing up.
Trump is the villain.
He's the scapegoat.
Every problem in the world comes from Trump.
But Trump is not as relevant right now as he was a few years ago.
Maybe he'll run for office again.
Maybe he won't.
So at the moment, he's just not particularly relevant.
So now they've got to try to make a new villain.
And the new villain they've selected is Ron DeSantis.
MSNBC also pushing this, one of the more eccentric hosts there, Joy Reid, going on a bizarre tirade against the governor of Florida.
On Sunday, the Florida Republican announced plans to offer unvaccinated cops $5,000 bonuses to relocate to Florida and join police forces there.
Rolling out this perverse dystopian tourism ad to the COVID blue line.
Are you big on ordering people to comply, but you hate complying with health mandates yourself?
Do you dream of arresting people's ability to breathe while you arrest them?
Well, pack up your potentially infectious self, your badge and your gun, and come on down to Florida.
Take this taxpayer bonus money and enjoy constant interaction with vulnerable senior citizens you can breathe on.
Every breakthrough case in ICU admission is the virus of freedom spreading.
And don't forget to sunscreen.
Is she okay?
Does someone need to check on Joy Reid?
What Joy Reid has observed is this policy that Ron DeSantis has.
He's saying, if you get fired, you're a cop.
You're being fired because you won't take the Fauci ouchie because you're a healthy person and you don't really need it.
And your risk from dying of the virus is very, very low.
And we're told that the vaccine is so super-duper effective that it protects you.
Regardless of however anyone else behaves, it protects you from hospitalization and death.
So, look, if you lose your job for that, come on down to Florida.
We got a job for you.
No!
No, it's evil!
You're going to kill Grandma!
You're going to breathe on Grandma!
Don't worry, Grandma got the vaccine.
It's fine.
You just told me that the vaccine is fine and it protects you.
No, you...
And all they've got is fear-mongering and insinuation and snark.
She never makes any argument.
She never cites any scientific facts.
She never makes any argument from justice or science or anything else.
The fact is, DeSantis was right about everything from the beginning of the pandemic.
Almost every single decision he made, maybe every single one, was correct.
And Cuomo got it wrong, and Newsom got it wrong, and Biden's gotten it wrong, and everyone's gotten it wrong except for this guy, okay?
And forget about DeSantis for a second.
This is true broadly on the right.
The government that we had before Joe Biden came in was working a lot better than the government we have now right with Joe Biden.
And they can't make an argument for it.
So all they've got is their snark and their insinuation and their fear mongering and very little else.
People are aware of that.
Their power is cracking a little bit in the media, in all of those institutions.
And that's been building for a long time.
And so now they are going to double down.
They are not going to give up power without a fight.
That's why we've got to hold the line.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is the Michael Knowles Show.
show.
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 producer, Mathis Glover.
Production manager, Pavel Vidovsky.
Editor and associate producer, Danny D'Amico.
Associate producer, Justine Turley.
Audio mixer, Mike Coromina.
And hair and makeup by Cherokee Heart.
Michael Knowles Show is a Daily Wire production.
Copyright Daily Wire 2021.
Today on the Ben Shapiro Show, Republicans subject Attorney General Merrick Garland to a rough day in the Senate.
Joe Biden heads to an international climate summit.
And the State Department says people of no gender can now get their passports stamped X. Yeah, that's happening.
