Fox News ousts Tucker, the top-rated host of all time; New York moves to ban all tobacco products for everyone; and Kevin Bacon dances for drag.
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:
Epic Will - Save 10% off your complete will package: https://www.epicwill.com/knowles
PureTalk - Get 50% OFF your first month with promo code KNOWLES: https://www.puretalk.com/landing/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
Unbeknownst to him or any of us, the final episode of Tucker Carlson Tonight aired last Friday.
Fittingly, his final segment involved him highlighting the heroism of an everyday American over a slice of pizza.
Tyler Perel joins us in studio.
He will deliver literally anywhere.
Tyler, it is so great to meet you in person.
Got a couple pies for you.
Couple Cocos pies.
So we at, these are from Cocos, established 1978.
This is sausage.
That's sausage.
And pineapple.
And really quick, as a pizza professional, do you look down on this order?
I do, I think that.
I consider it criminal.
I knew you did!
That's it for us for the week.
We'll be back.
By the way, the entire episode of Let Them Eat Bugs, not quite as good as pizza, streaming now on Fox Station.
Use the promo code ORIGINALS for 30 days free.
And we'll be back on Monday.
In the meantime, have the best weekend with the ones that you love, and we'll see you then.
Every solid conservative loves Tucker Carlson.
Many liberals do, too.
I can personally attest, Tucker is one of the best guys in politics.
Always willing to help out and take a stand for what he thinks is right, even when it's not popular, even when it might get him in trouble with the powers that be.
People have loved that honesty on his show.
That's how his show has dominated all of the others in cable news.
Highest ratings ever.
So why would Fox let him go?
The most popular cable news host in history is also the most coherently conservative.
Tucker Carlson, unlike many conservatives in media, especially in television media, is no court jester in the kingdom of liberalism.
He says what he thinks, he promotes guests he believes in, and he doesn't let the powers that be push him around.
Is it any wonder that the liberal establishment feels an urgent need to shut him up?
For years, and especially on his primetime show, Tucker has asked all the right questions and pushed mainstream American public discourse to the right.
And ultimately, that was a price the establishment could not afford to pay, no matter how high his ratings, no matter how profitable his show.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is the Michael Knowles Show.
Welcome back to the show.
Coming up, we have Whoopi Goldberg lecturing us on what is and is not American.
Is there anything more American than drag queen story hour?
I can't imagine, right?
In the meantime, I hope that the kind of pressure from the established powers that you see in cable news, I hope that doesn't make it too Podcasts and YouTube, because that would be not a great thing.
The best aspect of the Tucker Carlson Tonight Show is that it was on cable.
The fact that we had at least one voice on cable who was articulating a conservative point of view, not just a center-right point of view, not just a kind of a libertarian live and let live point of view, a conservative point of view.
That was unique, at least in terms of the ratings stratosphere that we're talking about with Tucker Carlson.
And so he irritated too many people who were too powerful.
He was asking a few too many questions.
I'll give you a great example.
Just a week or two ago, Tucker aired a segment about the 911 calls after Jeffrey Epstein's death.
Do you remember that?
Do you remember how strange that was?
Jeffrey Epstein.
Who ran this cabal of pedophiles who were extraordinarily prominent, wealthy, and they had their weird secret pedo island, and then all of these very, very prominent people were implicated in it, so Jeffrey Epstein gets arrested, and then oopsie-daisy, he just ends up dead.
And it was probably just a suicide riot, except that the security cameras broke, and the security guards didn't make their checks, and I think Hillary Clinton was spotted in a FedEx truck outside.
No, I'm joking about that last part.
Am I?
Am I joking?
I don't know.
Tucker stays on the story and says, all right, well, let's get the 9-1-1 calls at least.
So he requests the 9-1-1 calls from New York.
And New York says, oh, yeah, we don't have them.
We deleted them.
Oopsie daisy.
Oh, yeah, the Jeffrey Epstein calls.
Yeah, no, that was a while ago.
We just deleted those.
Oops.
Now, the NYPD says that they regularly delete old calls, so there's nothing in particularly interesting here.
Seems like a lot of coincidences.
I'm willing to take one or two coincidences and say, well, okay, maybe that's just incompetence.
But you take Jeffrey Epstein off suicide watch, you leave him unsupervised, the one guard forgets to make his rounds, the second guard forgets to make his rounds, the cameras around his jail cells break, the call gets erased.
Seems like too many coincidences.
So, Tucker was pulling the thread of that story, and he's pulling the thread of the January 6th nonsense he aired.
Coincidentally, I happened to be on his show that night, the night that he started to air the January 6th footage that none of us had seen because the Democrats who controlled the House hid this footage.
Finally, the Republicans come in, Kevin McCarthy takes over, and he has this footage.
He says, oh my goodness, the January 6th narrative.
I'm sorry.
But January 6th, the worst day in the history of the whole American history, on January 6th, turns out that the security footage tells a very different story than what the Democrats had told.
So what does Kevin McCarthy do?
He says, I'm going to give that footage to Tucker, because he's the biggest voice on the right on television.
And so he's going to go through it.
You know that irked the liberal establishment.
You know that was an embarrassment.
To liberal-minded and liberal-identifying people even at his own network.
And so, they finally boot him.
Speaking of crime, by the way, Daily Wire has requested the manifesto from the Nashville shooter, the trans-identifying shooter who targeted a Christian school and killed little Christian kids and their teachers.
We know there's a manifesto.
The Nashville police told us there's a manifesto.
That was weeks ago now.
We still haven't seen it.
After all of these shootings, we see the manifesto almost immediately.
Why haven't we seen this one?
Daily Wire puts in a request for it.
The Nashville PD.
Says they won't give it to us.
Now, the Nashville PD, the cops on the scene, acted with such heroism that it gave people a sense of confidence.
Finally, one of these police departments has really got their act together.
But then the political apparatchiks who are over the police department, they seem to be a little less responsive than the actual cops themselves.
And why is that?
I'm not sure that I even blame the Nashville police.
I'm sure that there are local politicians who are poking around in here and throwing their weight around.
Also the FBI.
The FBI is now apparently involved.
Nashville Metro Council member Courtney Johnston said that the document in the wrong hands would be astronomically dangerous.
So we can't let it get into the wrong hands.
You know, like the hands of conservative journalists who can read it and then report on what motivated the shooter.
That's the local politician.
Then the FBI is apparently involved.
But this is very strange, because right after the shooting, the Daily Wire called the Memphis field office of the FBI.
The FBI said, at this time it does not appear to be federal, and so the FBI is only going to get involved if this is a federal kind of a crime.
So then why is the FBI now providing assistance when it apparently doesn't have any jurisdiction?
We all know the answer, right?
We all know the answer.
The circumstances of this shooting are not politically convenient for the ruling class, because these kinds of shootings are supposed to be perpetrated by white young men, ideally heterosexual, ideally, oh, if they can identify in any way as Christian, that would be ideal.
And then we'll get all the details about the shooting, but then the moment that the shooting is A transgender-identifying, LGBT-identifying shooter targeting Christians?
Oh, we can't let that information get out.
And so we're going to bring in the feds, even though the feds don't really seem to have any role here, given the facts on the ground.
We've got to bring them in to suppress this.
When you ask questions about that, the liberal establishment is not very happy.
Now, how does the story end?
Well, how does your story end?
Someday, you're going to die.
That's why you gotta check out Epic Will.
Right now, go to epicwill.com slash Knowles.
There are certain things in life that you do to protect your family.
You get life insurance, you save for a rainy day fund, and you write a will.
Epic Will is not for people who are already super wealthy with a massive estate.
Those people need an attorney.
Epic Will is for people who are building their estate.
It's for people who are just getting started.
Epic Will provides a simple and secure platform to create a legally binding will in minutes.
Their user-friendly interface allows you to easily customize your will and ensure that your assets are distributed according to your wishes.
Unlike traditional law firms that charge high fees for will drafting, Epic Will Services are affordable and transparent with no hidden costs or surprises.
All you need to do is fill out their step-by-step form and they'll help you create your last will and testament living will health care and financial power of attorney in as little as five minutes and for just 119 bucks.
Having a will can ensure that your wishes are carried out after you pass away and may provide peace of mind for both you and your loved ones.
Go to epicwill.com slash Knowles.
Save 10% on Epic Will's complete will package.
That's epicwill.com slash K-N-O-W-L-E-S.
Speaking of liberal elites clamping down, this story out of New York.
Oh man, it sums up everything.
It's so ridiculous.
It gets me viscerally angry.
But it tells you everything you need to know about how culture and politics actually work.
The New York Democrats want to ban the sale of tobacco.
For everybody.
Not just they want to raise the age at which you can buy tobacco.
You can join the army at 18, you can go fight terrorists in Iraq and Syria at 18, but you can't smoke a cigar until 21.
Not even that they're saying.
They'll just ban it for everybody.
If you're born after 2010, you never get to purchase a tobacco product in the state of New York.
This is according to an April 13th memo from Jennifer Lee, who is the director of the Health Department's Bureau of Tobacco Control.
And the normie take on this, the immediate reaction from conservatives is going to be, here are those nanny state liberals always trying to put their government regulations on us.
We need to fight for freedom, and we need to fight for the ability to do what we want.
But that's not what's going on here, because at the same time that New York is trying to ban tobacco, New York is legalizing marijuana.
Marijuana contains much more tar than tobacco does.
I'm not encouraging people to go smoke cigarettes.
I do not smoke cigarettes.
I don't like cigarettes.
I do love cigars, though, which you don't inhale.
And so, listen, we can get into the distinctions between different types of tobacco some other time.
But it can't just be nanny state regulations, big government coming in and taking away things that might be harmful for you.
Marijuana is more harmful than tobacco.
By pretty much any measure.
Tobacco, actually this is a point that Tucker's made too.
Man, I better watch out.
The people who took out Tucker, they're gonna come for me if I keep saying too many dangerous things like the benefits of cigar smoking.
What does nicotine do?
Nicotine gets your heart pumping a little faster.
Nicotine makes you a little bit more focused.
Nicotine gets you through that work day.
What does marijuana do?
Marijuana makes you slower and hungrier and dumber and less funny.
That's what happens.
Who likes nicotine?
Conservatives.
Who likes nicotine?
Generally, people who are a little more normal, people who are a little more Of the, similar to the common man, you know, you're not gonna see Mike Bloomberg smoking a cigarette, okay?
You're not going to see the liberal elites flying around in their private jets.
They're probably not smoking cigarettes.
They're probably micro-dosing LSD or something, but they're not smoking cigarettes.
So, ordinary people like cigarettes.
Conservatives tend to like cigars.
Bowtie-wearing conservatives tend to like pipes.
Tobacco is, generally speaking, a more right-wing thing.
And marijuana, though I know that there are people on the right who like to puff the devil's lettuce and have a little Haitian oregano now and again, marijuana is more of a lib thing.
And what you're seeing in New York is not a question of freedom versus tyranny or laissez-faire versus the nanny state.
What you're seeing is just a fight between two cultures.
Are we going to live in a more conservative culture?
Or are we going to live in a more lib culture?
Are we going to live in a culture where the sort of vice, but it's not that bad kind of vice, is nicotine?
Or a culture where the vice, but it's not that bad kind of vice, is pot?
Are we going to live in a culture where the rules that set the limits around our behavior are from the traditional moral order and from the church?
Or are we going to live in a world in which the rules that set the limits around our speech and behavior are from political correctness and wokeness?
What is it?
This is about so much more than just cigars and blunts, okay?
There's a big difference between a cigar and a blunt.
But it's just a symbol of two cultures.
Are we going to live in the culture that Who cares about the children because we don't want to scandalize the children, we don't want to damage their immortal souls, and we want them to raise up and be good, virtuous citizens, and then one day be saints and go to heaven?
Or are we going to live in a culture that cares about the children because we fear that if one of them is sexually confused, they might not be able to access cross-sex hormones and chop their genitals off?
It's just two different views of what it means to care about children and raise up the next generation.
It's just two different cultures.
What kind of culture do you want to live in?
Cigars or blunts?
A philosopher's pipe or a glass bowl?
What kind of culture?
I know what culture I want to live in.
Speaking of culture, Chicago's culture seems to be on the decline.
I guess it's been on the decline for a hundred years, but it's really not looking great right now.
You remember a week or two ago, there was that roving gang of something like a hundred young Chicagoans wreaking havoc, setting cars on fire, vandalizing, attacking people.
So there was a young couple.
He was attacked by this roving gang.
Here's what the couple says.
It was very random because all we were doing, we just left Nordstrom and we were looking for somewhere to eat and we saw that group and they just thought they were tough and they wouldn't move out of the way.
Just out there being stupid, young and dumb, trying to prove a point for nothing.
And then they attacked this couple.
And this guy told the news that he was recovering from shoulder injuries, back injuries, a black eye.
He says that's how it happened.
And a state senator, Robert Peters, comes out to comment on the whole thing.
And what does he say?
Does he say, we'll make sure that we prosecute these ruffians to the fullest extent of the law.
We will make sure that every Chicagoan can feel safe walking down the street.
No, of course not.
You know what happens.
The Chicago state senator, Robert Peters, takes the side of the little thug teenagers.
He says, since I'm a glutton for punishment, I'm sure I'm going to get the most unhinged crime weirdo replies.
Hold on.
So he's already saying, I'm going to say something controversial.
And these weirdos who don't love violent crime on the streets of cities, they're going to be really upset with me.
What's he say?
He says, I would look at the behavior of young people as a political act and statement.
It's a mass protest against poverty and segregation.
Rest in peace to my mentions.
One thing he said there is correct.
It is a political act.
When you've got roving gangs of ruffians prowling the street, looking to beat people up, set cars on fire, kill people, just for fun.
Not to alleviate poverty.
These are not starving children stealing a loaf of bread.
As you heard from the victim, they were just looking to beat people up.
They didn't even really take anything.
When they set a car on fire, they didn't go in and even steal the stereo to go sell it down the street.
They just set it on fire.
They just tried to destroy things.
And that is a political act.
And the state senator defending these criminals, that is a political act.
You're right.
That is a statement.
The statement is, we run these streets.
The political act is, you're not safe.
The political act is, if you see me walking down the street, watch out.
You're not going to be able to reason with me.
You're not going to be able to argue with me.
You're not going to be able to turn to the law.
The law is not on your side.
It's on my side.
We're no longer going to be a nation of laws.
We're no longer going to be Lady Justice, blindfolded, meting out justice fairly and equally.
No.
Now it's going to be a nation of men.
And certain people are going to get a free pass and certain people are going to have the book thrown at them.
And if BLM burns the country down for eight months and throws Molotov cocktails at federal buildings, oh, that was mostly peaceful.
We'll maybe give you a little slap on the wrist.
Probably, though, it's OK.
Go out.
No bail, no bond.
You're fine.
We're gonna drop those charges.
But if you're a granny at the Capitol on January 6th, if you're a Midwesterner who goes in and takes a picture smiling in the Capitol rotunda, oh, you're going to solitary confinement.
You're a terrorist.
You're an insurrectionist.
We might send you to Gitmo, frankly.
You better thank your lucky stars that we're only putting you in solitary confinement in D.C.
We're not a nation of laws anymore.
We're a nation of men.
It's a political act.
Speaking of political acts, you know Netflix has this show about Cleopatra?
Sort of about Cleopatra.
It's called Queen Cleopatra.
It's a Netflix documentary.
And yet, the person playing Cleopatra is black.
But Cleopatra is not black.
This is not a fictional character where you might say, okay, we can bend the races a little bit.
This is not a contested historical fact.
Cleopatra was white.
She was Greek Macedonian.
If you did a biopic on Idi Amin and you cast me, that would be a little bit weird, wouldn't it?
We're going to have a biopic on Xi Jinping starring Tom Cruise.
That would be a little bit strange, wouldn't you say?
But what does the director of this show say, Tina Garabi?
She says, it's a political act.
This is a political act.
She says, doing the research, I realized what a political act it would be to see Cleopatra portrayed by a black actress.
Why shouldn't Cleopatra be a melanated sister?
And why do some people need Cleopatra to be white?
So the question is, why shouldn't Cleopatra be black?
The answer, of course, is because she wasn't.
Yeah, but why couldn't she be?
To quote John and Robert Kennedy, quoting George Bernard Shaw, the socialist playwright, writing a line for the serpent in the Garden of Eden tempting Eve, some people see things that are and say, why?
I dream things that never were and say, why not?
That's the animating spirit of leftism.
Why shouldn't she be?
Why do some people need her to be white?
When you say, why do some people need Cleopatra to be white, or to be at least not black, What you're really asking is, why do you care about the truth?
It's the same question as, why does some people need Bruce Jenner to be Bruce, he and him?
Why do you need that?
Why do you need to refer to men who think they're women as he and him and with male names?
Why do you care about the truth?
Why won't you let us make you lie?
Her proximity to whiteness seems to give her value, says the director.
And for some Egyptians, it seems to really matter.
So that's the other thing is about this Netflix movie.
Some of us who are whiter, I guess I'm Sicilian, so we're a little bit of a liminal, marginal case.
But some of us have criticized it, and we've said this is a little bit strange.
But the people who are really angry here are Egyptians, as even Gharavi, the director, says.
He says, yeah, I knew I'd get the Egyptians mad at me because I'm rewriting the history of Egypt in this completely silly way.
But I felt it was important enough for the political act.
It is a political act, but it's based on a lie.
And so then the question for us is, forget about Cleopatra and Netflix and all the rest of it, In these political acts, are the political acts going to be acts of pure will, or are they going to be acts of will following intellect?
What makes a human being?
What distinguishes us from the rest of the animals?
We have will and intellect.
We can think abstractly.
We have a rational soul.
So, do we order our will and our public actions according to reason, law, Logic?
Facts?
Reality?
Truth?
Or do we say, forget about all that stuff.
I shall be as a God.
I'll do whatever the hell I want.
And who are you to tell me?
Who are you to tell me I'm not a woman?
Who are you to tell me Cleopatra's not black?
Who are you to tell me that the January 6th people weren't the worst insurrectionist terrorists in history?
Who are you to tell me BLM was violent?
You don't know.
That's just your opinion, man.
And according to the left, opinions and perception, they have nothing to do with fact.
There is nothing but our own subjective, not even interpretation, our own subjective imposition of will on reality.
Who are you to talk about the truth?
I'm going to talk to you about my truth.
And if you don't like my truth, I'm going to burn down your city.
I'm going to clobber you on the head on the streets of Chicago.
I'm going to engage in a political act.
That's what our politics has become.
We've got to talk about that.
When you want to talk to your friends, you've got to check out PureTalk.
Right now, go to puretalk.com and use promo code NOLS.
We all know about the big wireless cell companies out there.
They lock you into these horrendous contracts, and if you try to get out of them early, they tack on outrageous charges.
That is why I would strongly recommend making the switch to PureTalk Wireless, where there are no hidden fees and no contracts and no hassle.
I love PureTalk.
I am so glad that we got the PureTalk service.
PureTalk's U.S. customer service team helps their customers make the switch in as little as 10 minutes, makes it so that you are even able to keep your phone number.
PureTalk has a range of affordable cell phone plans to choose from.
You can find the perfect option for your needs like unlimited talk, text, and plenty of data for just $30 a month.
Their 5G service is super fast, consistent, and doesn't drop calls.
You can get the same coverage you're used to at half the rate you're currently paying.
PureTalk saves the average family over $900 per year.
Not only will you save money, you will also get the satisfaction of knowing that you're supporting a great American company.
The CEO and Chairman of PeerTalk is a U.S.
military vet.
When you become a PeerTalk customer, you are given the option to support America's Warrior Partnership, which is an organization that works to prevent veteran suicide.
Go to PeerTalk.com, enter promo code NOLS to save 50% off your first month.
PeerTalk.com, promo code NOLS, K-N-A-W-L-A-S.
PeerTalk is simply smarter wireless.
If you're interested in something to watch right now, you've got to check out our series, What We Saw, hosted by storyteller Bill Whittle.
Season 1 is focused on Apollo 11, and now Season 2 is in full swing.
This time, Bill has set his sights on the Cold War and the tension between two superpowers that lasted for 45 years.
Episode 7 introduces us to the man who brought communism to the Western Hemisphere and repelled the Bay of Pigs invasion, Fidel Castro.
Bill makes you feel like you are there witnessing history.
New episodes of The Cold War come out every week, but you have to be a member to go see it.
So head on over to dailywire.com slash coldwar to start watching.
Speaking of irrational politics, Nancy Mace!
She's a Republican.
She's kind of a squish.
She's one of those Republicans, but not that kind of Republican.
You know, I'm a cool Republican.
Nancy Mace just came out and she explained on ABC, a liberal news network, how the Republicans need to compromise their beliefs to win elections.
I want us to find some middle ground.
As a Republican, a conservative, constitutional conservative who's pro-life, I saw what happened after Roe v. Wade because I represent a very purple district, as purple as this dress.
And I saw the sentiment change dramatically.
And as Republicans, we need to read the room on this issue because the vast majority of folks are not in the extremes.
And we just saw a fetal heartbeat bill signed in the dead of night recently in Florida.
In my home state of South Carolina, there was a very small group of state legislators that filed a bill that would execute women who have abortions and gave more rights to rapists than women who've been raped.
That is the wrong message heading into 24.
We're going to lose huge if we continue down this path of extremities and finding that middle ground.
The vast majority of people want some sort of gestational limits.
Not at nine months, but somewhere in the middle.
They want exceptions for rape and incest.
They want women to have access to birth control.
These are all very common sense positions that we can take and still be pro-life.
This woman is very confused, and she's on a liberal news network, and she's just mindlessly regurgitating leftist talking points that are completely divorced from reality.
Do you know in some Republican states, rapists have more rights than their victims?
It's just not true.
It's just complete nonsense.
She probably read it on Media Matters or something like that.
Very confused woman, doing her best impression of the mom in Mean Girls.
Hey liberals, I know I'm a Republican, but I'm a cool Republican.
You know, I'm not that kind of Republican.
I'm cool.
I'm gonna be your friend.
Okay.
On many issues, we can compromise with our political opponents.
And should compromise, even, perhaps.
On issues like taxation.
On issues maybe like zoning decrees.
I don't know.
On issues like immigration.
Okay, we can compromise.
We can meet in the middle.
That's how politics works.
Okay.
On some issues you can't though.
Because on some issues a compromise would be in principle as bad as the Worst outcome.
Of the two outcomes that you're trying to decide between, in some cases a compromise is the worst outcome of all.
Or at least as bad in principle.
And one of those issues would be abortion.
Because on abortion, if you try to compromise on it, you are literally splitting the baby.
You know that phrase, splitting the baby?
Comes from the Bible.
Where it was used as an instrument to determine who was the true mother of a child.
Two women claimed to be the mother of a child.
And so the decree to, all right, split the baby, give half to one and half to the other.
It exposes who the real mother is, because the real mother says, don't split my baby.
You can give it to her, but just don't split the baby.
Say, oh, you're the real mother.
OK, great.
You can't compromise on abortion, because either the baby is human and alive and shouldn't be murdered.
Or the baby is just a stupid clump of cells and who cares?
It's one of those two things.
Comedians have done bits on this in recent years.
Even comedians who are considered to be somewhat liberal.
Louis C.K., remember he said, oh yeah, having an abortion, it's just like going to the bathroom, you know?
It's like, it's just like that, it's no big deal.
Or it's murder.
And so he gets the audience sort of on his side, and then he points out abortion is very possibly murder.
Chris Rock, same thing.
He said, I'm with you guys.
You know, look, I'm totally pro-choice.
Abortion's great.
You know, but don't tell me it's a clump of cells.
I'm here to murder babies.
And then the audience doesn't know what to do.
He says, no, no, I'm on your side.
I'm just saying, yeah, well, I'm all for abortion.
Abortion's great, but it's about murdering a baby.
Right?
And then the audience is so shocked by this because he's calling out the truth.
It's one or the other.
It's a completely binary issue.
It's sort of like the transgender bathroom.
The difference is with abortion, you can come to some political compromise.
And because unborn babies don't have a voice, you won't hear their screams.
And you don't necessarily have to acknowledge the injustice of it.
So you can say, okay, all the babies who are 12 weeks old and older, they get to live.
But the 12 weeks old and younger, we can murder them.
And because they're little babies and they're vulnerable, you won't have to pay too much attention.
Whereas with an issue like the transgender bathrooms, those are so obviously mutually contradictory because either the men go into the women's bathroom or they don't.
So you can see, okay, either men or women, and they have the right to go into the women's bathroom, or men or not women, and they obviously don't have the right to go into the women's bathroom.
Either the transgender people get this right to go in and use the ladies' room, or women are allowed to have their own bathrooms.
But you can't simultaneously have both.
It's logically impossible.
It's practically impossible.
Nancy Mace says, well, we have to to win elections.
I don't think we do.
There's three issues that I can see that we have won on in recent years.
One of which is abortion.
In the last 50 years, sometimes we win on taxes for a little bit and then we lose on taxes.
Sometimes we win on foreign policy and then we lose on foreign policy.
But abortion is one of the few issues where we have consistently won.
It's because we've taken a clear line.
Now speaking of young people, Another Hollywood celebrity has come out and defended drag queens and drag queen performances for everybody in society.
And so there's a right to drag queens.
That would be Kevin Bacon.
And I keep my side of the street clean.
You wouldn't know what I mean.
This is so weird and creepy.
Korva is my boyfriend.
Korva is a god.
Ugh.
It's Kevin Bacon and some lady, I guess his wife, and they're wearing a shirt that's just a very creepy, mustachioed-looking man on it and says, "Drag is a right." It says, drag bans are bad karma.
Right now, drag performers in the LGBTQIA plus community need our help.
Shop the Six Degrees of KB campaign supporting the ACLU Drag Defense Fund or make a gift here.
Drag is art.
Drag is a right.
Drag is a right?
Down writing the Declaration, you've got Thomas Jefferson, the Founding Fathers, they said, we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they're endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.
Among these are the right to life, liberty, and big fat guys strapping on stilettos and jiggling for kids.
Those are self-evident rights.
We don't, hold on.
Hey, Tom, Tom?
What was that last one?
Huh?
No, don't worry about that.
It's about, you know, the guys putting on the stilettos and jiggling around at the library in the elementary school.
How is that a right?
It's self-evident, of course.
That's pretty much the argument Kevin Bacon's made.
It's self-evidently a right.
I don't think it's a right.
It's a wrong.
And it's a wrong that we tolerate to some degree in society because it's a fallen world and we've got other things to worry about.
But it's obviously wrong.
The whole reason drag is funny is because it's wrong.
There's been a conflation recently between drag queens and transgender-identifying people.
But those are different things.
In the case of transgender-identifying people, it's men who really believe they're women and who do their best to dress up like women and they fool themselves.
Because they have a defective perception, they look in the mirror and they say, wow, I really am a woman.
All the rest of us know, no, you're not.
You don't look like a woman.
You have a huge Adam's apple, and you're obviously a dude.
But they, because of their flawed perception, think that they are the opposite sex.
Drag queens, they know.
They say, I'm a big, burly guy, but I'm going to put on a silly wig and a big dress.
I'm going to dance around.
And the whole amusing aspect of the performance is that I am not a woman.
The incongruity, the wrongness of it, is the point.
This is why whenever the Libs find some photo from a conservative governor or something from Halloween one year, and he's wearing a wig or something, and they say, ha ha, see?
He supports drag and transgenderism, see?
He believes that men are not women too.
You say, no, he's making fun of it.
It's a joke.
When a man, including the guys who did drag shows and cabarets and things like that, when they put on the wig and the dress and the stilettos, they're making fun of the idea that a man can be a woman.
It's a joke, and it's weird, and societies at different times will clamp down a little more harshly on these or allow them to exist in back alleys.
And I think a lot of conservatives would say, look, in some seedy part of town, if you want some weird cabaret where dudes are dancing around like women, okay, we're just gonna look the other way.
It's not the conservatives who are the aggressors in this drag queen culture war.
It's the libs.
The libs are forcing the issue.
If the libs allowed their drag queen thing, they just kept it to some back alley somewhere in the red light district.
No one would really pay attention.
But they're the ones bringing it into the libraries, and they're the ones bringing it into the elementary schools, and they're the ones bringing it onto Main Street during their pride parades.
And so now we've got to say, no, it's wrong.
It's wrong.
There's no right to that.
We've had laws against this for much of American history, and it's wrong.
It's the same with the bathrooms.
If some troubled man uses the women's bathroom every now and again, As has been the case for many decades now.
And he doesn't really bother anybody and everyone thinks it's weird and they're kind of out on their guard.
All right, out of a pity for these deluded people.
Okay, fine, we'll let it go.
But then if you try to establish it as a right, then you're forcing the issue and we've got to tell you the truth, which is no.
This is weird.
It's wrong.
It's not conducive to human flourishing.
You men are not really women.
You don't have a right to do the women's things.
And Kevin Bacon, you are wrong.
My favorite comment yesterday is from the Drummer's Workshop at Norm's Music.
And he says, known for its diversity and pollution, New York City is also called the melting bone.
That's so true.
We started out, we were a melting pot in this country, and now we are the melting bones, according to Corinne Jean-Pierre.
That's how that experiment worked out.
Speaking about what's American and drag and freedom of expression, Whoopi Goldberg was on The View.
And Whoopi made a claim about American law, culture, and just what it means to be an American.
And Whoopi says banning books and banning drag queens, that is just downright un-American.
I'm not willing to give you access to my body.
I'm just not willing to do that.
That is none of your business.
What goes on in my family is none of your business.
Like, I feel like if you don't want to see drag shows, then don't take your child to a drag show.
If you don't want your child reading certain books, give the library a list of the books you don't want your kid to read.
Stay off my back.
Because my rights are just as important as yours, and when it comes to what I do with my family and my body, it's none of your business.
It is up to you.
To know what your kids are reading.
If you want to know, go to the school.
If it's not a book you're interested in, tell the teacher you don't want your kid reading it.
But don't get in the way of my kid being able to read that book.
That is not American.
Get off my back.
That is not American.
Okay, so before we get into Whoopi's confused philosophy, just as an historical point, banning books is very American.
Banning drag shows is obviously very American.
For much of American history throughout the country, including in San Francisco, transvestitism was completely illegal.
You would be arrested for public disturbance if you ever did that.
All sorts of weird sexual behaviors were illegal in the United States until the Supreme Court invented some right to do weird sex stuff in the mid-2000s, okay?
So it is deeply, deeply American to proscribe this sort of weird behavior.
But even banning books has always, for all of American history, has been very, very much a part of American public life.
Obviously going back to the Puritans, they banned all sorts of books.
In fact, there was one guy who was ostracized from the colony by Governor Bradford for writing poems that were a little bit licentious, a little bit lascivious.
And they almost executed him for it, but then they just banished him to an island so he could wait for an English ship to come by and take him back to Britain.
And then obviously up through the founding era, all sorts of laws against obscenity.
In fact, these laws against obscenity were being exercised at the federal level as recently as 2008.
The guy was in prison until 2011, one of the pornographers that they threw in jail.
But furthermore, it's not just the Christians and the conservatives banning books, quite the opposite.
It's the libs.
Since the middle of the 20th century, it's the libs who say you can't teach the Bible in schools.
Oh no, we better not find any teachers with a Bible in school.
We're going to get the ACLU on your back.
That's right, the American Civil Liberties Union.
We're going to go after you for having a Bible in schools.
You better not recite any prayers in schools.
Oh no siree.
This is America.
One nation under God.
We're not going to let you teach the Bible in schools.
If you don't want your kid reading gay porn in the library, then politely ask the librarian.
What are you talking about?
We've got laws against this for all of our nation's history, and furthermore, this is a self-government.
And so when you say, how dare you!
How dare you infringe on my right to make my kid read gay porn when he's 10 years old?
You don't have that right.
That's a wrong.
And who sets the civil rights and wrongs?
Well, that would be the people in a self-government, in that democracy that you people are always prattling on about, even though you don't believe it at all.
All of which is to say, the liberals obviously don't care about any of this.
They're just going to wrap themselves in the flag to peddle their radicalism.
And it's a political lesson for conservatives.
The libs, when they're being really, really effective, they're not burning the American flag.
The libs, when they're being really effective, they just are lying about American history.
And they're saying, oh no, my view, my weird trans-thrupple-parading-gay-porn-down-the-hallways-of-elementary-schools-why-that's-as-American-as-apple-pie-that's-why-the-founding-fathers-fought-the-revolution-was-to-defend-my-right-to-do-that.
And it's obviously totally bogus, but that's what they do.
They're picking up a lesson from Machiavelli.
They're picking up a lesson from a lot of political thinkers, which is, if you want to be politically effective, you've got to wrap yourself in the flag.
So there's two ways to do it.
You can either do it in the pure will kind of politics, which is, some people see things that aren't and say, well, I dream things that never were, and say, why not?
Which is the Humpty Dumpty kind of politics in Alice in Wonderland, where Humpty Dumpty says, what does a word mean?
It means whatever I say it means.
And Alice says, well, it's got to be awfully confusing for words to have all those meanings.
The question is, do words really mean those things?
And Humpty Dumpty says, no, no, no.
The question is, which is to be master?
That's all.
That's the liberal version of it.
It's just, yeah, we'll just, whatever we say, that's going to become the truth because we said it.
Then there's the conservative version, which is, what is the truth?
You engage in a rational process, and you ask yourself questions about objective reality, then you reason through that using your abstract reasoning, and then, and maybe the inherited wisdom of the ages, and maybe just looking at the customs of people who already exist, and then you use your will to try to pursue the truth.
So when the conservatives, when we wrap ourselves in the flag, it tends to be because we're making an argument that really has a basis in history.
That's not what the Libs do, and I'm not just making a cheap shot.
Don't forget, the biggest liberal campaign on education in the last five or six years was the New York Times 1619 Project.
Which claimed that America's revolution was fought to preserve slavery, and even left-wing academic historians said that wasn't true.
And when the writer of the 1619 Project, Nicole Hannah-Jones, was confronted by this, she basically shrugged her shoulders.
Yeah, okay, whatever.
Se non è vero è ben trovato, is the Italian expression.
You know, if it's not true, it makes a good story.
And what did the New York Times do?
Eventually, they kind of were forced to correct it a little bit, subtly, many months later.
But they still continued to peddle the 1619 Project because they don't care.
Politics grounded in the truth or a politics that is pure will?
Which one are we going to have?
You see this, actually, RFK Jr.
is running for president now as a Democrat.
And RFK Jr.
is a lifelong Democrat.
Obviously, his father is Robert Kennedy.
His uncle is John F. Kennedy.
And he's been an environmental lawyer his whole life.
He actually lived in the town right over from me when I grew up.
And he's a lib.
He's a real lib.
But he's gotten a lot of conservative cred recently because he's questioned vaccines for a long time.
And vaccine skepticism is now conservative.
It used to be liberal.
Now it's conservative.
After we saw how the liberal establishment lied to us for the last three years, he questions big pharma, questions Dr. Fauci.
And so he's done a lot of great work over the last few years.
Now, RFK Jr. running against Biden.
And a lot of conservatives are saying, why is he running as a Democrat?
He should be running as a Republican.
He's a Republican these days.
The Kennedys are Republicans these days.
Here's what RFK Jr. just had to say on the campaign trail.
We're now in this situation where, you know, without free speech, democracy just withers and dies.
Free speech is the fertilizer, it's the sunlight, it's the water for democracy.
There is no time in history where the people who are censoring speech were the good guys.
They're always the bad guys because of course that's the That is the first and last step of totalitarianism, silencing critics.
So that's the sort of statement that sounds like it's true, but it isn't really true.
It isn't really true because throughout history, everyone, everyone ever in power at all has censored speech.
And everyone, I don't care how liberal you think you are, you would support some kinds of limits on speech.
This is throughout all of history.
Throughout all of history.
Sometimes the Catholics have censored speech.
Sometimes the Protestants have censored speech.
Sometimes the Jews have censored speech.
Sometimes the Muslims have censored speech.
Today we see the atheists especially censoring speech.
Sometimes it's been the Democrats.
Sometimes it's been the Republicans.
Sometimes it's been this person or that person.
And the reason for that, as I explain in my book, Speechless, Controlling Words, Controlling Minds, Number one national bestseller.
Hello!
Hello, producers!
Where you at?
There we go.
All right.
We're missing Mr. Davies, I think.
As I explain in my book Speechless, every, there we go, every culture has to have certain limits.
Every culture is going to recognize certain things as taboo.
And so, RFK is pointing out that the current censorship that's going on is quite wrong.
Because it's the libs who are doing it, and they're censoring true speech.
But it's not wrong, necessarily, to censor false, evil, ugly speech.
It's not wrong to censor drag queen expression in the elementary schools, is it?
It's not wrong to censor the gay porn in the elementary school libraries.
I think all of us would agree that that's a very good thing.
It's not wrong to censor threats.
It's not wrong to censor fighting words.
It's not wrong To censor all these things.
It's a shallow liberal view that RFK Jr.
is expressing.
And I think he's doing it with the best of intentions, and he's one of the best Democrats out there.
It's just another reminder, liberalism is not going to save us.
Even the old liberalism of the 1960s, the Kennedy liberalism, even the much older liberalism, the classical liberalism, it's not going to save us.
It's just wrong.
You're not going to You can't beat liberalism by being a different kind of a liberal.
You've got to offer an alternative, and the liberal establishment doesn't like when you offer an alternative to that, which is why they took Tucker Carlson off the air.
Okay, we've got Cabot Phillips coming up on the member block to talk about dating.
