Ep. 1285 - "Queer Surgeon" Brags About Mutilating Prepubescent Kids
Zelensky whines that NATO won’t start WWIII, scientists get caught admitting that they covered up the Chinese lab leak of COVID, and a self-described “queer surgeon” admits to chopping up prepubescent kids.
Ep.1285
- - -
Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEl
- - -
DailyWire+:
Watch the latest episode of Master’s Program with Dennis Prager: https://bit.ly/3NvHehC
Get your Michael Knowles merch here: https://bit.ly/3X6tlKY
- - -
Today’s Sponsors:
Good Ranchers - Get $30 off with promo code KNOWLES at checkout.
https://bit.ly/43G8p0P
Birch Gold - Text "KNOWLES" to 989898 for your no-cost, no-obligation, FREE information kit: https://birchgold.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
A lot of people are worried about how to stave off imminent, catastrophic, man-made climate change.
Well...
Spanish climate minister Teresa Ribera has just showed the whole world how.
Minister, Ministress Ribera recently attended a climate change summit hosted by the European Union, and she showed up to the summit riding a bicycle.
And she rode that bicycle for approximately 100 yards, surrounded by emitting security vehicles, after she got out of a limousine, which she had entered after stepping off a private jet.
Our own transportation czar, Pete Buttigieg, pulled a similar stunt a couple years ago, sometime when he was not taking maternity leave.
Mayor Pete pulled up to a cabinet meeting riding a bicycle, which a hidden camera caught him unloading from the back of an armored SUV just a few blocks off his destination.
My favorite part of these performances is that they actually marginally increase pollution into the air, because the vehicles need to idle.
While Mayor Pete and the Spanish lady prepare their bicycle rides.
But they are worthwhile demonstrations nonetheless.
Because they show us a great example of what we should sacrifice to the nature gods.
And it's precisely what they are sacrificing to the nature gods.
And that is precisely nothing.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is the Michael Knowles Show.
Welcome back to the show.
This episode is brought to you by Good Ranchers.
Get great meat at a secure price and 30 bucks off your order with code Knowles.
Go to goodranchers.com.
Use code Knowles today.
Senator Tuberville has stepped in it.
Boy, he's in trouble for some comment about white nationalism or some nonsense.
We'll get into whatever CNN is crying about in just a moment.
First though, speaking of foreign performers, Mr. Zelensky over there in Ukraine is furious that NATO, led by the United States, is not going to immediately enter into World War III.
Is angry because while Joe Biden and the West broadly has said that Ukraine can eventually join NATO, Biden has said that Ukraine cannot join NATO right now.
Because if Ukraine joined NATO right now, while it's still engaged in a war with Russia, that would instantly trigger Article 5.
That would instantly trigger a world war with a nuclear former superpower, something that the US managed to avoid for the entirety of the Cold War.
But this punk in Ukraine wants to start it up right now.
Now, what does Mr. Zelensky say?
He says, It's unprecedented and absurd when time frame is not set neither for the invitation nor for Ukraine's membership.
It seems there is no readiness neither to invite Ukraine to NATO nor to make it member of the alliance.
This means that a window of opportunity is being left to bargain Ukraine's membership in NATO in negotiations with Russia.
And for Russia, this means motivation to continue its terror.
Uncertainty is weakness, and I will openly discuss this at the summit.
It's not quite my Fauci impression, but it's the best I can do for Zelensky.
In a way, look, I don't particularly care for Zelensky.
I don't care for U.S.
foreign policy, which has dragged this war on needlessly.
I don't care for the protestations of the liberal establishment, which for decades now has been provoking Russia into some kind of a war, which has ignored the warnings of very wise, even sometimes liberal statesmen like George Kennan, like Sam Nunn, like Daniel Patrick Moynihan, like lots of Like Henry Kissinger, actually.
Like lots of wise American foreign policy specialists who have said, hey, if you guys in NATO aggress into Ukraine, that's going to destroy Ukraine's status as a buffer state between great powers, and it's going to provoke Russia to war, especially because NATO has been aggressive in the past and invaded countries in the past.
Russia's going to view that as an unacceptable security threat.
Add on to that that Joe Biden literally invited Russia to invade part of Ukraine and said that if it were only a minor incursion, he wouldn't do very much about it.
Never mind that Zelensky has blamed Joe Biden for getting rid of the sanctions on Russia, which also invited more Russian aggression.
Never mind all of that.
Zelensky has a little bit of a right to be irritated here.
He does.
I don't like him that much.
I don't like that he's trying to provoke World War III.
I think Joe Biden actually made the right call here to put the brakes on Ukraine membership in NATO.
I don't think Ukraine should join NATO.
I don't think Ukraine should join the European Union.
But Zelensky has a little bit of a right to be irritated because the U.S.
and the West broadly has been encouraging Ukraine to make more and more overtures toward the West.
The US backed a color revolution in Ukraine in 2014, the Maidan revolution, which got rid of a pro-Russian leader and installed more pro-Western leaders in Ukraine.
Head of the CIA landed in Kiev two weeks after that revolution.
It was a little on the nose, guys.
And so they've been dangling all of this wonderful Western privilege in front of Ukraine.
Ukraine gravitates toward that privilege.
And now all of a sudden we say, no, actually, hold on, you can't join.
No, actually.
We're going to give you munitions, we're going to give you weapons, but we're not going to decisively end this war right now.
And so Ukraine's caught between a rock and a hard place, and Ukraine is getting absolutely pummeled right now, and they seem to be in a pretty brutal position, because the West has no interest in this war winding down anytime soon.
The West benefits from this war.
The West gets to turn Europe away from Russian energy back toward American energy.
The West gets to strengthen the NATO alliance, if for no reason out of existential fear.
And Russia benefits from prolonging this war.
They're losing a lot of troops, but Russia also gets to gain more territory in Ukraine.
It's hard to see how Russia could possibly lose the territory that it's conquered in Ukraine at this point.
So the only people who lose are Ukraine.
I get why Zelensky is irritated by this, but this is why it was a really foolish strategy.
For Ukraine to give up its status as a buffer state.
Buffer states are good.
Buffer states have worked for all of human history.
When you're caught between two big powers, it behooves you not to pick sides.
It behooves you to play them off against one another and get the best benefits you possibly can from both.
But because we don't study history anymore, because of fallen human nature, we just keep repeating the same errors of the past.
In this case, potentially with disastrous consequences if Zelensky gets his way with the consequence of World War 3.
So when things get a little crazy in the political order, you're going to want to check out Birchgold.
Right now text NOLS to 989898.
As central banks in countries such as China, India, and Australia begin looking to transition to a digital currency, The Federal Reserve has been contemplating the same for the U.S.
With a digital currency, the government could track every single purchase you make.
Officials could even prohibit you from purchasing certain products, or easily freeze or seize part or all of your money.
Times like these are a great reminder to diversify a portion of your savings into gold, and you can do that with the help of Birch Gold.
Birchgold is where I get my gold.
So do thousands of other concerned savers.
Birchgold will help you convert an existing IRA or 401k into an IRA in gold.
You don't pay a penny out of pocket.
When currencies fail, gold is a safe haven.
How much more time does the dollar have?
Protect your savings with gold.
Birchgold has an A-plus rating.
With the Better Business Bureau, thousands of happy customers.
Text NOLS, K-N-W-L-A-S, to 989898.
Get your free info kit on gold.
If a central bank digital currency becomes a reality, it will be nice, To have a little bit of gold to depend on.
Tex Knowles, KNW LAS to 98, 98, 98.
Speaking of places known for their biolabs, you see what I did there?
You catch that?
The scientists behind a paper discrediting, discrediting the lab leak hypothesis around COVID-19 have apparently admitted that they were Pretty much just willing to push a lie in order to keep public opinion from turning against China.
We found this out because of congressional hearings.
This was just broadcast on C-SPAN.
We've got a co-author of the March 2020 Nature Medicine article, The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2, COVID, the Wu Flu, the China Virus, and other scientists who collaborated on the paper.
Openly worrying, saying, goodness gracious, if this paper shows that COVID started in China, well then it's going to be a complete mess and there are going to be all sorts of political ramifications.
So we've got to discourage people from observing the obvious fact that this virus began out of a lab leak, not in nature, but out of a lab leak in China.
Here are the texts.
One of your colleagues, who's not here today but was invited, Dr. Rambutt, he said, I don't know if I should say this in committee room or not, but given the blank show that this would happen, if anyone seriously accused the Chinese of even accidental release, my feeling is we should say that given there is no evidence of a specifically engineered virus, we cannot possibly distinguish between natural evolution and escape, so we are content with ascribing it to natural
Processes, his concern was would he piss off China?
That's what his concern was.
So, look, something happened here.
Politicians may flip-flop, scientists do not flip-flop in a matter of 72 hours.
But the scientists do flip-flop if the scientists are politicians, and these scientists were always politicians because they work in public health.
And I hate to say, I told you so, some of us were saying this from the beginning of COVID.
When Dr. Fauci came out there and he said, listen, I don't have any public political opinions.
I'm a scientist, I'm the science, I'm the vicar of science on Earth.
When he said that, he ignored half of his job, which is the public part, and public just means politics, so they were always politicians.
That's the job of a public scientist, to take into account politics.
When they demur and they say, no, no, I hate it when we have to play politics.
Well, then you hate your job, because your job is to do that.
And so this was really great stuff from this Congress lady.
And really bad stuff from the public health scientists, because they were saying, we are going to lie.
We know that the political ramifications would be bad for the liberal establishment, so we're going to lie and say that we can't really distinguish between a natural virus and a human prodded and poked and strengthened virus that leaks out of a laboratory, out of a strong biolab in Wuhan.
So we're just going to lie and say we can't tell, and we're going to lie and say that this is probably natural.
And that's what they did.
So what do we conclude from this?
Do we conclude that Fauci is going to face any consequences?
He won't.
Do we conclude that Francis Collins and NIH is going to face any consequences?
He won't.
Do we conclude that any of these scientists who sent these messages will face consequences?
They won't.
Nothing will happen.
They got it.
They got it.
We figured out.
We figured out.
In the early 1990s, that LBJ stole a Senate election in 1948 in Texas.
And we found it out, and Robert Caro, the top biographer of LBJ, did a great job proving this.
A lot of good it did us.
Doesn't matter.
No one will be held to consequences.
LBJ was dead at that point.
It's good to be vindicated long after the fact, but not because you're going to hold the bad actors responsible for what they did in the past.
It's so that we can look to the future and not be fooled again.
Because I promise you, the next time the libs try to pull a stunt like this, you're going to hear all the same nonsense from not just the establishment media, Not just the hack politicians, not just the really fancy people at the universities.
You're going to hear it from the so-called scientists, too, and they're going to say, oh, no, no, listen, the science is very clear, and all you rude, deplorable idiots, you don't know anything about the science, so listen to us.
You should not listen to us.
They don't have any credibility.
They are liars.
They are admitted liars.
The only lesson to take away here is not that you should be fighting yesterday's battle and trying to lock up Fauci.
Do your best, please!
I'd love it if the guy faced consequences.
I just think practically, potentially, it's not going to happen.
So you can't be fooled again on all of these questions.
On the ideologies that are permeating our culture that we're not allowed to talk about on Big Tech.
That would be a good example of the scientists obviously being wrong.
On the Other questions surrounding the efficacy of vaccines, forget about the virus for a second, but the vaccines, that'd be a good example of the experts and geniuses being wrong.
Maybe even in more political matters, when we're told that our elections are totally 100% secure, do you really believe those guys?
I don't really believe those guys, I see a lot of evidence to the contrary.
The more that our established authorities are caught openly admitting, not just they made mistakes, but that they are liars, that they're intentionally deceiving you, The less credibility they have and the more you're going to have to rely on your gut.
Today, in the year of our Lord, 2023, in the United States, your gut has a much better track record of honesty and integrity than any of these established public genius scientific authorities.
And so the reasonable, rational choice is to trust a hunch.
A gut instinct rather than to trust these liars.
Speaking of dubious science and ideologies that we're not allowed to talk about on a certain big tech video platform.
We've been told by the fancy people, by the responsible people, by the people in the suits and the ties, that doctors are not performing transgender surgeries on minors.
That's not happening.
That's a right-wing fever conspiracy theory.
Okay, maybe they prescribed them some puberty blockers, but they do not perform those surgeries.
That's a lie.
You irresponsible lying conservatives are lying.
Well, okay, we've got A self-described queer surgeon, a rather effete fellow with pink hair, describing the transgender procedures that he and his buddies have personally performed.
One thing that is very new is genital surgery in someone that has underwent pubertal suppression.
Not so much an issue in someone with assigned female at birth anatomy that undergoes a phalloplasty because we're creating something with a free tissue transfer or a flap anyway.
But a much bigger issue for an individual that's undergoing a penile inversion vaginoplasty.
Because we use all of that tissue to basically create the vulva as well as line the internal vaginal canal.
And as a specialty, those of us that do a fairly high volume of genital gender affirming surgery, you know, we've maybe done a couple, a handful of pubertally suppressed adolescents as a field and no one's published on it yet.
OHSU is, we're just putting our first series together as we're kind of learning and figuring out what works.
But it's really changing things because you don't have enough tissue to line the vaginal canal so you either have to take a skin graft or take skin from elsewhere or use an artificial product.
The way that we're dealing with it is by using a robot and we're basically performing intra-abdominal components of the surgery.
That's enough.
That's enough.
That phrase, the key phrase here from his psychotic, psychopathic, ghastly horror movie monologue is pubertally suppressed adolescence.
That's a doozy, pubertally suppressed adolescence.
You know what that means?
That's a jargony euphemism for little kids, little tiny kids who haven't gone through puberty, whose genitals this man and his pervert buddies are mangling.
Surgically.
So, I'm going to try to stave off the righteous indignation here, because I don't think it's going to get us all that far.
Obviously, this should be illegal.
Once this is illegal, the punishment for this obviously should be a lengthy prison sentence or death, as far as I'm concerned.
This should be a very, very serious crime.
If you are mangling the genitals of little kids and you are making them into eunuchs and sterilizing them, That is almost as heinous a crime as I can possibly imagine.
And so once that is codified in the law, once those sorts of laws are enforced, the punishments for them should be very, very severe.
Yes, granted.
On the cultural front, a man like this should be ashamed to present himself in this way in public.
We used to have standards and norms that discouraged perverted men like this from presenting themselves in these perverted ways.
With the pink hair and the psycho affect, openly talking about chopping up little kids, men should be terrified to do that sort of thing.
And if they have any of these absolutely perverted and sadistic desires, they should keep them to themselves and they should work on themselves and try to cast those demons out of their bodies.
That's the cultural level of this, of course.
But then there is the even deeper level that I haven't heard a lot of people acknowledge, which is, this is yet another reminder that science is mostly fake.
Not that scientism or the politicization of science or whatever other Squishy language, the more centrist kind of people want to grant.
But the whole endeavor, the whole endeavor of the scientific revolution, the premise of which is that reality is fundamentally physical, that is flawed.
It's not true.
The modern scientific culture has given us certain nice things but it's given us a lot of bad things as well like transgenderism and transhumanism and skyrocketing rates of depression and anxiety and suicidality and a loss of the sense of meaning in this world and a neglect of the fundamental spiritual and metaphysical realities of this world.
It's given us all those things and it's also given us a ton of bogus Scientific theory, even taken on the plane of physical science alone, it's given us a bunch of BS.
It's given us this notion that the world is going to end in five minutes because of the sun monster and catastrophic climate change.
That's a product of the scientific revolution.
It's a product of a myopic, narrow, obviously mistaken worldview where you plug in a bunch of models and with all your genius people from Harvard and Yale and Princeton and Oxford and they plug in their models and they say, oh, the world's going to end in five minutes and it's not true.
And most people even who push these ideologies don't believe it.
That's why the Spanish climate minister doesn't really ride her bicycle to work.
She rides a private jet and then she gets into a limousine.
And she only rides that bicycle for the last 100 yards.
That's why Mayor Pete takes a nice armored limousine to his cabinet meeting, an armored SUV, actually.
So he admits even more greenhouse gases.
And then he pulls off a few blocks away, gets his bicycle out, and rides it there.
That's science.
The scientific establishment, the scientific revolution, is what gave us the public health geniuses like Dr. Fauci and all the rest of them, who lied to us about the origin of COVID.
It's the people who gave us the public health genius scientific innovators who gave us those vaccines that were not effective at stopping the virus, were not effective at stopping the spread of the virus, and were not Even all that safe, much less safe than they promised us they would be.
That is an issue of science, and it's been true for all of history.
We look back through history and we say, goodness gracious, can you believe they bled George Washington with leeches?
What idiots.
Goodness gracious, can you believe they gave women lobotomies?
Oh, that's so crazy.
Goodness gracious, can you believe this, that, and the other thing?
Well, that's been true for the entire history of science, and it will continue to be true.
Now, we're chopping off kids' genitals.
That's obviously much worse than any lobotomies we ever gave women.
That's much worse than the worst scientific experiments of the 20th century.
And it's going to keep going on.
It's not like we figured out science and now we're all good.
We have to recognize at a deeper level that human nature goes more than skin deep.
It goes more than genitals deep.
That's why this doctor is so mistaken.
If you want to give him the benefit of the doubt, be as charitable as you can about what he's doing.
He just thinks that people are bags of flesh and bags of chemicals that you can poke and prod and fundamentally change.
That's an honest mistake, but it has ghastly, awful consequences.
And that's a product not of some bad politician, merely.
That's a product of the scientific worldview that denies the deeper reality to human nature and to the world.
Now, speaking of bags of meat, when you want to get really good bags of meat to feed your body, you've got to check out Good Ranchers.
It's the best transition I've ever had in this entire show.
Right now, head on over to GoodRanchers.com, use promo code NOLS.
If you have not heard yet, the FDA approved lab-grown chicken for sale.
Yes!
Meat formed in a lab will soon be coming to a store near you.
Yuck!
If you prefer meat grown in a pasture instead of a petri dish, Then you need Good Ranchers.
Not only do they sell real meat from real animals, but they sell the best meat this country has to offer.
From steakhouse-quality cuts of beef to better-than-organic chicken, everything Good Ranchers sources is from local farms in America.
Plus, right now, you'll get $30 off with my code NOLS at GoodRanchers.com.
Also, you can't call the scientists in the lab to ask about their fake meat, but Good Ranchers has a team of people available for you to call and answer all your questions.
Real meat, real service.
What are you waiting for?
Enjoy real meat and real service today with Good Ranchers.
GoodRanchers.com.
Use code NOLS for 30 bucks off any box.
Promo code NOLS at GoodRanchers.com.
GoodRanchers.com.
American meat delivered.
The greatest interview show on YouTube, according to many people, many people are saying it, yes or no, is back with an all-new episode discussing the most talked about movie in America, Sound of Freedom.
Movie star Jim Caviezel, American hero Tim Ballard joined me for tough questions and stiff drinks.
A stiff drink that Jim Caviezel took from me, actually.
Check out this teaser.
- It's just a coincidence that many elites in Hollywood and big tech are also some of the harshest critics of "The Sound of Freedom" movie.
Does Michael think it's a coincidence? - I'm just thinking about it for a second.
- I don't think he thinks it's a coincidence.
- Don't give me the answer.
It's cheating.
It's cheating.
- I'm cheating, I want the judges to note that. - This is your last chance for the yes or no I want the judges to note that. - This is your last This is your last chance for the Yes or No Game discount.
Rather than giving Jeff Bezos more money on Prime Day, give it to Jeremy instead.
Get $5 off when you order Yes or No.
Go to dailywire.com.
Get your game today.
Dailywire.com.
Get $5 off your order of the Yes or No Game.
Do not wait.
The last chance to get $5 off is today.
The story is winding its way through the courts.
It's going to make it up to the Supreme Court, certainly.
It's a story that divides the right a little bit, but gets a lot deeper at the heart of one of the big issues in our country, education, than some of the recent laws that have been passed.
And this case is not about whether you can trans the kids at kindergarten.
This case is not about whether you can have gay porn in elementary schools.
It's a little trickier than that.
The case is about Whether or not a Catholic school can fire a teacher for being openly homosexual.
You've got two rights, supposed rights in America, pitted right up against one another.
The right to religious liberty and the right to have special civil rights protections on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, which is a very recently codified civil right protection that comes from the Supreme Court in cases like the Bostock case, the Harris Funeral Home case.
It's a rewriting of the civil rights law, and the civil rights law was a rewriting of the Constitution, but that's the law of the land right now.
So what is it?
Because you can't simultaneously have both.
Does the Catholic school have the right to teach Catholic stuff with Catholic teachers?
Or do homosexuals have the right to have any job they want?
Open homosexuals.
Which is it?
Lonnie Billard.
Announced on Facebook that he was engaged to his partner of 14 years.
So they were going to have a same-sex marriage.
And he wrote on Facebook, he said, if you don't agree with this, keep it to yourself.
And he was not even a full-time teacher, he was a substitute teacher at this Catholic school, Charlotte Catholic High School.
And then he found out the school wasn't picking him up anymore because he's an open homosexual.
The fight in the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Richmond is an early test right now of whether or not The First Amendment protects a business' right, in this case a Catholic school's right, to not employ people who violate their moral code.
This is a really crucial case, and I know that people are going to be more sympathetic to the substitute teacher, because they're going to say, look, we all have gay friends and cousins and stuff.
Some of my very best teachers that I had in school were openly gay.
It was a little bit of a different time back then when being openly gay didn't mean you were marching down the street in New York City saying, we're here, we're queer, we're coming for your children, you didn't have gay porn in elementary schools.
A little bit of a different time, but people are going to be much more sympathetic to the teacher here.
And yet, the only choice The only choice if we're going to have religion in America at all is to side with the Catholic school.
If a religious school does not have the right to uphold its religious principles in education, then religious education is banned in America.
Effectively.
Education is about forming minds and raising up young people.
And religious education has a, I'm not going to say distinctly moral component to it, because all education has a moral component, whether we want to admit it or not.
Liberal schools, public schools, they have a moral component.
They rigorously instill a moral view in their students on environmentalism, on the sexual revolution, on all the rest of it, on diversity, on everything.
They're just a little subtler about it.
But if the school The religious school does not have the right to hire teachers who uphold the educational vision of the school and to not hire teachers or to fire teachers who openly oppose the entire educational vision of the school or a key component of it.
Then that means that religious education is illegal, but because nature abhors a vacuum, It doesn't mean that now education is going to be neutral, as the liberals pretend.
It just means that only one religious view, actually an anti-religious view, is going to be enshrined in schools.
It means that schools not only will not have the right to teach the Christian view of sex, or the Jewish view of sex, or the Muslim view of sex, or any kind of traditional view of sex, it doesn't just mean that you don't have the right to that.
It doesn't even just mean that you do have the right to teach a more liberal view of sex.
It means that you must teach a more liberal view of sex.
It means you have to.
That's the law.
Because if you don't, the state will come after you.
So that's going to be a big test.
And it's far from clear what the Supreme Court's going to do.
The Supreme Court, despite our allegedly 6-3 conservative court, Sided with the transgenderists in Bostock.
Sided with the transgenderists and the idea of a civil right for sexual orientation and gender identity in the Harris Funeral Homes case.
So, if I had to place bets right now, I fear there's a good chance that Catholic education just effectively becomes outlawed in America.
Now, the court's been pretty good about religious liberty cases, kind of, as an okay record.
So, maybe there's a chance there.
I would say call your congressman.
I would say make this very clear that you don't want religious education to be completely abolished in America by nine lawyers on the Supreme Court.
Speaking of weird sex stuff, there's a story I meant to get to, not a long one, but a story about a Newport Beach couple.
A young guy, good looking couple, young, a surgeon and his wife and they're apparently swingers and they got in trouble because they went to a bar and they picked up these women and then brought them back to their place and the women say that they kind of came to.
The women think that they were drugged and that this couple, this young surgeon and his wife were actually preying on them.
And were drugging them to get involved into all sorts of weird stuff back at their place.
And so when the women came to this, they said, we got to get out of here, whatever.
And they left and they go after them.
Well, the charges were just dropped against the Newport Beach surgeon and his girlfriend.
And the question in the case is, were they swingers or predators?
In fact, that's this article here on Yahoo News asks that very question.
Were they swingers or were they predators?
Was it just fun kind of consensual gallivanting or was there something dark and nefarious here?
And my question is, what's the difference?
What's the difference really?
I'm not saying there's no distinction whatsoever between the two cases, but in both cases, they're predators.
In both cases, this Newport Beach couple is not going out to will the good of these other women, and to edify them, and build them up, and care for them, and take care of their needs, and get married to them, or anything like that.
They're just going out to satisfy their own base appetites, and to use women in the process.
And maybe they crossed the line even further, and drugged these women, or in some other way kind of coerced them.
But maybe they just merely seduced them in a bar and took them back and used their bodies and then threw them out on the street.
Either way though, that's predatory behavior.
In fact, the old ancient Greeks, good old Uncle Plato, talked about this too and said that Rape, physical rape, is in fact less severe than seduction.
Today, in our modern society, we think that's crazy.
What are you talking about?
Seduction?
That's just, that's consensual.
But rape, you know, that's one of the worst crimes.
Yeah, rape is one of the worst crimes.
But the reason that our old ancient Greek buddies thought that is because a physical rape is just a violation of the body.
A seduction is a violation not only of the body, but also of the intellect and of the soul.
It pierces much, much deeper.
That's the kind of behavior that they're engaging in.
It's the kind of behavior that's totally enshrined in our society, and it's enshrined in feminism, and it's enshrined in the sexual revolution, and it's an idea that As long as you can get someone to meekly mutter yes, that you have the right to do whatever you want to satisfy your own base desires.
It's an idea of pure selfishness, and it's an idea of predation and predatory behavior.
Swingers are predators.
What's the difference?
Speaking of Newport Beach, places known for fundraising, Our friend Vivek Ramaswamy, not a swinger to my knowledge.
Don't draw the wrong conclusion from that transition.
I was transitioning into political fundraising, nothing to do with the weird Newport Beach couple.
Vivek has a very novel idea for how to raise money for his presidential campaign.
Here it is.
This campaign is founded on the truth.
Here's the truth of how political fundraising actually works.
There's a tiny group, it's an oligopoly, of people who raise money, bundling and otherwise, who get to keep a large percentage, sometimes up to 10%, of what they actually raise.
That doesn't make any sense to belong to a small group of people.
I don't like this system as it exists.
But if that's the system we're going to have, my view is let's democratize that and make it possible for everybody to make money as well.
So if you're supporting me and you're part of this movement and you want to help us actually raise that money, I love it.
I think it's a great idea.
New program we're launching where you help me raise the money.
You get a unique link to do it.
We'll have a special relationship.
I'm going to keep giving you phone calls, telling you how I think you can be most effective for us.
But the money you raise, you get to keep 10 percent of it.
I love it.
I think it's a great idea.
He's right in that there is a class of people called political fundraisers and they work for these campaigns and they raise a boatload of money and they get to keep.
a decent chunk of it themselves.
That's their job.
So he's saying, why are we doing this?
Why are we creating this professional class of political consultants?
Politics is supposed to be about you.
It's supposed to be about ordinary citizens and personal connections.
So I'm gonna increase that personal connection to you and I'm gonna incentivize you.
Don't we support market incentives here on the right?
Yeah, I think we do.
Don't we do that in America?
Yeah, I think we do.
So we're gonna incentivize you to raise some money.
Some people are disingenuously calling this a pyramid scheme.
This is not a pyramid scheme at all.
A pyramid scheme is where you sell some stupid product, and then you convince other people not only to buy your product, but to sell that product for you, and then you get a cut of what that person sells, and then they do it, and they do it, and they do it, and it keeps going on and on and on, and the idea is you build up this kind of funnel into a pyramid.
It's not anything even close to what Vivek is saying.
He's just saying, hey, if you raise some money for me, you get 10%.
That's it.
No pyramid, no multi-layer, no, you just, whatever you raise you get 10%.
I think this is a great idea.
And the best part of this, it's not that he's raising money, Vivek doesn't need money, he's a very wealthy man, it's not that I don't know.
People are going to make a ton of money.
People might make some money, but they're not going to make an insane amount of money on this.
The best part of it is that he's trying something new.
He's shaking up the race in his campaign promises, in the way he's conducting the race, and even in the way he's conducting the operations of the campaign.
not just the way he's conducting social media ads, but the way he's conducting fundraising.
He's coming to this race with the out-of-the-box vision of an entrepreneur, which is what he is.
And this is why he keeps jumping up the ranks in this race.
Vivek right now nationally is in third place.
And this is the biggest positive probably about Vivek's presidential campaign.
And it's so shocking that this guy who pretty much nobody had heard of six months ago is now the number three guy in the GOP race for president.
And it's the biggest knock on the number two guy in the race, Ron DeSantis, who's got so many great things going for him.
He's a very impressive person.
He's very intelligent.
He's done a great job in Florida.
He would probably make a great president, but his campaign is stuck in the rut for precisely this reason.
All Vivek is doing is just trying new stuff, shaking things up, throwing spaghetti at the wall, and all the DeSantis campaign seems to be doing is doubling down on a strategy that is slowly losing them support.
And if they don't turn it around, it's going to seriously hamper their chances, if not totally foreclose their chances, of making it to the nomination.
You know, there are a lot of unhappy people out there.
Most of them think, if I could just get the right job, if I could just Find the right spouse.
If I could just have a little bit more money, then everything would be alright.
Just this one little change.
Well, the truth is, happiness is something you can achieve without adding anything else to your life.
And in fact, perhaps you must.
But don't take my word for it.
Take the founder of PragerU's word for it.
Dennis Prager.
In a brand new episode of PragerU's Master's Program, streaming exclusively on DailyWirePlus, Dennis will show you how you can be happy right now.
In PragerU's Master's Program, Dennis is sharing 40 years' worth of hard-earned wisdom that explores all sorts of topics, such as the differences between men and women, the consequences of secularism, and the case for marriage.
In this week's episode, Dennis will show you how to overcome the hurdles to happiness.
I can guarantee at least one of those hurdles you've never considered before.
You will not want to miss this episode.
Go to DailyWirePlus.com.
Become a member.
Watch PragerU's Master's program today.
My favorite comment yesterday is from StettinWalters574, not to be confused with the 573 other StettinWalterses on YouTube, who says, don't forget basic math.
That's another tool of the far right.
That's true.
The aspects of the far right that you've really got to look out for, exercising, being on time, working hard, speaking English, Basic math, literacy, not screaming all the time, being sort of quiet, normal.
There are lots of warning signs of being on the far right.
Speaking of the far right, the GOP nomination for president, Vivek, is now in third place, according to a morning consult survey.
Now, I don't want to overstate what third place means.
Trump is running away with this nomination.
Trump is at 56%.
He, according to Morning Consult, is 30 points up on his next closest rival, Ron DeSantis, 17%.
And Ron DeSantis is way up on Vivek Ramaswamy.
He's up 9%, so a little over 100% more support than Vivek has right now.
But it's pretty good, man.
I don't know, that's pretty impressive.
Ron DeSantis is one of the most impressive Republican politicians in the country, frankly, in my lifetime.
And this guy, Vivek, is just coming up and he's not all that far away, I guess, in terms of raw numbers.
And Vivek is one point above the former Vice President of the United States, Mike Pence, who was a popular governor of Indiana, who was a popular congressman.
This guy, Vivek, point up on him, he's almost triple on Nikki Haley, almost triple on Tim Scott, almost triple on Chris Christie, so much for the Christians.
He is way above Asa Hutchinson, he's at 1%.
Poor Burgum, who's running as a socially liberal, cut taxes kind of candidate.
He's at 0%, Suarez 0%, Heard 0%.
I've been making this warning and I've been a little tough on DeSantis the past few days and I'm tough on DeSantis out of love because I really personally like the guy and I like a lot of the people associated with his campaign.
Keep this up and you're going to lose.
Simple as that.
What the DeSantis campaign is betting on right now is that they're going to hold firm at, I don't know, I don't know what they're going to hold firm at.
They were going to hold firm at 22%.
Now it's at 17%.
It keeps dropping.
But they're going to hold firm somewhere until the first debate.
And the first debate is going to be where Ron DeSantis really makes his mark against Trump.
And maybe he will, maybe he won't.
Trump has great debates and Trump has pretty bad debates.
So that's a coin flip.
You don't know how Trump, and I bet if recent performance is any indication, Trump's looking pretty good at his debate skills, at his stage skills.
It looks like he's kind of got some of his mojo back.
But furthermore, If the DeSantis campaign thinks that that's going to be the race, because everyone's going to be piling on Trump, and that's where DeSantis is going to really deal the knockout blow, and that's when his numbers are going to switch.
Well, I think you got another thing coming, because all the guns are not going to be trained on Trump at that first debate.
The guns are going to be trained on Ron DeSantis, because Ron DeSantis' campaign is showing blood in the water right now.
Ron DeSantis is 39 points below Donald Trump right now.
So all the guys, number 3, number 4, number 5, number 6, they're all going to train just like they did in 2016.
They're going to train all their energy on the number 2 guy.
They're going to try to take him out so that they have a chance to shoot at the king.
Because they know if you shoot at the king, you best not miss.
So they're not going to go after Trump right away.
There's no political advantage for them to do it.
They might throw a few volleys just to save face, but the real guns are going to be trained on Ron DeSantis.
So they've got to shake something up.
Running as the new and improved version of Trump ain't working.
What is the solution going to be?
I don't know.
I don't work for the DeSantis campaign.
But it's got to be something, man.
If Vivek Ramaswamy can do it, and he can jump way up in the polls, surely the very popular governor of Florida can do it.
As well.
There's another, I'm like singing Vivek's praises today.
Not just because the guy's a pal of mine, but I'm genuinely very impressed by his campaign.
Here's another idea.
He threw this one out a couple weeks ago.
It didn't totally land, so he just moved on to the fundraising idea.
But I think it's a pretty good one.
He established a scholarship for patriotism.
It's our son Arjun's first birthday today.
And in honor of that, my wife Apoorva and I are committing to fund a new scholarship to foster American national pride among young Americans.
It's going to be called the American Identity Scholarship.
It's going to allow 10 students, 10 high school students across the country to win a $25,000 scholarship, making it one of the largest scholarships in the country.
For submitting a compelling and concise video explaining why it is they're proud to be an American and most importantly, What it means to be an American.
That's something that we don't talk about enough.
Ask young people across the country today.
What does it mean to be an American?
You often get a blank stare in response.
That's the vacuum at the heart of our national soul.
Less than 16% of Gen Z says they're proud to be American today.
So this is cool, I like it.
It didn't get as big a splash as I suspect Vivek was hoping for in the campaign.
So it doesn't matter, whatever, the guy just moves on.
He says, okay, now we're gonna do this fundraising thing, that did make a big splash.
And he just keeps chipping away, he just keeps throwing spaghetti at the wall.
He just keeps mixing metaphors like I'm mixing them right now, and it's working very well.
Now, the question That Vivek poses in the scholarship is the central theme of his campaign.
And it's a really important one.
It's what is American identity?
And I love that question.
And I think it's really perspicacious.
It's a really incisive theme for the campaign.
But what's the answer?
What is the answer to that question?
Conservatives are going to reflexively think they have the answer to say that America is the spirit of 76 and freedom and maybe, maybe.
But that wasn't always the way that America viewed herself.
That is in many ways a creation of the post-World War II liberal consensus.
That America is a classically liberal nation founded on enlightenment values.
That's a kind of, actually a relatively recent understanding.
America viewed herself very differently in 1620.
America viewed herself very differently in 1776.
America viewed herself very differently in the early 19th century, and in the later 19th century, and even in the early 20th century.
And we're going to view ourselves very differently now.
So, the conservatives are going to have to focus in on this.
What is it?
Is America primarily racial?
America's never really been, America's been At least ostensibly a white country for a lot of its history, but it was never merely a white country.
I mean, the story has always been much more complicated than that.
Carl Jung has a really good essay on this about how the existence in America of Native American Indians and black slaves and then freed black people.
Always colored, pun intended, the American understanding of race and character.
And so I don't think it's really that exactly.
Is America, what is it, is it just freedom and enlightenment values?
No one's even read John Locke.
Nobody, nor should they, frankly.
No, is America, what is, is America the right to do whatever you want, like chop yourself up and engage in all sorts of weird behaviors?
I don't think so.
What is, is America one nation under God?
This be our motto and God is our trust?
That's a pretty traditional understanding of what America is.
What does that mean in 2023?
That's a question that a lot of us have to ask.
Now, on this racial point, before we go, I want to get to Tommy Tuberville.
No, you know what?
I'm running out of time, so that's going to be my tease.
It's going to be my tease, okay?
Tommy Tuberville, though, he's in trouble because he is referring to white nationalism and he's not condemning white nationalism in the military or something like that.
