The Supreme Court rules in favor of the second amendment, the US Navy releases a creepy video on pronouns, and Joe Biden demands lower gas prices.
Become a Daily Wire member to watch summer blockbuster “Terror on the Prairie”, the most talked about documentary in America “What Is A Woman”, and so much more. Use code KNOWLES for 25% off your new membership: https://utm.io/ueHMa
—
Today’s Sponsors:
Skip the grocery store & choose Good Ranchers for 100% American meat. Visit goodranchers.com/KNOWLES or use code "KNOWLES" at checkout and get 2 pounds of FREE American Wagyu Burgers + Free Shipping added to your order.
Stop funding woke corporate agendas. Switch to PureTalk instead. Save 50% off your first month at https://www.puretalkusa.com/landing/knowlespodcast.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
The Supreme Court just delivered the biggest win for the Second Amendment and for gun rights in almost 15 years.
The case was the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association versus Bruin, and the question concerned whether or not New Yorkers are allowed to bear arms, to carry a gun outside of the home.
The decision was not close.
Even Roberts, who is the swing vote, the squish of the court, he sided with the conservatives.
Six-three decision, the opinion written by Justice Clarence Thomas.
It came down to a law in New York that said that if you wanted to be able to carry a gun, you had to have proper cause, and you had to demonstrate proper cause.
But of course, the proper cause from the Second Amendment is this.
When the government is trying to take away your Second Amendment rights, that is proper cause to exercise those rights.
A major win for conservatives, a major win for the rule of law in an already excellent...
Supreme Court term for the Constitution for conservatives.
As we all await with bated breath the decision in Dobbs versus Jackson Women's Health Organization, the decision that could overrule Roe v.
Wade.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is the Michael Knowles Show.
Welcome back to the Michael Knowles Show.
I'm Michael Knowles.
My favorite comment yesterday is from King Bubba, who says, When they said we would own nothing and rent everything, they didn't say that included our immune system.
Very good point.
That is true.
The World Economic Forum really has been extraordinarily efficient.
Yes, you will.
You will earn nothing.
You will rent everything and you will subscribe to Netflix.
You'll subscribe to your razor companies and you will subscribe to the vaccines, which are so incredibly safe and effective that you need to take 7000 of them every single year.
Just take that jab.
It feels kind of like we don't have as much control anymore.
Feels kind of like we don't have as much privacy anymore.
Well, when you want to take control of your communications, you've got to check out Pure Talk.
Right now, go to puretalk.com, enter promo code NOLSPODCAST. Right now, let me guess what you're paying for your cell phone.
I would bet It's somewhere around $80 a month.
Maybe it's higher.
Maybe it's $90 a month.
Maybe it's a little lower, but I bet it's somewhere in that zone.
What if I told you you could pay $20 per month for your cell phone?
You're not going to have to sacrifice your phone.
You can get the brand newest, coolest iPhone or whatever you want.
You're not going to have to sacrifice your service.
You're going to get the exact same service as those big carriers that you're paying big bucks for now.
How do they do it?
Because you're paying a premium to those big cell phone carriers for stuff that you're not using.
If you go to Pure Talk right now, you will get that great 5G service.
You'll get that very, very cool phone.
You're not going to be dropping calls all of a sudden.
You're not going to have a terrible service.
You're going to have really the top shelf stuff.
You're just not going to pay money for stuff that you don't need.
Go to puretalk.com right now.
Select a plan.
Enter promo code NOLSPODCAST. Love these guys.
They are totally, totally supporting this show and the voicemail bag, which is my favorite segment.
Promo code NOLSPODCAST, K-N-O-W-L-E-S, podcast, all one word, puretalk.com.
Pure Talk is simply smarter wireless.
Really, really big win.
It's almost sad that we have to celebrate a win like this.
It's sad because the Second Amendment is pretty clear.
The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
I know that we redefine all the words these days.
Shall not be infringed should be pretty clear.
Keep and bear arms should be pretty clear.
And by the way, we're not talking about a bazooka or a nuclear weapon.
We're talking about a regular gun.
So the Supreme Court makes the right decision here.
It's not even close.
It's a 6-3 ruling.
And then in a move that, if it's not unprecedented, it's certainly extremely unusual and it might be unprecedented, the Biden DOJ came out and said they disagree with the Supreme Court.
It just shows you how stacked things are for conservatives here.
This is coming on the very day when Senate Democrats passed the most radical gun control legislation that they passed since 1994.
This on the day that the executive branch comes out and says, no, we hate your gun rights.
We want to get rid of them.
This, as all the corporations, as all of the institutions, come out against your basic Second Amendment rights.
And we need to celebrate that the Second Amendment hasn't been completely gutted.
A really, really basic right, the right to defend ourselves.
But we'll take the wins while we can get them.
This was a slam dunk, though.
This one was...
So clear from the perspective of the law, from the perspective of the Constitution, from the perspective of centuries of American history.
What did the Democrats have on their side?
What was pushing the Libs argument here?
I would say pretty much just this.
Land of the free, home of the brave.
Land of the AR-15, home of kids in the grave.
I've struggled to find the words, keep the disposition sunny.
I'm always trying to turn the unfunny things funny, but laughing feels wrong.
Hypocrisy's rife, I gotta say something, cause you're all pro-life unless it's taken by a gunman.
Nineteen more tiny heartbeats stopped and they're all my modern.
You force kids into the world, then condemn them to slaughter.
We teach our daughters how to hide when they should be learning history.
Then we're surprised when it repeats itself.
It's no mystery.
It's indifferent.
See them run when asked how to combat the madness.
They don't care about your rights.
They only care about their status.
And they have us where they can hold us.
Packed in the Senate and the SCOTUS. And act in focus, hocus, pocus, while we hopelessly focus on the joke that is trying to feel safe in this country.
I love my home, but I don't know if we'll truly become free if we can't agree.
Uncle Sam's holding a bad gun.
The nation's fighting for its soul.
Are we sure it ever had one?
Children dying in the school.
But can you tell me why?
Are they not trying to change the rules?
We're crying, but we're not fools.
I am calling for a complete and total ban on all theater kids until we figure out what the hell is going on.
I mentioned this clip.
I alluded to it at the end of the show yesterday.
And I told you, you had to prepare yourself.
You had to give yourself a facial massage so that the cringe would not just be stuck on your face permanently forever listening to that.
Watching that, if you had the misfortune of watching that with your eyes, that's...
I know it's really challenging.
I think that's pretty much the best argument the Dems had to take away our guns.
That's it.
It also raises this question.
What was the purpose of that video?
What was the purpose of that guy releasing that Hamilton impression?
That rap, sing-y, song-y political activism?
Was it to effect political change?
Or was it to just get clicks and clout?
It was obviously the latter.
Is that video convincing anybody in the middle?
No.
The ordinary people, the conservatives and the people in the middle and in the center, the only thing they will take away from that video is wanting to give that guy a swirly.
They're not going to be persuaded to give up their Second Amendment rights.
But what did this guy get?
He got a lot of clicks and he got a lot of attention and I assume he wants to be in a Broadway musical or something and maybe that will work out for him.
But that's it.
That is the best that they've got.
The left has...
Silly, bizarre, outlandish appeals to emotion, and they've got the raw exercise of power.
So they do control a lot of the institutions, and they use those institutions to push their radical agenda.
Believe it or not, that video, that gun rap from that guy, that is not even the most cringe-inducing video on the internet right now.
that honor would go to the United States Navy.
Hi, my name is Johnny and I use he/him pronouns.
Hi, and I'm Kanchi and I use she/her pronouns.
And we're here to talk about pronouns.
What is a pronoun?
A pronoun is how we identify ourselves apart from our name and it's also how people refer to us in conversations.
Using the right pronouns is a really simple way to affirm someone's identity.
It is a signal of acceptance and respect.
If it's a signal of acceptance and respect, How do we go about creating a safe space for everybody?
That's a good question.
A really good way to do that is to use inclusive language.
Instead of saying something like, hey, guys, you can say, hey, everyone, or hey, team.
Yeah, and now that you say that, another way that we could show that we're allies and that we accept everybody is to maybe include our pronouns in our emails or, like we just did, introduce ourselves using our pronouns.
The sound you're hearing right now is General Patton rolling over in his grave.
Old blood and guts about to become reanimated so he can show up and beat up whichever Navy officer okayed this video.
I still don't even really believe that this is real.
I have to think this is a hoax cooked up somewhere.
Except that we've seen this kind of rainbow activism from the other branches of the services.
And so the Navy seems to have followed suit here.
A great way for you to affirm everybody's sexual desires and beliefs.
Meanwhile, Vladimir Putin is just rolling tanks through Eastern Europe.
Hold on.
We'll deal with that in one second.
First, though, did you really call him a pansexual when he's a transsexual?
Meanwhile, Xi Jinping is just conquering Hong Kong, is conquering Taiwan.
We're going to deal with that in just one second.
First, though, did you affirm that man's sexual fantasies?
We need to take care of that first.
In 2013, women were not in combat positions.
Women were not allowed to be in combat positions in the United States military.
And in 2013, the Obama administration moved to put women in combat roles.
And that was really, really controversial.
And the Republicans were against it, and even a lot of Democrats were against it.
Fast forward nine years, and we are here with our sailors, and the other servicemen too, having to sit through these bizarre training videos where you have to pretend that a dude can be a chick.
Nine years.
Think about how fast that is.
And think about, too, how just insanely navel-gazing and narcissistic it is.
I am coming to you right now from Santa Barbara, California.
I came up to Santa Barbara to speak to the YAF high school conference.
I'm going to have to miss the YAF college conference because little Buddy Knowles, little baby number two, is coming out.
So I came up here.
I was really pleased to be able to speak to high school students.
The topic of my speech was the narcissism of gender ideology.
on the YAF YouTube channel now.
We always talk about the absurdity of transgenderism.
We talk about the absurdity from a biological standpoint, the incoherence from a metaphysical standpoint.
We don't really focus on the narcissism of it.
It's just people talking about themselves all the time.
They're just focused on themselves and the most base aspects of themselves.
Talking about their genitals and their libido and their sexual desires ad nauseum.
And it's sad.
And it's pathetic.
And it's the sort of thing that children do.
The people who haven't gotten an education, that haven't grown up do.
This is not the sort of thing we should expect from adults.
It sure as hell isn't the sort of thing that we should expect from the United States military.
Now, what I expect in my life is to go home to my wonderful community, to my wonderful wife, and my wonderful house, and sit down to a delicious meal of good meat.
And when I want good meat, you know where I go.
Good Ranchers.
Right now, head on over to GoodRanchers.com slash Knowles.
Use promo code Knowles, and I'm going to give you some meat.
That's right.
Meet Care of Michael for your 4th of July.
Right now, if you head on over to GoodRanchers.com, you use my code, you will get two 18-ounce prime center-cut ribeyes free with your order.
These steaks can cost $50 apiece.
I'm giving you $100 of free meat.
Well, it's really Good Ranchers is doing it through my show, through my promo code.
Right in time for the 4th of July.
I absolutely love these guys.
American company.
100% American meat.
When sweet little Lisa is out of town, and I don't know, what am I going to do?
What am I going to cook?
I don't know.
I almost never cook.
You know what I do?
My first instinct?
I go for that freezer.
I get out my good ranchers.
They've got great beef.
They've got superb chicken.
I love it.
I actually go back and forth on which one I like more.
They are absolutely fabulous.
giving away two delicious ribeyes.
Normally it would be $50 per steak or more from those other places.
We are now approaching the 50th anniversary of Title IX. Title IX is this way to give women lots of distinct opportunities in educational environments.
And in the most ironic, hilarious way to celebrate the 50th anniversary of Title IX, Joe Biden has decided to push to extend the Title IX protections that go to women But
it's kind of funny.
We have to admit it's kind of funny that we've gone full circle here and had feminism completely destroyed by the poisonous fruits that it put out well over 50 years ago, that the second wave of feminism put out.
It does remind us, too, you can't have it all.
You can't have everything.
This is a theme I've talked about a lot.
I wrote a book about it.
We talk about it in this show.
Society requires limits.
Limits to our speech, limits to our behavior, limits to our institutions, limits to our laws, limits to our rights.
You need limits.
You need limits for liberty.
If liberty is to have any sense at all, it needs to have limits.
If it doesn't have limits, it becomes licentiousness and you lose the whole system.
So what Biden is proposing is to change Title IX protections, which protect people on the basis of sex, to protect LGBTQI plus students from discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity, and sex characteristics. to protect LGBTQI plus students from discrimination based on sexual This according to Biden's Department of Education.
But you can't.
You can't protect everything.
You can't be totally inclusive of everything and everyone.
You can't tolerate everything.
If we're gonna be really tolerant and open toward the transgender students, then we are not gonna be so tolerant of the women who don't want dudes changing in their locker room.
If we're going to be tolerant of the women and protect women, which was the whole point of Title IX in the first place, then you can't protect the so-called rights of the so-called transgender students because you can't let the dudes into the women's sports leagues and into the locker rooms and into the bathrooms.
You have to pick one, and the Biden administration is pretending not to pick one.
The Biden administration is pretending to just be really open and inclusive to everybody, man, but they're not.
They are tacitly endorsing transgenderism and they are tacitly throwing the chicks under the bus.
Does Joe Biden know that he's doing that?
Probably not.
But the people who are working for him and the people who are leading him around by the hand certainly are.
There's been a big debate over just how far gone Joe Biden is.
Some people have argued that Joe Biden actually, even though he talks like he's not all there and even though he seems to fall down a lot, he's still, he's the president.
He's the one calling the shots.
He's not being handled.
He's not being led around.
He's the decider.
I don't think that's true.
I don't think it's true, not just because the man is obviously diminished.
I don't think it's true because the man has never believed anything ever.
The man was always kind of being led around, if not by handlers, then by the prevailing political wins.
The guy is just an empty suit.
And now it's not merely a matter of him not knowing what he thinks about a certain issue.
Now it's a matter of he doesn't know how to act when he walks into a room.
And we just saw this because of a photograph that the White House released.
It was zoomed in on.
Greg Price pointed this out.
Biden was holding a sheet of paper that told him exactly what to do, where to sit, what to do.
You can read it right there.
He says, you, all capital letters, you enter the Roosevelt Room and say hello to participants.
You take your, all caps, seat.
Press enters.
You give brief comments.
The press departs.
You ask Liz Shuler of the AFL-CIO a question.
Thank participants.
You depart.
So even these really basic things, you sit down in your chair.
You stop making it so obvious that you're reading these notes that we gave to you.
This is pretty clear that Joe Biden is being led around.
I do wish that whoever gave him this sheet of paper would instruct him on how to fix the economy, would instruct him on how to restart American oil and gas production, would teach him anything productive.
Rather than how to comport himself around the press.
But that is probably too much to ask.
He just looks so weak.
He looks so weak because he's frail and he's doddering and he's stuttering and he's falling down and he doesn't even know how to get into a room by himself.
But he also looks weak from the standpoint of policy.
We have record high gas.
We've had record high gas for, what, over 20 consecutive days now or something like that.
I'm in California.
Gas is $7 a gallon in some places or more, $8 a gallon in some places.
So what's Joe Biden going to do to fix it?
Well, Joe Biden's plan is he's going to ask the gas companies in a really stern voice to just to lower the prices.
So let's be honest with one another.
My message is simple.
To the companies running gas stations...
And setting those prices at the pump.
This is a time of war.
Global peril.
Ukraine.
These are not normal times.
Bring down the price you are charging at the pump to reflect the cost you are paying for the product.
Do it now.
Do it today.
That's his plan.
His plan is asking the gas companies to lower their prices.
Do it now.
That's not a plan.
By the way, it's not as though the gas companies are just raising their prices to make a lot of money.
Yes, the gas companies want to maximize their profits, but that's nothing new.
That's true in ordinary times.
That's true in extraordinary times.
And if the gas companies were not facing pressure because of things like the war in Ukraine, because of things like increased demand, because of things like Joe Biden shutting down new oil and gas production, shutting down new oil pipelines, if they weren't facing that, they would be able to lower their prices.
They are trying to compete with one another.
It's not just like there's one gas company.
They are trying to compete with one another, but that's where the market is right now.
And the market's there, not just because of these sad, terrible turns of misfortune that have afflicted Joe Biden out of pure happenstance.
These things are happening because of decisions that Joe Biden made.
So, for all those Republicans in Congress criticizing me today for high gas prices in America, are you now saying we were wrong to support Ukraine?
Are you saying we were wrong to stand up to Putin?
Are you saying that we would rather have lower gas prices in America and Putin's iron fist in Europe?
I don't believe that.
No, we're saying you should have dealt with all of that stuff the first time and not personally invited Vladimir Putin to invade Ukraine.
The revisionist history that comes from this guy is so audacious, you almost have to respect the sheer tenacity of it.
Except, to be fair, he probably doesn't remember he said it.
Joe Biden...
One, rolled out the red carpet for Putin by lifting the sanctions on Putin's oil pipeline, the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, which Ukraine President Zelensky says caused the Russian invasion.
So Biden causes the Russian invasion.
Then, when Putin's getting ready to invade, he literally invites him to invade and says, well, you know, if it's just a minor incursion into Ukraine, then we're not going to really do anything about that.
So he says, you can do it.
You can invade Donbass.
You can invade the eastern parts of the country.
That's totally fine.
Then, knowing that we're going to have the oil markets going crazy, he shuts down future oil and gas leases in America.
He didn't need to do that.
He just chose to do that.
Previously, he had shut down oil pipelines in America.
So he gives the green light to Putin's pipeline, but he shuts down the American pipelines.
And when you shut down one pipeline, it's not just that you shut down one pipeline.
You are signaling...
That the government is not going to back any new oil pipelines when there's pushback.
So he does all of those things.
Nobody, when we're complaining about this, you can't just fall back on the traditional Democrat strategy of saying that we're colluding with Vladimir Putin.
You can't do that.
First of all, you're the one who was weak on Putin and you were so weak on Putin that it caused all these problems in the first place.
And then you showed up and got tough a little bit too late.
And then you made a bunch of stupid decisions on how to punish Vladimir Putin that had no effect on him, by the way.
Russia's doing just fine right now.
We're the ones feeling the pain.
Russia is not feeling the same kind of pain that Joe Biden insisted that he would be, that Putin would be and that Russia would be.
And so...
Now we're in this situation that because of him, the only thing that he can do is say, hey, you oil companies, bring down your prices.
Thanks a lot, buddy.
Tell me when that's going to work.
Not very intimidating.
It's not intimidating to Putin or any of our enemies overseas.
It's not intimidating to domestic opponents either.
Ron DeSantis, Governor Ron DeSantis, absolutely crushing it as per usual down there in Florida.
He's pushing back on the White House, not on the issue of energy, not on the issue of Ukraine, but on something that is probably...
Certainly closer to home for us than Ukraine, and it's up there with the gas prices.
It is this insistence by the White House, by Washington DC, that we shoot our little babies up with these experimental Fauci ouchies that are so extraordinarily safe and effective that we all need to take 10 million boosters.
Ron DeSantis said, no, we're not going to follow any of that guidance.
Governor Ron DeSantis asked in Florida if he will be going along with the White House's insistence on shooting up babies full of Dr.
Fauci's super-duper safe and effective experimental vaccines that don't stop you from catching or spreading the virus.
And Ron DeSantis says, no, I don't think we're going to be doing that.
What do you make of the White House saying that the state reversed on child vaccines?
So the White House is lying about it.
We are surprised.
Not surprised the White House would lie.
Definitely not surprised that legacy media would amplify the lie because that's what they do.
The state of Florida, they came out with an article saying the state of Florida has not ordered, its Department of Health has not ordered mRNA jabs for the babies.
Yes, we didn't.
We recommend against it.
We are not going to have any programs where we're trying to jab six month old babies with MRNRA. That's just the reality.
And I think what happened was they thought somehow we would be embarrassed by that.
No, we're following the data.
You look at these European countries, a lot of them don't even allow Moderna for under age 30, or they recommend against it.
So that was always that.
We still have not ordered it.
We're not going to order it.
Now, what they're saying is because practitioners and hospitals can order it, somehow we've reversed.
I said from the beginning they'll be able to do that.
We don't have the authority to prevent it.
And quite frankly, if someone wants to make a different decision, I would just caution people, look at the actual data in the clinical trial.
It is the weakest possible data that you could possibly see.
No, we're not going to do it.
I love that way that DeSantis talks.
He's just so confident about everything.
He's just so...
Hey, Governor DeSantis, what should we have for lunch today?
We're going to have cheeseburgers for lunch, okay?
And other people, they want to have a turkey sandwich.
And other people, they tried having pizza.
And that doesn't work.
And we're not going to do that in Florida, and we're not going to do that for America.
And on this issue, I'm not making fun of him.
I genuinely like that kind of clarity.
And he's completely right on this issue.
Well, what do you say about you're not ordering vaccines, Fauci-ouchy experimental vaccines for little tiny babies?
Correct.
Bingo.
You got it.
I know you're upset about it, but the report actually totally, totally right.
This is also really important for DeSantis to focus on because this is the distinguishing feature between him and Trump.
Trump and DeSantis speak broadly to the same group of voters.
They speak in largely the same way.
They even use the same kind of hand gestures and the same modes of speaking.
They both are talking to a kind of populist, kind of nationalist, kind of new right audience.
But Trump backed the vaccines.
I'm not knocking him too much forward.
It was very, very hard to resist that sort of thing at the time.
And Trump went very hard for the vaccines.
Not to mandate anything, but to encourage people to take them.
DeSantis, a little softer on the vaccines.
And he was a little more reticent to follow Dr. Fauci.
And he just looks better to conservative voters on COVID.
And so in this stealth race for the 2024 presidential nomination, where DeSantis and Trump, they're not going after each other yet explicitly, explicitly, this is gonna be the issue that DeSantis is gonna run with because it's by far his greatest strength vis-a-vis Trump.
Now, the criticisms of Trump on COVID, again, I think it would have been very tough for Trump to actually withstand the libs trying to lock down the whole world and rig the election and kick him out of office.
But that's the most legit attack I think that you can find on Trump.
The vast majority of attacks on Trump are complete BS. Notably the idea, well, starting with the idea that he colluded with the Russians.
Turns out that was a total Fed Democrat hoax.
And we now know that for a fact.
But two, the idea that Donald Trump tried to stage a coup d'etat on January 6th, the worst day ever in American history.
We were this close to being governed by the dictatorship of the Horn Hat guy, but we made it through.
So that's obviously completely absurd, and that never happened.
But did you catch the insurrection that did happen?
No, probably not, because you wouldn't have heard about it, and it wasn't talked about on the front pages of the New York Times and the Washington Post and blared endlessly on all of the stupid left-wing news networks.
But there was, if January 6th was an insurrection, there was an insurrection in the Wisconsin Statehouse.
Did you hear that?
If you weren't watching, if you're just listening to this show right now, I'll describe the scene for you.
It wasn't horn hat guys painted in red, white, and blue, popping cores, wearing MAGA hats.
It was a bunch of left-wingers wearing pink t-shirts, Planned Parenthood t-shirts that were chanting, shut it down, we don't care, all throughout the Wisconsin Statehouse.
and If January 6th was an insurrection certainly this was an insurrection too.
They're explicitly trying to interfere with government business.
They are saying, shut it down.
Shut down what?
Shut down the legislature.
Shut down the government.
Shut down the lawmaking process.
The lawmaking process in Wisconsin's sacred temple to our democracy.
No, you don't hear any of that because the libs don't care about it because in this case, the insurrectionists are on their side.
And they don't really care about our democracy or anything like that.
When the libs say democracy, they just mean liberalism, progressivism, leftism, the sort of stuff that they are after.
Just another reminder not to take anything about January 6th seriously at all.
It's a complete political operation.
The way that it's talked about is a hoax, is exaggerated to the point of really just being a fabrication.
And people are still attacking Trump.
You're still attacking Trump, even in that great temple to our sacred democracy.
Eric Swalwell, the man who was almost president, one of the first people out of the 2020 Democrat presidential primary, who later was found out to be sleeping with a Chinese spy, who never stops stepping on rakes of his own making.
Eric Swalwell tells this harrowing tale from the Capitol.
Quote, today I gave a tour in the Capitol and was stopped by a father with his young boy.
The father yelled at me, hey Swalwell, then told his son that Swalwell, he's trouble, he doesn't back Trump.
I kept walking and felt sad for the boy.
He's being raised in a cult family.
In a cult family because a Republican made fun of Swalwell and said we're backing the other guy.
We're not backing the Democrats.
That's a cult.
The people who believe that men can secretly be women and who are chopping off the genitals of children, they're accusing other people of being in a cult because we backed the Republican who wanted to cut our taxes and let us be a little bit freer.
That's what they say.
And it's important.
This kind of language is important.
It's not a mere political disagreement here.
They are delegitimizing any opposition.
If you oppose them in any way, you contradict them in any way, it's not just that you're kind of wrong and we're going to fight you at the ballot box.
It's that you are a dangerous, insurrectionist, terrorist cult member and you will be dealt with accordingly.
Now, how are we going to fight back?
We've got to build our own institutions.
And you know what institution...
I'm a part of building that I've been building for a long time and it's really worked out thanks to your support.
That would be us here at The Daily Wire.
We're not just commenting on culture.
We are investing a ton of money in creating culture, in making movies, in committing $100 million to children's programming to take on Woke Disney and all these other guys.
We need your support to do it.
And I'm just going to make a personal appeal right now.
I need your support because I really want to beat Ben on the membership numbers.
I really want.
That would be so deeply satisfying.
So head on over at dailywire.com slash Knowles.
Become a Daily Wire member today.
Join the fight with us.
You will save 25%.
Now we will be right back to hear from you in the voice mailbag.
Welcome back to my absolute favorite time of the week when I get to hear from all of you in the voice mailbag brought to you by Pure Talk, right?
Right now, go to puretalk.com.
Use promo code NOELSPODCAST. You're going to save a ton of money.
You're going to have a much better cell phone experience.
You can get all the best phones, all the best service, and you're going to keep my favorite segment coming, the voice mailbag.
All right, without further ado, let's get the first question.
Mr.
Knowles, I recently listened to your yes or no with Will Witt on a road trip, and I would like to challenge you on your stance on marijuana.
It is sheer hypocrisy for you to sit there, sipping your martinis, saying that weed should be illegal.
God created grain, which you turned into booze.
God also created grass, which I turned into brownies.
Your justification that alcohol should remain legal is based on the second chapter of John, Jesus turning water into wine, and that it has been in our culture forever.
Basically just an appeal to tradition, not a moral stance.
Is your view really so narrow that you cannot see the generalization of mild natural intoxicants?
If so, why do you generalize to the view that all alcohol is okay instead of wine only?
Where's the verse about Jesus turning water into whiskey?
Really good question.
You are completely wrong, but it's a very, very good question.
You say that my justification for booze comes from the Gospels.
In part, that's true.
I cite it.
But I'm not arguing that because booze is in the Gospels, that is the sole reason why we should have booze.
I am saying that second part, that part that you kind of glided over a little bit, and because it's been in our culture traditionally for a long time.
Yes, I'm saying it's been in our culture.
It's so important to our culture.
It goes back so long.
Actually, it was the first miracle of Jesus.
That's how far it goes back.
That's how deep it is in our culture.
And you're saying, so you're telling me, Michael, that just because it's traditional, we should do it?
That just because it's traditional, we should think about it differently than something that is not traditional and is some relatively newer, relatively more liberal thing that was introduced from a foreign culture?
And my answer is...
Yeah.
Yup.
Uh-huh.
That's my view.
That happens to be a conservative view.
I do not have a highly ideological, rationalist view about which intoxicants I support.
I have a conservative view, a traditionalist view.
A prudential view.
Even if you wanted to get rid of booze, it wouldn't work.
It's too deep in our culture.
You could get rid of pot.
You could suppress the use of marijuana in our culture.
We did it for a very long time, and then the libs wanted to legalize pot, and now more people smoke pot.
By the way, I don't think that they're the same sorts of things.
I do think that whiskey and gin and tequila and everything is...
Fairly similar to wine and beer, though they're a little bit different.
But I think they're different in kind from something like pot.
I don't think all drugs are the same.
Marijuana and cocaine are very different drugs.
One kind of chills you out.
One gets you really hopped up and crazy.
Booze is a great social lubricant.
Marijuana really is not.
I'll be totally frank with you.
I've puffed on the devil's lettuce a little bit in my wayward youth.
Okay, not too much.
It was never really my thing.
But I tried it, and I didn't like it very much.
Because it made me, I felt dumber and not as funny.
And I just, I don't know, I just don't really like it.
And so what's my argument for why we should suppress that and not necessarily, not totally suppress booze, that we suppress booze in some ways too?
Because that's what I want.
And it's not just because of what I want and my tyranny of the will.
I think we have the right to set community standards.
And we have the right to say, no, certain intoxicants we don't like because of their effects.
And certain intoxicants maybe we don't like, but we're going to tolerate them because it would be too hard to get rid of them.
And certain intoxicants we sort of like, you know, nicotine or something.
In certain ways that's going to be okay and we're going to accept that.
And yeah, we do have the right to make those judgments.
We do have the right to set those standards.
Unless you're going to make the argument that we should legalize all drugs, including black tar heroin, including fentanyl and all of that, I don't think there would be any good argument for that whatsoever.
But it's not hypocrisy.
It's standards.
It's culture.
It's tradition.
It's very, very conservative.
Okay, next question.
Hi, I've been meaning to send in a message for a couple weeks and I'm finally getting around to it.
This is a little out of date now, but during your debate with the girl over abortion, one thing I noticed you didn't point out, which I've seen very few people point out, is the false equivalence of her analogy.
Whether it's the violin analogy or a car as she framed it, the analogy posits that allowing the natural flow of events leads to death, and taking direct action by contravening nature leads to life, where in reality, inaction leads to a living baby and taking action directly leads to a dead baby.
The false equivalence goes directly toward the pro-abortion side's deliberate reframing of pregnancies in unnatural occurrence, like a parasitic infection that needs to be stopped.
And I think a lot of people on that side would be against that if they understood where the arguments were coming from, similar to how they would be for abolishing Roe if they knew the actual impact that will, God willing, have.
It's a dishonest framing, and I wish you'd pointed that out during the debate.
What would your thoughts be there?
My thoughts are you're exactly right.
It's a very good point to make.
There are lots of problems with the stupid violin analogy and all sorts of arguments for abortion, but I have very little to add there.
I think you're totally right.
One of the problems debating abortion is it's so wrong.
It's so wrong for so very many reasons that one could be there all day and you kind of have to pick and choose.
But I agree.
That's a very good point.
I'm glad you brought it up.
Well put.
I couldn't have said it any better myself.
Next question.
Hey Michael, huge fan of the show, super appreciative of all that you guys do over there at The Daily Wire.
My question for you is about religion and spreading Christianity.
This might sound backwards, but I find it easier to share the gospel with people who are atheist or agnostic than it is to share the gospel with religious friends.
If somebody is already Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, or whatever their religion may be, how would you recommend sharing Christianity's message about Jesus?
They already have a belief system.
They already trust God.
They already worship regularly.
So how are we supposed to just convince them to abandon their faith and choose ours instead?
Thanks and God bless.
Congrats on the second baby too.
Thank you very much.
- I agree with your perception.
I think that's true that it is easier to talk to atheists about God and evangelize to them than it is to evangelize to people who already have some conception of God in religion, albeit maybe not the correct one.
In part, it's because the atheists are just so obviously wrong, and either they haven't given the topic a lot of thought, or if they have, they've really gone down very bad paths, and so it's much easier to do that, whereas someone who is, let's say, a Muslim or a Jew or some type of sect of Christianity that you do not agree with, they probably have given it a fair bit of thought, and so One wants to tread lightly, also because we need allies.
And so as a political matter, you might totally disagree with the Jews and the Muslims and the Methodists and the this and the that, but you know that in this day and age when When belief in God, period, is so under attack by the atheists and the secularists, you don't want to alienate them because as just a practical matter, you need to form a coalition to fight back against the radicals.
So I totally agree with your point.
But yes, you do have to evangelize.
So how would I go about that?
Well, if I were evangelizing to a Muslim, I would probably focus on God as Logos, as the divine logic of the universe.
This is not accepted in Islam.
In Islam, Allah is totally transcendent.
In Islam, Allah is pure will.
So I mentioned this on the show the other day.
It's funny that this is coming up again now.
Pope Benedict puts it very well in the Regensburg Address where he's quoting a Muslim theologian, Ibn Hazm, who points out that Allah can order you to do anything.
Allah could order his followers to worship idols, and that would make some sort of sense in Islam.
Very different from Christianity, where Christ and God, the Trinity, is...
Not merely will, but also logic.
So that would be one place.
And then you would probably want to point to the divinity of Christ, which is a point of contention with Islam.
Islam views Christ as a figure to be honored, but they say that he's not God.
And you would also want to point to the crucifixion, because Islam denies the crucifixion, and the crucifixion is simply an historical fact.
So you would want to point to that as well.
If you're evangelizing to a Jew, Obviously, you would just need to convince the Jew that Christ is who he says he is.
You might go for C.S. Lewis' argument that Christ is either a lord, the lord, a liar, or a lunatic.
Sometimes you will hear people suggest, no, there's a fourth L. He could be a legend.
This, I think, is the weakest of all.
We just have so much historical evidence of Christ, Christ's existence, and his life broadly as we know it to be.
So I would go through that.
You might also focus on the Old Testament, the Old Testament as prefiguring Christ, as various Old Testament figures as types of Christ, and I would focus specifically on the book of Isaiah.
If you're trying to evangelize to a Protestant, let's say you're a Catholic and you're trying to evangelize to a Protestant, you would point to the historical continuity of the church, and you would point to The doctrines and dogmas and practices in the Catholic Church that different Protestant sects might take issue with.
And you would want to show their historical continuity and their place in the scripture, which is true.
There's some grounding in the scripture for all of it.
And so you would speak in that kind of language.
And if you were trying to evangelize to, I don't know, to a Catholic, well, I don't know.
I don't think you have to do that.
It's just my point of view.
Okay, next question.
Hey Michael, huge fan of the show.
Quick question for you.
You're always talking about how if there are things in our community, state, or even the country at large that we want changed, we should contact our senators and representatives asking for said change.
However, I live in Georgia, so unfortunately my senators are Warnock and Ossoff.
Warnock is crazy, Ossoff is slimy, and unfortunately my congresswoman is also crazy.
Luckily, she just got primaried, but I'm still stuck with her until November when Warnock will be up for re-election.
Come November, I will still be six months away from being old enough to vote.
Do you have any advice on how I can affect change until then, or do I just have to wait for the red wave that's hopefully coming and being old enough to vote?
Thanks so much for everything you do.
Great question.
Yes, there is something you can do right now, right this very second, especially in a midterm election year and in a state where the elections will be tight.
You can volunteer for a campaign.
You might not be able to vote, but you can volunteer for a campaign.
It's a really, really good experience.
One of the most educational experiences of my entire life was the first congressional campaign that I worked on when I was 19 years old, I think.
So I'd really recommend that you do that.
I mean, it's going to be a really bitter fight down there in Georgia, so you should absolutely get involved in it.
All right, enough of the voice mailbag.
Now we get to the old-fashioned, old-timey typed-up mailbag.
Question from David.
Hi Michael, what do you think about monarchy?
I believe monarchy is the one form of government which is best supported by the Bible and Christian tradition.
If you are not a monarchist, how do you reconcile this with your traditional Catholic faith?
Really good question.
I'm not anti-monarchy.
I know that some people think that the American Revolution was about overthrowing monarchy or a total rejection of monarchy.
I don't think that's true.
I think a lot of the founding fathers were perfectly open to monarchy.
And there are kind of monarchistic elements in the American regime.
There are three kinds of just regimes.
Monarchies.
There have been good monarchies.
There have been good monarchies and bad democracies.
Monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy.
The bad version of those three regimes is tyranny for monarchy and oligarchy for aristocracy and mob rule for democracy.
That's the bad version.
Or you could have the good version.
In terms of the ideal regime, I tend to side with Thomas Aquinas, as I do on most things.
And Thomas Aquinas has a very interesting description of the ideal regime.
He writes in the Summa Theologia Prima Secundae, question 105, he says, the best form of government is in a state or kingdom where one is given the power to preside over all, while under him are others having governing powers.
And yet a government of this kind is shared by all, both because all are eligible to govern and because the rules are chosen by all.
For this is the best form of polity being partly kingdom, since there is one at the head of all, partly aristocracy, insofar as a number of persons are set in authority, partly democracy, that is government by the people, insofar as the rulers can be chosen from the people and the people have the right to choose their rulers.
Did you hear that?
Did you listen to what he was describing?
Sounds pretty similar to me to the American form of government, which has one person presiding at the head of all and aristocratic elements, certainly at the founding of the country before the 17th Amendment when the Senate exercised a role that was a sort of aristocratic role.
There are other elements, too.
And then, obviously, a large democratic role in the government, too.
In many ways, the American form of government is a reflection or pretty close to a reflection of St. Thomas Aquinas' ideal regime.
And it does remind us too of what Tocqueville wrote.
Alexei de Tocqueville writing the most famous book ever on democracy in America on both of those things.
Alexei de Tocqueville was a liberal and he was pro-democracy and he was very pro-America.
He was a French aristocrat.
And he pointed out that we think of Catholicism as a kind of foreign element in America.
But actually, it's kind of the most American type of religion.
And he actually predicted that Americans would either become Catholics or give up Christianity altogether.
That's an interesting topic for another time.
But as for the form of government, the American form, at least, maybe not the way it's functioning now, but the way that it was originally set up, Is pretty close to the ideal.
Okay, that's it.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is The Michael Knowles Show.
See you Monday.
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, 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 2022.
Hey everybody, this is Andrew Klavan, host of The Andrew Klavan Show.
You know, some people are depressed because the republic is collapsing, the end of days is approaching, and the moon's turned to blood.
But on The Andrew Klavan Show, that's where the fun just gets started.
