Ep. 1229 - Losing Weight Is Fatphobic... According To These People
A new candidate enters the 2024 race to compete against Biden, Colorado becomes a tourist destination for trans-ing the kids, and Elon Musk sides with Michael on aliens.
Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEl
- - -
DailyWire+:
Become a DailyWire+ member to gain access to movies, shows, documentaries, and more: https://bit.ly/3jJQBQ7
Pre-order your Jeremy's Chocolate here: https://bit.ly/3EQeVag
Shop all Jeremy’s Razors products here: https://bit.ly/3xuFD43
Get your Michael Knowles merch here: https://bit.ly/3X6tlKY
- - -
Today’s Sponsors:
Good Ranchers - FREE bacon for 1 year! Use code KNOWLES for an extra $20 off your first order! https://www.goodranchers.com/Knowles?utm_source=DailyWire&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=MichaelKnowles
ExpressVPN - Get 3 Months FREE of ExpressVPN: https://expressvpn.com/knowles
- - -
Socials:
Follow on Twitter: https://bit.ly/3RwKpq6
Follow on Instagram: https://bit.ly/3BqZLXA
Follow on Facebook: https://bit.ly/3eEmwyg
Subscribe on YouTube: https://bit.ly/3L273Ek
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
We're now at the stage of the 2024 presidential race in which we expect two qualities of any new candidate.
One, that that candidate will be a Republican.
And two, that that candidate will be a fringe afterthought since the GOP field is now dominated by Trump and DeSantis.
But what is strange about the newest candidate in the race is that he is neither of those things.
He's a Democrat and he hails from the most prominent political family in Democrat politics.
The son of a slain former presidential candidate and the nephew of a slain former president is running for president himself.
Here's why.
This is what happens when you censor somebody for 18 years.
I got a lot to talk about.
They shouldn't have shut me up that long, because now I'm going to really let loose on them for the next 18 months.
They're going to hear a lot from me.
What RFK Jr.
is talking about is how the political establishment censored him for questioning the safety of vaccines.
And everybody, especially conservatives, used to make fun of him for it.
Until the past few years, when we've all seen firsthand the corruption of the medical establishment, especially on vaccines.
Now he doesn't seem quite so crazy.
And the corruption that RFK Jr.
is taking aim at goes much deeper than just medicine.
In his words, quote, I've come here today to announce my candidacy for the Democratic nomination for President of the United States.
My mission over the next 18 months of this campaign and throughout my presidency will be to end the corrupt merger of state and corporate power that is threatening now to impose a new kind of corporate feudalism on our country.
All great points, but surprising.
Surprising that this kind of message might resonate.
Especially surprising that it resonates with independents and republicans, who until just recently were the party of trusting the science and defending big corporations.
It's surprising how fast things can change.
How parties can realign, how priorities can be upended, and how the polls show that this eccentric Kennedy could pose an actual threat to Joe Biden.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is The Michael Knowles Show.
Welcome back to the show.
This episode is brought to you by my friends over at Good Ranchers.
Free bacon, great meat, a secure price, and an extra $20 off with my code Knolls, K-N-O-W-L-E-S.
Head on over to GoodRanchers.com, use my code Knolls, K-N-O-W-L-E-S, for $20 off your order.
We will be getting to a really important medical advice coming later today.
It's gone viral on TikTok, which says that losing weight is fat phobic.
You got to follow the science.
You got to trust the experts.
We'll get to that in a second.
First though, I don't want to just totally gloss over RFK Jr.
here.
We have all spent so much time kind of making jokes about RFK Jr.
He has seemed outside the mainstream of American political discourse until very recently.
Now he's kind of a real guy.
Maybe he always was a real guy, and what was wrong was the prevailing consensus view.
We'll find out in his campaign, I guess, but according to the USA Today Suffolk Poll, RFK Jr.
might actually have a shot, at least at making Joe Biden sweat.
According to this poll, Joe Biden right now has only 67% support among Democrats in the 2024 primary.
Marianne Williamson, who's the new agey dark psychic forces man candidate in the race, she has 5%.
RFK Jr.
on his first day in the race has 14%.
That's pretty good.
RFK Jr.
is not one of these guys who's been quietly and steadily campaigning for president for decades now.
His candidacy kind of came out of left field.
And he's already got a pretty significant chunk of the Democrat primary base.
But what about the rest of the people?
I'm no mathematician, but 67 plus 14 plus 5 does not equal 100.
So that means there's a huge portion of Democrats, 33% of Democrats, who just don't like Biden, who just like somebody else.
Find me anybody without the name Biden and I will vote for that person.
So it speaks to the weakness of Biden.
It doesn't factor in Gavin Newsom.
Gavin Newsom, who clearly does want to run for president, he is currently campaigning for president.
But he has said he will not run if Joe Biden does.
And Newsom is such an establishmentarian type guy.
He probably, probably would not run.
Shows there's a lot of dissatisfaction here.
And when you've got a candidate with real Democrat bona fides, he's not a fake Democrat, a dino, Democrat in name only.
This guy's a real dem, and his family Is the major family in Democrat politics.
And if this guy comes out and he runs, but he questions certain aspects of our corrupt political establishment, aspects of it that are among the least popular, notably this merger of corporate power with the prevailing ruling political order, that could be effective.
RFK Jr.
has so much working against him.
He even has that speech impediment where he kind of sounds a little bit like this when he's campaigning.
And even with that, on day one, you've got 14%.
Not a bad launch.
People are so sick, especially of the medical corruption.
We're seeing more and more evidence of that every day.
Project Veritas has just published some undercover footage of a gender clinic that is contradicting what we've been told by the liberal establishment.
We've been told that They're not really transing the kids.
That's a right-wing conspiracy theory.
The only transitions that are occurring happen after 18.
Well, that's not true.
A multi-state investigation here has exposed WPATH, W Path Connected Transgender Health Doctors, prescribing puberty blockers to minors as young as 8 years old and irreversible cross-sex hormones to minors as young as 14.
We do have patients who are starting as young as 8, 9.
We have a list of gender-affirming therapists that we can provide to.
They said it was transition or suicide.
Like, I was given no choice.
I was told, you will kill yourself if you don't go through with these treatments.
It's very much, you know, pro-hormone, pro-changes.
If you don't do this, your child will kill themselves.
That is the most common theme.
You don't think anybody can do that for a 10-year-old to do the surgery?
They could, yeah.
I've never done a 10-year-old.
Yeah.
To be quite fair with you, I've done 15, 16.
So, Mount Sinai Adolescent Clinic, they started age 10.
She did say this about The way to go at this age, age 10, would be something like a puberty blocker.
When you then get to age 14 is when I'll consider some cross gender hormones.
14 is a reasonable age, most kids are mature enough to make a relatively informed decision.
Project Veritas has these guys dead to rights.
And so two takeaways.
One, the trans activists are lying, of course.
Our liberal establishment is lying, of course.
They are transing the kids.
They're putting these kids through very intense treatments at hideously young ages.
Just completely unacceptably young ages.
Okay, we all knew that.
My second takeaway from this is Project Veritas might survive.
You remember there was the big split with Project Veritas because they booted out their founder, James O'Keefe.
Now James is doing his own thing, and I'm sure he'll be successful at that.
A lot of people said, okay, there's no point in Project Veritas anymore if they're going to lose James O'Keefe.
This is good work.
And as someone who does not work for Project Veritas, or does not work for James O'Keefe for that matter, my only interest in this entire thing is, one, that everybody play nice.
We don't want to throw people who have done a lot of help for the conservative movement just out the window.
But two, the main thing I'm interested in is This investigative work, this is very, very important work.
And so, if Project Veritas can keep the hits coming like that, wonderful.
That's great news.
And then, if James O'Keefe, in his new venture, can keep his hits coming too, all the better.
If we can just expose these people, that is what we are after here.
That is the end in sight.
We know, time and time again, we have seen the kind of corruption that they are engaging in.
Just put it on camera.
Just expose it.
That sunlight is a great disinfectant.
Speaking of the trans industry, Colorado has become the first trans tourism state.
Talk about things that the trans activists probably want to hide.
This is definitely among them.
They are constantly preying on us.
They are constantly going in.
They're trying to do anything they can to tear us down, to prevent them from being exposed.
And so when we engage in activities, especially online, we're going to want to be very clever about that.
We're going to want to protect ourselves.
That's why you've got to check out ExpressVPN.
Right now, head on over to ExpressVPN.com slash Knowles.
You've heard me talk about how important it is to have a VPN to protect your online privacy.
Choosing a VPN you trust is equally important.
I like to research my sponsors.
I only recommend brands that I believe in, I can say with full confidence.
ExpressVPN is the best VPN on the market.
ExpressVPN does not log your online activity.
Lots of cheap or free VPNs make money by selling your data to advertisers.
But ExpressVPN developed a trusted server technology that makes their VPN servers incapable of storing any data at all.
Also, ExpressVPN now uses Lightway, a new VPN protocol they engineered to make user speeds faster than ever.
The last thing that really sets ExpressVPN apart is how easy it is to use.
You don't need any technical skills to set it up.
You fire up that app, you tap one button to connect, that's it.
Even your grandparents could do it.
Even I could do it, and I'm a real Luddite when it comes to this stuff.
Not just me saying it, Business Insider, The Verge, many other tech journals rate ExpressVPN the number one VPN in the world.
Secure your online data today by using the only VPN that I trust.
Visit ExpressVPN.com slash Knowles.
Get three extra months for free.
E-X-P-R-E-S-S VPN.com slash Knowles.
ExpressVPN.com slash Knowles to learn more.
Colorado becomes the first transgender tourism state.
And what does that mean in practice?
It means that in states around the country, it's now illegal to trans the kids.
In states around the country, what Project Veritas uncovered is not legal anymore.
And so certain states are saying, oh, if you're a young child who's a little confused about your sex and gender, just come on over here.
Yeah, come on over to Colorado and we'll pump you full of hormones and set you on the path to chopping off your genitals.
Oh, you... Hey, listen, parents, you can't abuse your children and sterilize them and chop up their bodies in Tennessee.
Well, come on over to Colorado.
We'll do it for you over here.
Absolutely.
And if you've got those mean old parents who won't do it, well, kids, hop on a Greyhound.
We'll take care of you.
I'm all for federalism.
On certain issues, you need a national standard.
Transgenderism, certainly transing the kids, but I think transgenderism broadly is probably one of those issues where we need a national standard.
I remember years ago when I was a student, I got to meet Justice Antonin Scalia, and we asked Justice Scalia about same-sex marriage, which was being discussed at the time, and we Sweet summer children we were, young conservative students.
We said, well, Mr. Justice Scalia, is it possible that one state has gay marriage and another state doesn't have gay marriage and we just allow the states to choose their own way?
And Scalia made an important point.
Scalia, a defender of states' rights in so many areas, said on certain issues, you kind of need a national standard.
What does it mean if Two men go to a courthouse in Massachusetts and the judge says, okay, you are legally married.
But then those two men then travel to Tennessee and Tennessee says, two men can't get married to each other.
Marriage involves sexual difference.
What are you guys talking about?
Do they have the rights of married people?
Marriage is the fundamental political building block.
How do you have a country if you've got fundamentally different definitions of marriage in each state?
But what's more fundamental even than marriage?
The definition of man and woman.
Because those definitions are what build up marriage.
What is a husband?
What is a wife?
So I just don't see how we leave this issue to the states.
Transing the kids, of course, because it's just so deeply unjust.
We just feel it in our very bones.
But transgenderism broadly, how do you have a country in which man and woman means one thing in Colorado, but a different thing in Texas?
Then we really agree on nothing.
We can have lots of diversity and variety across the states, but If we're going to have a country at all, we have to agree on at least a few basic things.
I don't see how we avoid this.
I don't see how the Supreme Court avoids weighing in on this sort of issue.
Now, unfortunately, the last time the Supreme Court weighed in on a fundamental matter, they upended the tradition of all of human history and they denied reality when they redefined Marriage.
And then later on, the Supreme Court, even with apparently conservative judges on it, decided to redefine civil rights protections for sex as civil rights protections for gender identity and sexual orientation.
So I'm not exactly optimistic about what would happen if the Supreme Court were to address this question today.
But regardless, what else are we supposed to do?
Now we're going to live in a country Where we can't even agree on what a man is and what a woman is, that's not going to work.
The Libs, for their part, of course, are very much pushing a national standard.
The Biden administration has just been revealed to have sent an internal email, this is from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, warning that transgender people face, quote, increasing attacks And this email came out just days after a transgender identifying shooter targeted and shot up a Christian school and killed three little kids and three adults in that school.
Apparently motivated by this gender ideology, according to the police, but we don't know for sure because the FBI won't show us the manifesto.
Wonder why the FBI won't show us the manifesto.
Transgender identifying shooter Reportedly, very likely motivated by the gender ideology, shoots up poor little Christian kids in a school, and the Biden administration says the real victims here, it's the trans people.
It's always got to be whatever preferred group the libs have identified, even when it is a member of that group committing the crime, that group still has to be the victim.
No shame whatsoever.
There's a political lesson here for conservatives.
Which is, we conservatives are very moderate by our nature.
And moderation is a virtue, so I'm all for moderation.
But I'm not for weakness, and I'm not for naivete.
Conservatives say, well, we can't push too hard on the transgender issue.
Let's just focus on if we should trans the 7-year-olds or wait until they turn 8.
Michael, when you say we need to eradicate the ideology of transgenderism from public life, that's too extreme.
It's going to turn people off.
It's going to turn people off.
Do you ever think that the libs promising to chop off kids' genitals, don't you think that's extreme?
Don't you think that might turn people off?
But the libs don't care about that.
Don't you think that redefining marriage, regardless of your views on marriage, don't you think fundamentally redefining the basic building block of society might turn some people off?
The libs don't worry about that.
Don't you think abolishing women's bathrooms and abolishing women's sports and don't you think that might turn some people off?
Even forget about these sexual issues for a second.
Don't you think sending $100 billion to Ukraine for a war that's not particularly popular in the United States, don't you think that might turn people off?
Don't you think, given what Americans think about immigration, that insisting on taking in 3 million foreigners every year, 1 million legal immigrants, and 2 million illegal immigrants, don't you think that's extreme and might turn people off?
The libs don't care.
And it's because the libs understand that while it might be difficult to get a law passed, to get a new rule established, Shortly thereafter, people just adjust to it.
The law is like the air.
The law is just something that, while it very much shapes and defines the way that we live, while it's part of our everyday existence, people are not conscious of the law.
We just, we fight, we argue, oh no, on the conservative side, we overrule Roe v. Wade, and now this is the biggest fight ever, it's such a huge fight that liberals are gonna try to assassinate Justice Kavanaugh, this is the biggest fight ever in history, and then the Dobbs decision comes out, and the law changes, and then most people just kind of calm down about it.
It's the water through which the fish swim.
So the libs know, if you can just change that law, if you can push through and hold tight and actually get the job done, People will just adjust.
That's what we need to do.
We need to recognize, yeah, we're going to take a little bit of a political hit right now.
The liberal establishment's going to aim all of its fire at us.
But then once we succeed, that's it.
It just unconsciously shapes people's lives.
Now, speaking of standards, there are calls among Democrats, and especially among Republicans, for an elderly Democrat senator to retire.
And this elderly Democrat senator, she's wrong about a lot of things, and she's said all sorts of terrible things.
She has actually specifically targeted my religious group, this senator, when she was grilling Justice Barrett, when Justice Barrett was first put up for one of the lower courts.
She said, I don't know if we can pick you, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, because you're Catholic and the dogma lives loudly within you.
So I'm not under any illusions about Senator Barrett.
Dianne Feinstein's wisdom or judgment, or now that she's so elderly, her ability to carry out the basic functions of her job.
But I am very much not in favor of her retiring.
I am 100% on board with Dianne Feinstein staying in that Senate for as long as she possibly can.
Why?
We'll get to it in a second.
First, though, guys.
You gotta get Good Ranchers.
Right now go to GoodRanchers.com, enter promo code NOLS.
If you've not changed the way you buy meat yet, you really need to.
Let me tell you three reasons I personally subscribe to Good Ranchers.
First, Good Ranchers is giving you free bacon for a year.
A pound and a half of bacon in every box.
It's a $240 value.
Second, Good Ranchers offers a price lock guarantee, meaning that when you subscribe, your price does not change for the length of your subscription, when the price of meat is expected to increase by another 4.5% in this coming year.
I don't even understand how the financials at Good Ranchers work, but it could be a huge, huge savings for you and your family.
Third, Good Ranchers meat is just better.
It is just better objectively.
All of the others.
Their all-natural burgers are Sweet Little Elise's favorite.
Their USDA prime steaks.
We're talking really top-grade steak here.
Better than organic chicken.
It'll change your standard for great meat.
I am very picky when it comes to my food.
You know I'm an Italian extraction.
Food means a lot to us.
Good Rancher's is Second to none.
Absolutely peerless in the space.
And the prices are better than anybody, too.
GoodRanchers.com.
Use promo code NOLS for 20 bucks off your box.
Free bacon, great meat, a secure price, and a bonus $20 off today.
Promo code NOLS at GoodRanchers.com.
GoodRanchers.com.
American meat delivered.
The woke corporations are erasing women.
They are spitting on your values.
But instead of just talking the problem away or ignoring it, Jeremy Boring got proactive.
When Harry's condemned us, All of you, he made Jeremy's Razors.
When Hershey's celebrated women with a man, Jeremy launched Jeremy's Chocolate.
And now that chocolate is here and shipping as we speak, Jeremy's Chocolate is free trade, delicious, and comes in only two kinds, nuts and nutless.
Do you get it?
Do you get it?
Thanks to you, we've sold over 32 tons of it.
Even though Jeremy has a 300-bedroom house, he couldn't store that much chocolate.
So we said, you know what?
Let's get a fulfillment center.
And we did.
We told you we were going to build a parallel economy, and we meant it.
Jeremy's may be the greatest joke ever told, but it's also very real and doing serious damage to those corporations that hate your guts.
There are still a few bars left in the first batch of Jeremy's chocolates, so get them before they're gone.
Go to jeremyschocolate.com today.
I am not in favor of Senator Dianne Feinstein retiring.
Because then what happens?
I can't believe I've seen conservatives publish columns on this, talk on this.
Diane Feinstein, she's almost 90.
She's been home now.
She's been home since February.
And she says it's because she's recovering from shingles.
That may or may not be the case.
But she's pushing 90.
She did temporarily, at least, give up her seat on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
But she remains in the Senate.
Keep her there forever.
Diane Feinstein retires.
Then what?
Then the Democrats in California appoint a much younger, more energetic, more capable Democrat to take her place.
No thanks.
Dianne Feinstein is very liberal, but Dianne Feinstein is among the more conservative California Democrats that are there.
So what happens when she retires?
The Democrats in California appoint a certainly more radical, more leftist senator to replace her?
No thanks.
I say we keep her there.
One of the sad facts about our republic these days is it's not governed in the way that one who had read the Constitution or watched Schoolhouse Rock with the bill up on Capitol Hill might think that it is run.
The government just kind of runs itself as a blob filled with bureaucrats and all sorts of real legislating bodies like the federal agencies that have very little to do with what the people want or with elections or with the Constitution or traditions for that matter.
So it just keeps keeping on.
The Democrats, when they were so terrified that Donald Trump was going to destroy the country, we all knew Trump would be a pretty good president.
But they said, oh, no, this is the end.
Our country can't survive.
And then what happened?
The country did great.
And the country did great in part because of Trump's leadership.
But the country was able to maintain its running in part because the president doesn't totally matter.
That was one of the things that undermined Trump's ability to govern, by the way.
Same thing with the Senate.
What does the Senate really do?
Not all that much.
They do have some specific powers, so I want to make sure that the people who are in the Senate are the most conservative people that we can get.
But the idea that, oh no, we need someone who can respond urgently to any matter, that's not what the Senate does.
The Senate is the greatest deliberative body in the world.
Most of what the Senate is even supposed to do is just deliberate.
You don't need to be terribly energetic for that.
Keep Dianne Feinstein in her place.
Speaking of dubious signs of life, this is my favorite news story all week, maybe all month.
You know, there's a debate raging at the Daily Wire.
This debate is over the existence of aliens.
On the one side, on the incorrect side, you have Matt Walsh.
You have Matt Walsh and all the libs who believe in E.T., Little Green Men.
It's very hard for me to see my friend Matt, who is generally a wise person, his head is basically screwed on straight, and he's just so wrong about this.
Then on the other correct side of the debate, you have me.
And all of the conservatives and the people with proper judgment who recognize that aliens are totally fake.
That was a slit because what people say are aliens are almost certainly demons, though that's a secondary aspect of the debate which we can get to later.
This news story today that's so important for this national conversation we're having comes from Elon Musk, who happens to agree A lot of people ask me, you know...
Where are the aliens?
And I think if anyone would know about aliens on Earth, it would probably be me.
I would think.
Yeah, I'm, you know, very familiar with space stuff.
And I've seen no evidence of aliens.
I'm not saying that we are unique, I'm simply stating to the best of my knowledge that there is no evidence for other conscious life.
I hope there is, and I hope they're peaceful, obviously, two important characteristics.
But I'm just saying we haven't seen anything yet.
There's no evidence.
I love this because Elon is right.
If anybody on Earth would know about aliens, it would be this guy.
My only hesitation actually at celebrating that he's on my side of the alien debate is that Elon Musk is so impressive and eccentric Some have suggested he might be an alien himself.
And if he were an alien, then denying the existence of aliens is exactly the sort of thing you would expect an alien to say.
So that's my only little caveat here.
But generally speaking, I think that Elon Musk is a human being.
I think he's very, very intelligent.
I think he has a unique expertise on outer space.
I'm glad that he agrees with yours truly on the matter of aliens.
The thing that gets me about the alien people is that, and I'm not talking about a hybrid of humans and E.T., I'm talking about the people who really believe in aliens.
They always go back to this ridiculous argument.
They say, well, the universe is so big, it's just probable that there are other life forms out there.
It's so big, it's just statistically probable that That isn't true.
That represents a fundamental misunderstanding of probability and statistics.
Because in order to know the probability, the statistical likelihood of something, we have to know something about the thing that we're talking about.
We have to know something about the thing whose likelihood we're trying to predict.
And when it comes to the origin of life, we don't.
We do in the sense that God created Adam and then out of his rib he created Eve.
I think that's probably the most accurate description of how life begins that we can find.
And I'm sure some dork scientist in a lab coat is going to say, well actually it was seven zillion years ago there was this interaction of this chemical with this other chemical and That may or may not have some scientific validity, but it's just not a precise and accurate way to describe it.
But furthermore, we don't have any working scientific theory of the origin of life.
We just, the scientists, with the lab coats, have no clue whatsoever.
So if you don't know even the basic aspect of the thing for which you're trying to determine probability and statistical likelihood, then you've got nowhere to go.
The universe could be a thousand times larger than we estimate that it is.
There is still not one shred of evidence, there's not one single reason to believe that there is any additional life beyond our Earth.
So what do you, do you think that we're unique?
Yeah, why not?
There's a lot more evidence that we're unique than evidence that we're not unique.
Thank you, Elon.
Thank you, Elon, for proving my point.
Speaking of aliens.
We'll turn away from the aliens on Mars for a second and turn toward the aliens in Guadalajara.
President Trump has just announced that he will use the military to crush the Mexican drug cartels.
Fentanyl, heroin, meth, and other lethal drugs are pouring across our wide-open border, stealing hundreds of thousands of beautiful American lives.
And it's happening like never before in our history.
Children are being left without parents.
Families are being ripped apart.
Communities are being decimated.
Our neighbors and fellow citizens are having their entire worlds destroyed.
Destroyed like nobody thought possible.
Our country is being poisoned from within by the drugs and by all of the other crime that's taking place.
The drug cartels are waging war on America, and it's now time for America to wage war on the cartels.
In this war, Joe Biden has sided against the United States and with the cartels.
They are making more money than they've ever made before, times 10.
President Trump goes on, he's been making a number of these policy videos.
It used to be that a campaign would release a 50-page paper on, here's my policy on this or that.
But we live in an age that is much more multimedia, and we have far shorter attention spans now.
So I like these five-minute President Trump policy videos.
What he highlights here is a correction to the way that conservatives think about foreign policy.
The way that foreign policy debates are presented very often is a debate between interventionism and isolationism.
And what's curious about that Representation is that it splits the conservatives.
Because a lot of conservatives think, why am I spending $100 billion potentially sending American troops into Ukraine and maybe throwing us into World War III?
Why would I do that?
Let's just focus on our own borders.
But then there are other Republicans who will say, well, why are we letting some two-bit strongman push us around?
We're the United States of America.
We are the world police.
And we're going to go in, maybe not build nations, but we're going to go in and assert our strength and our interests.
So which is it?
What's the conservative answer?
Just looking at ourselves and being cowardly, that doesn't seem conservative.
But then going around and spreading some Wilsonian project of creating democracies everywhere and raising the pride flag in Kandahar, that doesn't seem very conservative either.
The debate is not between isolation and intervention.
The debate is over what kind of intervention are we going to have.
The idea that we're going to go spend a zillion dollars to raise a pride flag in Kabul is crazy, especially when you consider that we're told we're not allowed to use our military force to stop the actual invasion run by some of the worst criminal organizations on the face of the earth that's going on at our southern border right now, which has a much more direct effect on our political order.
The idea that we're going to send Hundreds of billions of dollars of weapons and potentially some of our own young men to go fight a war in Ukraine, a territorial dispute that's been going on for a long time, when we're not going to take care of a territorial dispute on our own southern border.
That seems crazy to a lot of people.
It's just as in the debate over free speech.
The debate over free speech is not between free speech on the one hand and censorship on the other.
It's a debate over what standards, what taboos, what norms are we going to have.
The same thing is true here.
Foreign policy debate is not a debate between intervention and isolation.
It's where are we going to intervene and for what purpose.
You know, I've got a new interview series.
It's called Michael And.
Quickly becoming one of our most popular shows we've ever done.
In these interviews, we dive deep into a wide variety of topics with extraordinary people.
For example, I interviewed a former astrologist who struggled with thoughts of suicide and looked to the stars for answers.
I interviewed an exorcist, a priest, Father Dan Rehill, who detailed the frightening reality of possession as well as the war raging in the supernatural world.
We released a new episode with Joshua Zachoff, a former DMT and Magic Mushroom user who came to realize that all that stuff was really terrible and became a Christian.
What he told me will shock you.
Check it out.
I started getting into DMT where I was having encounters with light beings.
What did you think the light beings were?
With acid and mushrooms, You don't typically, at least I never had visuals.
With the DMT, this was like full on, like you're seeing a whole world just crack open in front of you.
What would they tell you?
These three beings come in my room, and another one came in and was dragging my body.
And they told me, if you don't stop doing heroin, this is you.
This episode is available.
The rest of the series is available now as well on the Michael Knowles Show YouTube channel.
Go check it out after this show.
My favorite comment yesterday is from Karis Stewart, who says, if, as the FDA contends, pregnancy is a disease, what is IVF?
More disturbingly, if pregnancy is a disease, could we soon see coercive sterilization campaigns in the name of public health?
Really great point, because the FDA, in order to fast-track an abortion drug, they had to claim that pregnancy is a life-threatening illness.
In fact, it's the abortion drug that is life-threatening, because it kills people.
You can't actually argue.
Does anyone seriously argue that pregnancy is a life-threatening illness or a disease?
Well, if it is, then what about fertility treatments?
You're telling me that fertility treatments are also an important medical service?
Fertility treatments are just going to bring on this life-threatening disease.
We've got to ban all of those, right?
And then, to your point on the potential course of sterilization, that did happen.
Sterilization has happened in the United States, but we're seeing a course of sterilization of poor little kids who, by definition, cannot consent and who are being sterilized and having their lives ruined by very wayward parents and this insane ideology.
But then you look around at India, you look at China, and there were direct coercive sterilization campaigns that took place as a result of a book by an American, Paul Ehrlich's Population Bomb, which warned that within a decade, this was in 1970, within a decade we would have mass famine because there were too many people on earth.
It turned out to be complete bunk.
Over the last 50 years the world population doubled, malnutrition fell to an all-time low.
These policies were implemented in India, where if people wanted access to utilities, if people wanted access to basic necessities, they would have to sterilize themselves.
And in China, which had the one-child policy, killed countless people over the years.
Could it happen here?
A lot of people said a lot of things couldn't happen here.
And look where we are.
Closing down churches, our way of life, for three years.
Redefining the basic aspects of society.
Chopping off little kids' genitals.
That couldn't happen here.
A lot of things are happening.
Politics can change very, very fast.
Okay.
I want to get to an important aspect of our public health and our specifically mental health arena.
Not transgenderism.
I know everyone talks about transgenderism all the time.
But this is more important.
This is fatphobia.
This is trans-slenderism, if you will.
A mental health counselor has gone viral saying that if you are fat and you lose weight, why you're fatphobic.
Another great question.
This person is asking if there is any time in which intentional weight loss is not fatphobic.
I'm going to say 99.9% of the times if you are intentionally losing weight, it is fatphobic.
I'm leaving that .01% in case I am truly, truly wrong, but I don't think I am.
And here's the reason why.
I'm not saying if you exercise and happen to lose weight that that is fatphobic.
I'm not saying if you start a medication and you happen to lose weight that is fatphobic.
I am not saying that if you're going through any type of illness, and that is altering your body in some way, that that is fatphobic.
I'm saying when you are intentionally exercising to lose weight, altering your diet to lose weight, doing any activity intentionally to lose weight, is fatphobic.
I still can't get over it.
If you take a pill and you go through a medical treatment that causes you to start wasting away, I guess I won't blame you for that.
I guess that's not totally your fault.
But if you ever want to lose weight so that you are less obese, so that you're healthier, why, that is fatphobic.
The irony is that the people who accuse others of phobia Are always the ones denying rationality.
A phobia is supposed to be an irrational fear, but it's the ones who accuse people of a phobia.
They're the ones who deny rationality.
I don't even just mean that they are unreasonable.
They're obviously unreasonable people.
But I mean they deny even the possibility of rationality.
Because I can make a rational argument and say, well, when you're morbidly obese, that can have all sorts of terrible effects on your health.
And it also is spiritually disordered.
If you've got a problem with gluttony, you probably are going to want to address that problem.
And so, in order to be physically healthier, to become more spiritually disciplined, to not hoard resources for yourself even, to Have a more healthy relationship with the physical world, you should lose weight.
And they say, how dare you?
Or what about the transgender phobia?
If I make an argument and I say that, look, I'm using my reason and I think men and women are different and I don't see how your true identity could differ from your natural biological sex, and when you look at the rates of Depression, anxiety, and suicidality after the so-called transgender reassignment surgery, actually none of it improves.
And on one measure, according to the largest data set on this ever, on anxiety things actually seem to get a little bit worse.
And so for that reason, for many, many other reasons, which are philosophical, which are anthropological, which are biological, which are psychological, for all of these reasons, transgenderism does not appear to be true.
And they would say, how dare you?
How dare you bring up reason and logic?
They are the ones who deny any recourse to reason.
Because what they say, when you ask them for a logical argument for their beliefs, is they say, well, there doesn't need to be a logical argument, because it's just my subjective feeling.
When you propose a debate, like we did two days ago at the University of Pittsburgh, at the very last minute, even the top scholars on this stuff are going to drop out.
They're going to drop out because The real phobes, the real people who are being irrational here and who are, they're phobic even of rationality itself.
They are the libs.
That's what they do.
Now another viral TikTok I do want to get to before we go.
This would be a black lady who really doesn't like white people.
Can you imagine?
Here's why.
I don't trust white people.
I don't trust white people for a multitude of reasons, but one of the main reasons is they're unpredictable.
Like, I think about all the times where I really considered white people my friends, and then when we got in a small argument, they released all the racism they hid throughout our whole friendship.
Scary.
And then I think about the fact that I became- Put a pause there.
What does that mean?
Because that- That would be odd if you were friends with somebody and then the moment you had a little tiff over, I don't know, hey, let's split the bill.
No, I'll pick up the bill.
Or you had a little tiff over, I want to go see this movie.
No, I want to go see that movie.
They just start saying, you N-word!
You, you put on your Klan hood or something like that.
I don't, I don't believe that has ever happened.
Now, does she mean that when she and her white alleged friends get into an argument, the very fact of disagreeing is taken to be racist?
Because that's how the libs argue today.
The libs argue today and they say, if you ever just disagree with a black person, you've got to be racist.
If you ever disagree with a transgender identifying person, you're a transphobe.
If you ever disagree on any topic, if you disagree on the idea that a man can become a woman, you're a phobic of some kind.
I suspect that's strongly what is implied here.
Keep going.
Well, give them the opportunity to come clean about any problematic past, they say nothing, and then they get exposed for being racist.
And it's never like some low-key, like I used to say the N-word in songs.
No, it's like N-word hard R against black people.
Like, tell me why white people are normalizing racist pasts.
Also, I think about the fact that white people have continuously, when given the opportunity, oppressed multiple marginalized communities.
And I think about the fact how easy it is for them to do it again.
Like, if they really wanted to, they would bring slavery back.
They kinda already did with the criminal justice system.
Plus the rate of hate crimes?
I will legit always be scared of white people until they're the minority.
Which I hope will be sooner than I think.
So what is she gonna do then?
What if white people became the minority and this woman wants an explicitly racial form of the justice system?
What happens to the white people when that lady's in charge?
You see the flaw in her argument, of course.
She says that white people, all they want to do is oppress black people.
They're just so oppressive.
That's why they have affirmative action.
That's why they keep pushing these crazy reparations policies.
That's why they have all of these These rules, that's why they don't when BLM is riding around the country.
They don't punish them at all, but when a yokel and a granny show up to the Capitol on January 6th, they throw them into solitary confinement just because they want to oppress the black people so much.
If white people are the majority of the country, which this woman's lamenting, then why aren't the white people doing that now?
Why aren't they bringing slavery back now?
She has a little parenthetical.
She says, well, they sort of have through the criminal justice system.
So she's saying if you punish criminals, you punish robbers and murderers and killers, then that's the equivalent of slavery.
So she's giving you a vision of the criminal justice system under her preferred world.
That would be a criminal justice system in which white people can't do anything right, in which the jails are emptied, criminals are let off the hook.
It would be a criminal justice system that is explicit about punishing people for their race.
We have a justice system right now that does actually punish people for their race.
It punishes white people and Asian people.
If they're the wrong race, and those are the two wrong races, then they have a harder time getting into college, they have a harder time getting jobs, and if you're a part of a favored race, then you have an easier time having those things.
And what this woman is saying is, well, once I'm in power, we're going to turn that up to 11, baby.
I don't know.
That doesn't seem great.
That doesn't seem like a great idea.
Now, I'm very sorry to say there won't be a member block today.
Mr. Davies has written in my teleprompter that I should blame producer Danny for this.
That doesn't make a lot of sense.
That doesn't seem like a rational, reasonable thing to do.
I will blame Mr. Davies for that because, you know, we are here in Washington, D.C.
We did the Tim Pool Show last night.
It was a lot of fun.
You can catch that over at Tim's YouTube channel, TimCastIRL.
And now Mr. Davies is saying, oh, I've got to get on an airplane right now.
So I've got to pack up the whole studio in this hotel room and I'm not allowed to do the member block.
Well, okay.
I think we need to figure out different flights next time, Mr. Davies.
Okay, but there's so much more that I want to get to.
I guess we're just going to have to hold that for tomorrow.
At least I did get a live in-person member block yesterday with some members of the Crème de la Crème who came out to Pitt.
We had a nice cigar and a drink yesterday afternoon.
