Jihadis attack U.S. troops in Syria, a Harvard professor calls Michael a “stochastic terrorist,” and blood transfusions might change people’s personalities.
Ep.1356
- - -
Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEl
- - -
DailyWire+:
Check out Bentkey here: https://bit.ly/46NTTVo
Get your own Yes or No game here: https://bit.ly/3X6tlKY
- - -
Today’s Sponsors:
Good Ranchers - Get $30 off your order PLUS free expedited shipping! Promo code KNOWLES at checkout. https://bit.ly/43G8p0P
Genucel - Fall Classics Package – Exclusive discounts https://genucel.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
On the 40th anniversary of the Beirut barracks bombings, President Biden had to cut a press conference short because jihadis attacked a US military base in Syria.
I apologize, I have to go to the situation with another issue I have to deal with.
Thank you, thank you, thank you.
The U.S.
currently has about 900 troops in Syria and almost three times that number in Iraq, where Islamic militants have also targeted American troops since the war in the Holy Land broke out a couple weeks ago.
Fortunately, the Americans have thus far made it out relatively unscathed, but the war is clearly expanding and threatening to pull the U.S.
once again into all-out war in the Middle East.
With the GOP in disarray, many Republican leaders have made a habit of asking in terms of crisis what President Reagan might do.
Usually the question defies easy answer because Reagan's been dead for almost 20 years, and he hasn't been in office in 34 years, and political circumstances change over time.
But in this case, we actually do have an answer.
Because Ronald Reagan dealt with a far more devastating version of this exact problem almost at the exact same spot 40 years ago.
40 years and one day ago, two trucks hit a building housing American troops in Lebanon and those trucks were rigged with bombs and they blew up.
The attack killed 241 American servicemen along with 58 French military personnel and six civilians.
And what did President Reagan do?
That old cowboy invoked by so many reflexive war hawks.
Ronald Reagan declined to retaliate in any serious way.
And then he quickly withdrew American forces from the country.
This is not the answer that the Gippers' most idolatrous and belligerent invokers might expect or desire.
But that's what really happened.
Because Ronald Reagan, one of the best foreign policy presidents we've ever had, consistently sought to avoid direct overt military confrontation.
Despite his bellicose reputation, Reagan was reticent to get the United States bogged down in foreign wars with ambiguous strategic objectives.
As the usual suspects beat the war drums louder and louder over the coming weeks, remember that the president whose motto was peace through strength in almost identical circumstances famously and wisely said no.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is the Michael Knowles Show.
Welcome back to the show.
Guess what I had for dinner last night?
I'll give you one guess.
You guessed it, good ranchers.
I had delicious, usually I do the beef and the steak and the ground beef and all that.
The chicken and nice chicken cutlets that were the most magnificent chicken cutlets I've had in a long time.
This episode, of course, brought to you by Good Ranchers.
Get great meat at a secure price and 30 bucks off your order with code KNOLLS, K-N-N-W-L-E-S.
Go to GoodRanchers.com.
Use code KNOLLS, K-N-N-W-L-E-S today.
Greta Thunberg is striking in solidarity with the Palestinians.
Which is strange because I thought in order to go on strike you had to have a job, but she skipped that step.
She's now just, she's on strike, not for the Sun Monster right now, it is for Hamas.
We will get to that in just a moment.
First though, the war is only getting worse.
You might recall I guess a week and a half or so ago, there was a news report that came out that the Israelis had bombed a church, a very old church in Gaza, perhaps one of the oldest churches in the world, with roots all the way back in antiquity and which was expanded by crusaders in the 12th century.
That turned out to be fake news.
The church had not been bombed, which is good, because you think, why would the Israelis bomb a church?
Hamas isn't storing weapons in a church.
Hamas doesn't have a command center in a church.
Why would they do it?
So, luckily, that was fake news until yesterday, and now the church has been bombed.
This is a Greek Orthodox church in Gaza.
It is the church of Saint Porphyrios, and people were killed.
According to Palestine health officials, they say 16 people were killed.
We don't know.
It's the fog of war.
We do know, however, that some people were killed because relatives of former Republican Congressman Justin Amash were sheltering in the church and were killed.
Palestinian officials had said at least 500 Muslims and Christians had taken shelter in St.
Porphyrios Church.
We don't know those real numbers, but Israel needs to answer for this.
Okay, I am as big a defender of the State of Israel's right to defend itself as there is.
Obviously, the Israeli government has a right to protect itself after Hamas militants slaughter over a thousand people and rape and pillage and burn and do all sorts of terrible things and take hostages.
But the Israelis have to answer for why they hit this church.
And in fact, they have.
Charlie Kirk raised this point yesterday, and an Israeli spokesperson for the IDF said, I understand your feelings and respect them.
We did not target that or any church.
We struck a Hamas military operative who coordinated rocket fire toward Israel from that vicinity.
He was a legitimate target.
We will continue to be careful of any sensitive facility.
Will you?
I don't know.
I mean, I appreciate the answer.
I'm glad the IDF is answering for it, but clearly they weren't all that careful because they blew up an old church, a really old church.
And my reaction to this even is giving me pause because every single innocent person who is killed is worth any number of old churches.
Human beings are worth much more than beautiful old stuff.
And yet, because we've become so callous to the death of innocence, it's when the really old stuff, when the art, when the buildings, when the culture get destroyed, that sometimes pulls on our heartstrings even more.
We feel this is such a loss, it can never be replicated.
Fortunately, I don't think the church was totally destroyed, but it appears to have been severely damaged.
And that feeling of loss for our culture, that feeling of loss for Beautiful art, and in this case something deeper than art, you're talking about a house of God oriented toward the worship of God, points us and reminds us of the most significant loss in this war or any war, which is the loss of life for innocent civilians, which we write off.
And we use euphemisms and we say it's collateral damage.
Collateral damage means the death of innocent people.
Not just going on in the Middle East, in the Ukraine war.
The fact that Joe Biden has no interest in winding down the Ukraine war.
The fact that there have been multiple opportunities for peace and Joe Biden has said no thank you.
Why?
Because the war hawks in Washington say that the war in Ukraine is great for us because we get to deplete the Russian military, that's another euphemism, and we get to We get to advance our strategic objectives, whatever those may be, and we don't even have to sacrifice American troops, we can just spend some money.
But while we're depleting the Russian military, innocent people are being killed.
And while this war drags on, innocent people are being killed.
While this war in the Holy Land drags on, innocent people are being killed and irreplaceable art and artifacts of our culture are being destroyed as well.
So the question is, even if This is a legit answer from the IDF.
The question then has to be, what is the objective here?
Is the objective the total destruction of Hamas?
It's a good objective.
I'm all for it.
Is the objective the total destruction of Gaza?
That's a little more dubious.
Israel does generally a very good job of protecting civilians compared to other people, certainly compared to Hamas.
But do we want to see the Gaza Strip totally destroyed?
Is the objective here regime change in Iran?
Is that in the interests of the United States?
Is that in the interest of global stability?
What's the objective here?
It's not just a question that the IDF has to answer, it's a question especially that the United States has to answer, because the United States keeps getting bogged down in these wars, now for decades, that don't seem to have a clear point to them.
And in the meantime, the destruction only expands.
against things that are irreplaceable, not just buildings, not just art, but people too.
Question is, how does this end?
Speaking of terrorism, yours truly has been accused of terrorism by a professor at Harvard.
This professor at Harvard came to my attention because I got a Google alert about some gay news outlet.
It's called The Advocate, and the gay shtoppo titled this article, quote, Stochastic Terrorism, Links Between the GOP, Right-Wing Influencers, and Neo-Nazi Violence.
And then you see there on the cover, it's some neo-Nazis, and then a picture of libs of TikTok, and then me.
Somehow, if you connect the dots, Libs of TikTok, an Orthodox Jewish woman, and I, a man who got in trouble with this gay outlet for saying men and women are different, we are basically, when you squint your eyes and tilt your head and really think about it, we're basically skinheads in front of a swastika.
What did I say that got them to do this?
I knew what they were referring to the moment I saw the headline.
I went to CPAC back in March.
And I said that men can't really become women, and women can't really become men, despite popular confusion, to the contrary.
And therefore, for the good of society, and especially for the good of the poor people who have fallen prey to this confusion, transgenderism must be eradicated from public life entirely, the entire preposterous ideology, from top to bottom.
The article quotes someone named Juliet Kayyem, who is a Harvard Kennedy School professor, And, notably, the former Assistant Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security.
And what Kayyem said is that my speech is an example of stochastic terrorism tactics employed.
Right-wing commentator Michael Knowles of the Daily Wire argued to an assembled crowd that transgenderism must be eradicated from public life entirely, Adding that it would be for the good of society.
This was a perfect example, Kayyem says.
He says eradication.
And then he says transgenderism.
So he knows he's going to try to get an out out of that.
Using the term transgenderism, which is outdated and not used.
This article, I'm not joking, this article seriously argues with a straight face that the term transgenderism is outdated and not used.
The term transgenderism was not used five minutes ago.
The term transgenderism is something new that cropped up.
If you asked people ten years ago, what is transgenderism, most people would look at you like you had three heads.
That's a new term, but the way that the left manipulates language, that term too has become out of date, so I don't know what they're going to replace it with, but they say it's outdated and not used, not by anybody except for everybody, but we shouldn't use it according to this Harvard professor.
That term conveys everything he intended to convey to his followers, while affording him some plausible deniability, she explains.
Now, obviously, this woman is extremely confused about the meaning of words.
And I know this because of the phrase, stochastic terrorism.
My question is, when did the Libs discover the word stochastic?
Have you noticed the Libs, they have these words that just, they find and they glom onto and they use them endlessly.
Some recent examples would be grifter.
They call everyone they don't like grifters.
Or what's another one?
Gaslight, based on that old movie.
Everyone's gaslighting everyone all the time.
They use that word a lot.
The classic one is literally.
They love using literally.
They misuse that word because they use literally to mean figuratively.
And then here, not only do they use this weird word stochastic, gratuitously, Totally unnecessarily, but they also use it inappropriately because stochastic refers to randomness, it refers to chance, like stochastic process in mathematics.
But what this woman is accusing me of, what the libs are always accusing us of when they use this phrase stochastic terrorism, is the opposite of random.
They're accusing us of doing something deliberately with a direct effect.
What they're saying is that when I call for the eradication of this preposterous ideology, that I am deliberately And directly inciting violence against sexually confused people, which is not what stochastic means.
So they use the word, they use this $10 word, the meaning of which they do not know, they use it inappropriately and unnecessarily.
They could just call us terrorists, which is what they really mean to do, which is also inappropriate, but at least it's simpler.
What is this?
Is this all just a big joke?
Is this something to laugh about?
Kind of.
It's funny that a Harvard professor doesn't know how to use basic words and that a Harvard professor is attacking me for knowing the meaning of words.
What she says here is, Knowles, he knows what he's saying.
He's using these words and the words he uses give him an out against the things that I am accusing him of doing.
Because if he had used the words that I want him to use, then I could really attack him.
But because he used the words that he used, and he knows the meaning of those words, I can't really attack him, because what he said is perfectly fine.
But he, but secretly, but secretly, it's not fine.
Because I know, I, with my crystal ball, I know that he really meant to say something that he didn't say, and that's why he's a terrorist.
So it's kind of funny that a professor at Harvard, especially at the Harvard Politics School, the Kennedy School, would misuse and misunderstand words like this.
But the reason it's not totally funny is that this isn't just some random woman, a woman who's appeared through some sort of stochastic process, who is spouting off from the ivory tower.
This is a former assistant secretary of DHS, the Department of Homeland Security, which puts you on the terror list, which can really mess up your life, okay, which has a lot of power, and which has accumulated more and more power over the last 20 years.
That's a little less funny.
Because there are people who are currently at DHS, there are a lot of people who are currently stacking the government, who believe, just as this woman does, that if you think men and women are different and one cannot become the other, that you are a terrorist.
And they're going to look at you the same way they look at Hamas and Hezbollah and ISIS and Al-Qaeda.
They're going to come after you.
You don't need to have an AK-47.
You don't need to set off a bomb.
You just need to use words that they don't like.
And they're going to use their positions of influence at the arguably most prestigious school in the country and in the federal government to stop you.
That's not good.
Now, we've got to prepare ourselves for a political battle here.
And when you want to prepare your body and feel really good and have a great dinner, you've got to check out Good Ranchers.
Right now, go to GoodRanchers.com slash Knowles every Halloween.
Parents are warned about the potential dangers in their kid's candy.
But what we don't talk about are the potential dangers you encounter every day in the meat aisle of your grocery store.
Lab-grown meat is growing more popular, and it's not unusual for foreign meat to be labeled as a product of the United States.
And the scary truth is, we don't really know what's in our meat, unless you, like me, eat good ranchers.
Last night I had Such a juicy and delicious chicken cutlet.
Well, I had multiple chicken cutlets from Good Ranchers.
I usually just focus on the beef because, you know, I only eat Good Ranchers, what, three times a week, four times a week if I'm lucky.
And so I want to focus it on the beef and the steak and the burgers, best burger you ever had.
But so I go for the chicken.
Magnificent.
Best chicken cutlets I've had in a very, very long time.
Right now, Good Ranchers is throwing in a treat for our listeners.
$30 off your order with code Knolls.
Head on over right now to GoodRanchers.com.
Use code Knolls.
Get $30 off with free express shipping.
Code Knolls, K-N-O-W-L-L-L-S.
For $30 off your box, GoodRanchers.com.
Good Ranchers, American meat, delivered.
Speaking of terrorism, Karine Jean-Pierre.
Who's just asked about the surge in anti-Semitic attacks.
Since this war broke out, there have been a lot of new attacks on Jews in the United States.
What does KJP have to say about it? - Level of concern right now about the potential rise of anti-Semitism in light of everything that's going on in Israel. - So a couple of things.
Look, we have not seen any credible threats.
I know there's been always questions about credible threats, and so I just want to make sure that that's out there.
But look, Muslim and those perceived to be Muslim have endured a disproportionate number of hate-fueled attacks.
Well, hold on, hold on.
The question was, what do you think about all the attacks on Jews?
And then Karine Jean-Pierre's answer is, yes, Islamophobia is a really big problem.
No, no, no, hold on.
We can talk about Islamophobia in a second.
But I'm asking about the attacks on Jews.
Yes.
Yes.
The Palestine supporters have suffered greatly.
No, we're... But Karine Jean-Pierre can't answer this.
The White House can't answer this.
The Democrats broadly can't answer this.
This is a wedge issue in the Democratic Party.
The Democrat Party previously had been a big supporter of Israel.
Both parties in the United States were big supporters of Israel.
The question of Israel became more of a partisan issue during the Obama administration because Barack Obama hated Bibi Netanyahu and Bibi Netanyahu, leader of Israel, responded a little bit in kind and cozied up to Donald Trump and doesn't have a great relationship with Joe Biden.
So Israel support all of a sudden becomes more of a Republican thing.
And because, especially American evangelicals or so, Vocally supportive of Israel even in the popular culture support for Israel has has become coded as more of a right-wing thing than a left-wing thing and also because Israel is a symbol of colonialism, much as European states in Africa have been symbols of colonialism, much as the United States of America has been a symbol of colonialism.
The intersectional left has taken up the cause of the stateless Palestinians against the nation-state of Israel.
The oppression narrative is on the side of the Palestinians now, not on the side of Jews, even though the State of Israel was established for the Jews in large part because of the historical victimhood of the Jewish people.
That doesn't matter.
What have you done for me lately?
Now that ideology is backing the Palestinians.
Still, there are a lot of Israel supporters in the Democrat Party, so they can't get a clean win either way.
But if Joe Biden's got to pick a side, They are going to side at least a little bit with the Palestinians against the Israelis.
That's where the Democrat base is today.
And Joe Biden has never been a conviction politician.
He doesn't have any actual beliefs.
He wakes up in the morning, he licks his finger, he figures out which way the wind is blowing.
And certainly among Democrats, the wind is blowing against the state of Israel for Palestine.
So what do you say about antisemitism, Joe?
I say Islamophobia is a big, big problem.
Now, speaking of the future and the youths, you've been asking us for an alternative in kids' media.
It is finally here.
The Daily Wire just launched BentKey, our brand new kids' entertainment platform.
We are all sick of Hollywood pushing leftist propaganda on our kids.
Now there is finally an answer for those of us looking for children's shows that we can trust.
BentKey is brand new.
It's available to download right now.
It's an entirely new company from The Daily Wire dedicated to creating the next generation of timeless stories that transport kids into a world of adventure, imagination, and joy.
This is exactly what parents have been waiting for.
I don't just say that as someone who works for The Daily Wire.
I say that because I am one of those parents.
I do not want my kids to see all this insane leftist propaganda.
I have been as gung-ho as anybody in this building.
We have tested it on my children.
No children were harmed in the testing of this content.
In fact, my two and a half year old absolutely loves it.
to create this content, and the content is absolutely fabulous.
We have tested it on my children.
No children were harmed in the testing of this content.
In fact, my two-and-a-half-year-old absolutely loves it.
I had high expectations for it already because I know there are a lot of talented people in this building.
It exceeded my expectations.
I've been doing a lot of I could not have imagined that DW was going to provide all of this for its members, and they're not increasing the price of annual membership, which to me is insane, but they don't want to do it.
So it's the greatest value add that we've ever given.
It's a $99 value that you get completely free, goes to show you that we don't just talk about changing culture, we put it into action.
We really believe in what we're doing, and as I said, if you're already a DW Plus member, you already have BentKey.
Just download the app to start streaming now.
If you're not a member, there has never been a better time to join.
You get all of the Daily Wire Plus content that you know and love, plus BentKey at no additional cost.
Go to dailywire.com slash subscribe right now to start streaming the next generation of kids' entertainment.
Speaking of the kids... and Palestine... Greta Thunberg!
She's taking a break from protesting in favor of Gaia and the sun gods and all the rest of the weather religion, and she is standing with Gaza and Palestine.
Greta Thunberg just posted a tweet.
It says, Week 270.
Today we strike in solidarity with Palestine and Gaza.
270 weeks.
At that point, I think you just lose your job.
But she never had a job, so she's just striking.
Striking is her job, and usually she strikes for the benefit of the environmental left, which profits and grows in power by consolidating the socially and politically acceptable Energy use.
But today, she's decided she's going to strike for Gaza.
This is true of the broader left.
It's not just the White House.
It's not just the professional activist, the sort of marionette of the liberal regime, Greta Thunberg.
It is also Justin Trudeau, the leader of America's evil top hat Canada, who just tweets out, quote, As members of the Palestinian, Arab, and Black Muslim communities gathered for prayer yesterday, I wanted them to know this.
We know you're worried and hurting.
We are here for you.
We will not stop advocating for civilians to be protected and for international law to be upheld.
I know a lot of people are confused about which side to be on here because a lot of people say, we don't really have a dog in this fight.
The Holy Land is very far away.
This is a conflict that's gone on in its present form for well over a hundred years, and it's a conflict that has gone on broadly for millennia, and so we don't really pick a side here.
But the side is going to pick you, I guess is how I would say it.
If you look around and look at the people who are supporting Palestine slash Hamas versus the people who are supporting the state of Israel.
Broadly speaking, you are going to see the most prominent leftists who are wrong about the most things in the most egregious ways.
They are generally going to be on the side of Palestine.
And the people with whom you generally tend to agree are who are right about generally the right number of things.
They are broadly going to be supportive of the Israeli government.
I'm not saying that it's a perfect one-to-one, I'm not saying that all the interests are totally aligned, but that's what happens.
Rashida Tlaib, AOC, Ilhan Omar, Justin Trudeau, Justin Castro, Greta Thunberg, Joe Biden, all the rest of them, they are pretty vocally on the side of the Palestinians.
And if the libs, if the people who are most wrong about everything, are uniformly on the side of the Palestinians, then probably that's not the right side to totally be on, right?
Politics is a team sport, and I know people don't like that, and it makes people uncomfortable, and we all bemoan tribalism.
That's another one of these words that cropped up in the last six, seven years that is largely meaningless, but it's just a word that's going around like a meme.
But politics is tribal, and here we're talking about one of the most ancient tribes in the world, and multiple ancient tribes actually, fighting over this.
It seems ill-advised to put yourself on the side of Greta Thunberg and Justin Trudeau and the squad in favor of Palestine liberation, because the argument for Palestine liberation is the anti-colonial argument, which is ultimately just an anti-European, anti-dirty rotten white man argument to destroy anything resembling Western civilization.
That's what it's about.
Someone put it in a pithy way, which was, a lot of the left doesn't hate Israel because they're Jews, they hate Israel because they're white, and because the state of Israel appears to have a lot of resemblances to any other British colonial project, much like the United States, and the arguments that are being wielded right now against the state of Israel will, and in fact are currently being wielded, against the U.S.
as well.
That's not a perfect overlap of interest though, which is why I say the U.S.
interest in this war remains, it has always been and it remains, to contain the war.
And speaking of picking sides, Jon Stewart was just axed from Apple.
And he had this new show, it was called The Problem with Jon Stewart, his first big show since he left The Daily Show.
And the show gets cancelled pretty early.
Why did Apple TV cancel Jon Stewart?
There are two competing narratives.
One says they canceled him because he had low ratings.
The other narrative, clearly being leaked by his team, is that they canceled him because he wanted to criticize China and he wanted to criticize artificial intelligence.
And Apple is very warm with China and with artificial intelligence, so they had an ideological disagreement.
They shut him up.
Which is it?
Well, we got the numbers.
Some estimates put Jon Stewart's viewership On this Apple TV show, as low as 40,000 U.S.
homes.
That is nothing.
That is barely a blip.
Forget about compared to a network TV audience or even a cable TV audience.
Compared to a small podcast, those are bad numbers.
So, okay, he had the low ratings, but then the reports say that he was planning shows on China, on Israel actually too, and on AI.
And Apple, because it does a lot of business with China.
Apple, which would collapse if we decoupled with China.
And artificial intelligence obviously is important to Apple.
They don't like those topics, so they kill it.
Which is it?
Which destroyed Jon Stewart's show?
The answer is both.
It's obviously both.
Jon Stewart has always had low ratings.
He was a cultural phenomenon when he had the Daily Show on Comedy Central.
That show didn't get a lot of viewers.
It was relatively low rated, but the people who watched it tended to be journalists and the chattering political class concentrated in the coasts, very liberal, who had an outsized microphone.
So they made a big deal out of his show, even though relatively few people watched it in the country.
The low ratings can be forgiven.
As long as you are dancing to the tune that the liberal elite are playing.
That's the issue.
When John Stewart was dancing as the court jester of the liberal regime, which is what his job was at the Daily Show, they loved him, and they made a big deal out of him, and they made him famous, and they made him wealthy, even though not a lot of people watched his show.
But now that he's maybe turning against some of what The ruling class want, especially in China and AI, well now those low ratings are not going to be forgiven, and they're going to take away his fame, and they're going to take away his money.
And he's going to see how illusory all of those things actually were.
And he's going to learn a lesson that a lot of us have forgotten, which is true in politics, and it's true in business, and it's true in all of public life.
He who pays the piper calls the tune.
Speaking of dancing to other people's tune, I've got a very disturbing story that just came out.
And it's disturbing in that it's super creepy and spooky and kind of zombie-like and it's just in time for Halloween.
But it's actually a satisfying story because it vindicates a lot of old wisdom.
And the story is this.
Blood transfusions might change your personality.
A lot of people get blood transfusions.
There is scientific evidence that you don't just get blood and you don't just get platelets, you get an increased risk of certain diseases.
Okay, maybe you could say, well, it's just a protein or something was going along with the blood.
And you get potentially changes in your personality and your mood and your tastes.
And it's really, really weird.
Researchers at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden Published a major study that showed that a cause of spontaneous brain hemorrhage could be transmitted via blood transfusion.
As I said, that could just be some protein or something like that.
But it might go deeper than that, and there's a lot of evidence that it does go deeper.
Five years ago, a study by Geneva University reported that nearly half of patients reported changes in their behavior and values after receiving blood transfusions.
There have also been well-publicized stories of people who had organ transplants and then their tastes changed.
In the U.S., there was a 47-year-old woman who had a lung transplant from an 18-year-old and then immediately had a craving for beer and fried chicken.
Which were things that this woman had not previously craved, but that every 18-year-old in the country does crave.
The researchers interviewed seven people who had received blood transfusions for things like hip replacements and other surgeries.
They found out three of the seven believed that their personalities had changed.
One said he slept and dreamt a lot more than before.
Another said his sense of taste had changed.
He found this worrying.
He said, I hope that the donor's blood cannot take over.
This is Really great news, even though it's spooky and creepy, because this is a vindication of classical anthropology.
This is a vindication of the old way of viewing human nature.
Not the new way of viewing human nature.
The new way of viewing human nature is that we're all just machines, man.
We're like computers, plug and play, you know?
And we're just, we're like a hard drive.
And just like in different parts of a machine, you can just pull out our parts and they're interchangeable and you can plug them into new people and it's no big deal.
The classical understanding of human nature is not that.
The classical understanding of human nature is that we are an integrated whole, that we are a primary substance, that you can't just plug and play our different parts, like on a car.
You know, on a car, you can go and you take out a catalytic converter from one car, you can put it into another car, and it's going to work just fine.
You can pull out the transmission here, you can plug it in.
Because, to use the old terminology, a car, and all these other created things, they're just artifacts.
We make them, so they're not They're not totally integrated in the way that a human being is.
A human being being a primary substance made by God.
One problem for this old view of human nature in recent years has been that it seems like with organ transplants, we actually are kind of like the catalytic converter.
We actually are like a car or like any other artifact.
You just plug us and play us.
And there's so many people, especially prominent voices in the academy and in the government and in the cultural elite, who say, yeah, we're just machines.
We think we have free will.
We think we have souls.
We think we have desires and longings and meaning, but it's all just fake.
It's an illusion made by firing pistons in our brain, even the term pistons, you know, to compare it to a car.
And so you're just deluding yourself.
But maybe not.
Maybe our organs don't just plug and play like that.
Maybe actually it's all part of that one person.
And you could get a blood transfusion and things start to go a little haywire.
And you start craving chicken and beer.
Maybe they're really for us and we are one thing that is integrated.
Not just in our body, but take it one step further.
Maybe we're integrated body and soul.
Maybe we're actually not machines, but human beings.
Who knew?
Every wise person for all of history is the answer.
Until very recently, and then we said, those guys are dumb idiots, and we're modern, and we have cell phones, so we know that they're all wrong and we're right about everything.
Well, maybe not.
Maybe we actually are human beings.
Speaking of the vindication of traditional wisdom, this is a shocking headline.
If you're driving, you've got to pull over.
If you're standing up, please sit down.
If you take a deep breath.
Turns out that when the Kentucky Democrat Governor Beshear, during the COVID lockdowns, decided to let a bunch of criminals out of prison, turns out that those criminals that he let out of prison, they went on and committed more crimes.
I mean, how could you can't blame Andy Beshear here, right?
How could he have possibly seen it coming that people who are known for committing a lot of crimes If you let them out of their punishment, and you just set them free in society, they're going to commit more crimes.
How could any modern liberal who recognizes that no one is personally responsible for their crimes, and actually it's society's fault, and we need, the prison industrial complex is a terrible form of oppression and slavery, and actually we just need to give people hugs, and let them free, and let them be, they don't even have free will, we can't, anyway.
Who could have guessed?
Normal people is who could have guessed.
Ordinary, normal people who have the wisdom of the ages and even a modicum of common sense once again vindicated over the liberal elite.
We're looking pretty good, aren't we?
When you want to look really, really good, you got to check out GenuCell.
Right now, go to GenuCell.com slash NOLS.
Our friends over at GenuCell have launched a new product called GenuCell 3, which works fast on your under-eye bags and puffiness.
GenuCell 3 is smooth and luxurious, and it uses advanced technology to deliver complex vitamins and minerals directly to your face for instant hydration.
It's like Gatorade for your skin.
This new GenuCell technology keeps your skin looking young and healthy for years to come.
The GenuCell Fall Classics Package also includes a jawline treatment for a more firm neck and jawline, as well as GenuCell's Anti-Wrinkle Moisturizer and Deep Firming Serum.
Right now, go to GenuCell.com slash Knolls, K-N-O-W-L-E-S, for extra discounts on this amazing Fall Package.
Get your skin ready for the cold and dry weather.
If you don't look and feel your absolute best, You will get your money back, no questions guaranteed.
That is Genucel.com slash Knowles.
You know, I love this company.
I love the founder.
He's a Coptic Christian from Egypt who fled over here for the American dream.
Go to Genucel.com slash K-N-O-W-L-E-S.
My favorite comment yesterday is from Brodin McArthur, 3955, who says, I like to listen to Michael because he remains calm and collected during such crazy times.
I tend to get frustrated and he is my Xanax.
I think that's a compliment.
Michael Knowles, the human Xanax.
I don't, is that?
I will choose to take that as a compliment.
Thank you very much.
Nearly 70% of inmates released by Andy Beshear through commutations during COVID went on to re-offend, with some committing violent felonies like assault and homicide.
1,702 individuals whose sentences were commuted by Beshear in 2020.
The majority of them, 882, went on to commit felonies.
Then an additional 252 committed misdemeanors, leaving just over 500 who have not committed any crimes yet.
Turns out you can't fix problems just by wishing them away.
You can't.
And it turns out that refusing to punish criminals is not compassionate.
It's not charitable.
It's not compassionate.
Toward the future victims and the past victims, but especially the future victims of their crimes.
Had Bashir just done his job and been normal and locked up the criminals?
882?
No, I'm sorry more than over a thousand victims would not have been victimized.
Over a thousand people would not have been victims of crimes.
Some of which were violent felonies.
Homicide.
So people are dead because Andy Beshear thought it would be really compassionate to let criminals out of prison.
That's not compassionate.
It's not charitable.
It's not compassionate or charitable toward the criminals either.
Plato talks about this in Gorgias.
It turns out all these really old guys, they were right about a lot of things.
It is an act of love to punish a criminal because the criminal has something wrong with him.
It's kind of like a disease.
He's got defects of his will and his intellect, and he does bad things.
And when you do bad things, that harms you.
It harms your soul.
It will compromise your potential eternal reward.
I mean, ultimately, it could send you to hell.
But even if you don't believe in the soul, even if you don't believe in religion or anything that Every wise person throughout all of history has believed in.
Even if you don't believe in that, even just from the perspective of life on earth, if you're a criminal and you keep murdering people and doing drugs and getting involved with the wrong crowd and you're going to harm yourself, you're not going to live a good life, you're not going to be happy, you're going to wind up Either dead of an overdose or killed in some violent crime or you're going to wind up destroying your body.
You're going to be living a bad life.
Nobody says, you know, I love my child and I really want my child to have a good life and that's why I'm going to encourage my child to get involved in crime.
It's not good.
It's not good for these people either.
It is Cruelty to do this.
It is the kind of negligence that is so typical of liberalism, on the left and on the right, which says that other people, they're not my problem.
Other people, they're not my business.
No, I'm just going to do me and you do you and I'm an island and tie around to myself.
And how does it affect you?
Look, man, how does it affect you if we radically redefine some Social question.
How does it affect you if we radically social engineer some aspect of society?
Oh, because I live in society with other people and it warps the universe in which I am attempting to live a good and flourishing life.
It affects me because man is a political animal and social creature and we're not just islands and atoms floating in outer space.
How does it affect me?
Because some stupid criminal released by Andy Beshear could murder me, God forbid.
That's how it affects me.
We gotta ditch this crazy ideological hyper-individualism on the left and on the right.
It's different on the left and the right.
On the right, it's, don't take any of my money.
And on the left, it's, don't tell me what weird stuff I can do in back alleyways at night.
But the point of it is ultimately the same.
It's a denial of society, and it immiserates all of us.
Now, speaking of crime and punishment, a judge, a Democrat judge in Colorado, has just greenlit a campaign to keep Trump off the ballot in Colorado.
This judge, Sarah Wallace, was appointed by the Democrat governor, Jared Polis, and she has denied a motion by Trump and the Colorado GOP to throw out a lawsuit seeking to block Trump from appearing on the ballot in Colorado.
And why are they going to block Trump from appearing on the ballot?
Because he's an evil rapist, insurrectionist, Ukraine colluding, Russia colluding, mean old orange man who we really hate, and an invisible link in the Constitution that says that mean orange men can't be on the ballot.
I think that's pretty much the substance of the lawsuit.
And this Colorado judge says, okay, you can go ahead.
Or that's the substance of the campaign, rather.
And the judge says, yeah, the campaign can go ahead.
Sure.
Okay.
The last time we had a situation like this, I will remind you, was 1860.
People sometimes say that in 1860, Abraham Lincoln didn't appear on the ballot in the Southern states, which is not quite true because elections were conducted differently than they are today.
You didn't have a formal ballot on a computer screen or even just printed out.
It was the parties would produce the ballots and the GOP didn't even invest in the South because they were never going to win and GOP was a new party with not a lot of resources.
But the effect of it was basically that.
Abraham Lincoln was not a candidate that one could even really plausibly vote for in a lot of the country.
And then when he got elected president, that was a cause of the Civil War.
Because half the country felt that it didn't have any representation, it didn't really have any say whatsoever.
This is not an identical situation, but it's pretty close.
If the liberals succeed at kicking Donald Trump off the ballot in 2024, it's going to tell us two things.
One, it's going to tell us that Trump is obviously electable.
One of the silliest lines I hear is that Donald Trump can't win the general election.
He can't win a general election, which I know is false because he won at least one general election.
He did.
A lot of people who said the same thing in 2016, Donald Trump can never win a general election, they were quite surprised when he won the general election in 2016.
But then they use the dubious election of 2020 to say, well, we'll see now.
Actually, he can't win.
He could.
I'm not saying he will.
I'm just saying he could.
The fact that the Dems want to keep him off the ballot shows you They don't think it's going to be a slam dunk to defeat him at the ballot box.
Even with the voter harvesting, even with the drop boxes, even with all of their nonsense and all of their shenanigans that open the elections to fraud, they still are not convinced they can beat him at the ballot box.
So they want to prevent voters from even having the choice at the ballot box.
That's the first thing it's going to tell you.
The second thing it tells you is we are dangerously close to not having Much of anything in common as a country.
We are dangerously close to the conditions that we were at in 1860.
And I'm not one of these catastrophists who says that we're always going to be on the brink of civil war and we're all gonna, I'm certainly not encouraging civil war by any means, but it could happen.
Just like people sometimes say, do you think we're living in the end times?
My answer is, I don't think we are, but someone's gonna be living in the end times.
I guess we could be.
That's kind of how I feel about civil war.
I'm not saying that we're headed for civil war, but We could be.
Civil wars happen, and the liberals would appear to be cultivating the conditions to make it much more likely.
