A federal court just found six pro-lifers guilty for peacefully protesting and might sentence them to 11 years in prison, conservatives unwisely are going to war with Taylor Swift, and Elon Musk is going to turn us all into cyborg robots.
Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEl
Ep.1416
- - -
DailyWire+:
Unlock your Bentkey 14-day free trial here: https://bit.ly/3GSz8go
Become a DailyWire+ member to gain access to movies, shows, documentaries, kids entertainment and more: https://utm.io/ueMfc
Get your own Yes or No game here: https://bit.ly/3X6tlKY
- - -
Today’s Sponsors:
Birch Gold - Text "KNOWLES" to 989898, or go to https://birchgold.com/Knowles, for your no-cost, no-obligation, FREE information kit.
Renewal by Andersen - Shop Renewal by Andersen’s New Year’s Sales Event by Texting KNOWLES to 200-300
- - -
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 federal court has just convicted six pro-lifers of peacefully trying to discourage infanticide, an apparent crime that apparently carries up to 11 years in prison.
Here is a short clip from Greg Price of the supposed crime which occurred almost three years ago in Nashville.
You can see clearly that the pro-lifers are wielding their assault hymns while they assume the extremely threatening criss-cross applesauce sitting position.
That's enough of that.
More than a decade in prison, it brings to mind a question that I have raised before.
Is Joe Biden a more evil ruler than Vladimir Putin or Xi Jinping?
I know, I know.
Crazy.
Those guys are autocrats.
Xi Jinping persecutes Muslims.
Vladimir Putin tries to re-annex former Soviet territory.
I know, it's bad.
I'm not saying that isn't bad.
But Joe Biden is imprisoning people, lots of people, for peacefully suggesting that we stop murdering babies.
Is there anything more cartoonishly evil than that?
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is the Michael Knowles Show.
Welcome back to the show.
Elon Musk is going to turn us all into cyborg humanoids by hacking into our brains.
Maybe not all of us, but he's started to do it with one person.
We'll get to that in just a moment.
First though, what are these pro-lifers being convicted for?
What are they going to go to prison for?
It's for violating something called the F.A.C.E.
Act.
And the F.A.C.E.
Act is some dumb law that should obviously be repealed that was intended largely to protect abortion clinics from anyone ever, forget about exposing the crimes that take place in there, but even just demonstrating around them that the F.A.C.E.
Act is the shut-up pro-lifers who don't think we should slaughter babies act.
That's really what it's about.
But that's not all the F.A.C.E.
Act does.
Because if that were all that the law Explicitly endeavored to do, there's no way it ever would have passed.
Certainly not 20, 30 years ago when the Democrats at least paid lip service to being somewhat open to the cause of life.
So, as the excellent Senator Mike Lee from Utah points out, the FACE Act prohibits three things.
Blocking and vandalizing abortion clinics, yes.
And two, places of worship, and three, pregnancy centers.
As Senator Lee points out, guess how many face act violations of the second type the Biden administration has pursued?
Is your guess, I don't know, a thousand?
Is your guess a hundred?
Is it ten?
Is it one?
Zero.
Big, fat, nil.
That's how many.
And yet we know that there have been many attacks on places of worship.
A lot of churches have been vandalized, a lot of graffiti, a lot of synagogues have been attacked and vandalized.
Biden doesn't pursue any face act violations there, any protests outside, any blocking the access to go to church.
For goodness sakes, the federal government blocked access to go to church during the entirety of COVID.
Biden doesn't care about that at all.
Doesn't matter if it happened two years ago, five years ago, yesterday.
All he focuses on is stopping people from peacefully suggesting that perhaps we ought to maybe consider killing fewer babies every single year.
Very, very evil administration.
It reminds me of that Mitchell and Webb bit.
Where it's the two Nazi guys and they're kind of going over their uniforms and their insignia.
They say, you know, you ever think, is it possible that we're the baddies?
Are we the baddies?
I don't want to think that America's the baddies.
When you make it a matter of urgent national policy, number one priority, lock up anyone who says we shouldn't kill the babies, we start to look like the baddies.
And we got to stop it.
Joe Biden needs a lot of help.
He's not looking very good right now.
And so one suggestion to help Biden that has come from the Libs and from Republicans, it's come from MSNBC and it's also come from conservatives who are very fearful of this outcome, is that Joe Biden might team up with Taylor Swift to win the 2024 election.
Here is what the White House Press Secretary has to say about that possibility.
One idea that's been tossed around a bit in jest.
Sending the president to a stop on Swift's Eras tour.
So what would Swift Support give the president?
Any plans?
Any plans to go on tour?
So let me first say, I gotta be really mindful.
I'm a federal employee.
As you know, there's something called the Hatch Act, so certainly cannot speak to anything that is related to 2024 and upcoming elections.
So you gotta be super, super mindful.
Obviously, there are a lot of, I know, in my shop, in the press office shop, there are a lot of Swifties, if you will, fans of Taylor Swift.
And so I'm just gonna leave it there.
I'm not gonna get I'm not gonna get into the President's schedule at all from here as it relates to the 2024 elections.
The first time the Hatch Act has been invoked in regards to Taylor Swift.
Corinne Jean-Pierre, thank you for your time.
Let me translate that for you.
Yes, we really want Taylor Swift to endorse Joe Biden.
Corinne Jean-Pierre!
Stumps for Biden all the time, implicitly and sometimes explicitly.
But whenever there is a question that she doesn't want to answer, all of a sudden she is a strict, letter-of-the-law, Hatch Act abider.
The Hatch Act, which says that government employees can't engage in campaign-related activities.
But, you know, in my press office, we sure got a lot of Swifties there.
Please!
Please, Taylor!
Please, Travis!
Please bail us out!
We can't even if we...
Rig this election from sea to shining sea.
We're still not very confident about it.
Of course not, because Biden's numbers are not great right now.
So they want it.
Yeah, of course they do.
Plenty of Democrats want to team up with Taylor Swift, and Taylor Swift didn't endorse Joe Biden in 2020, and Joe Biden did run against Donald Trump.
They have good reason to think that she might do that.
Though there's good reason to think she might not want to be that involved in this election.
Namely, she's the biggest pop star on earth, she's become a billionaire this year, and while she is liberal, she voices some liberal political views, she's not particularly flamboyant about it.
Even her endorsement of Biden was somewhat tepid.
I think she posted a picture of herself with a Joe Biden cookie.
That was about it.
Which brings me to my fellow conservatives who I think are completely misplaying the Taylor card.
We'll get to that in one second.
First though, I want to talk to you about Birchgold.
Right now text Knolls to 989898.
Between election season coming later this year, North Korea testing missiles, Iran increasing its aggression, there is a lot of instability as we plunge into the new year.
How do you protect your family in the midst of all that chaos?
A great place to start is by protecting your savings.
It is not too late to invest in gold with Birch Gold Group today.
Unlike many other investments, gold is often viewed as a safe haven investment during turbulent times by providing a hedge against inflation and economic uncertainty.
Birch Gold!
We'll help you convert your existing IRA or 401k into a tax-sheltered IRA in gold, and it doesn't cost you a penny out of pocket.
While diversification does not eliminate risk entirely, Birch Gold's experts can help you manage and reduce, providing a more resilient foundation for your financial well-being.
I would strongly encourage you to talk to one of their most trusted experts today.
Some great conservatives, many of them good friends of mine, I think, are making a mistake.
They want to go to war with Taylor Swift.
The most extreme version is they're arguing that Taylor Swift is an op.
She's a psy-op.
She was constructed in a lab somewhere at Langley, and she was made famous and wealthy over the course of 15 years for the purpose of endorsing Joe Biden in 2024, and that's what they're going to use her for.
That's the really extreme version.
The less extreme version is this woman, she's a big lib, and we shouldn't encourage big libs in pop culture.
She's everything wrong with society.
We need to stop our daughters from listening to her devilish music.
I've got an unpopular opinion here.
Taylor Swift is temperamentally conservative.
I know she probably said something stupid about abortion once.
I know she makes vague allusions to the LGBT LMNOP community.
I know, I get it, I know.
Yeah, she's a millennial white girl catering to an audience of affluent, mostly white girls, though obviously some other people too because she's the biggest pop star on earth.
Yeah.
She's also pretty.
She's not covered up in tattoos and piercings and mutilations.
She's not shrieking and screaming all the time.
For being the biggest pop star in the world, she doesn't actually call that much attention to herself.
I couldn't even really tell you what her voice sounds like because she doesn't talk all that much and make grand political statements and speeches.
She's not seen getting dragged out of nightclubs or having some kind of meltdown.
The big time now that we see Taylor Swift is when she's kissing her football player boyfriend on the field.
The girl is as American as apple pie.
And so I understand.
There's a distinction to be had, I know, between being ideologically conservative or philosophically conservative and being temperamentally conservative.
But I can work with the latter.
Who would you rather your daughter listen to?
Doja Cat, who's doing little demon jiggles?
Or Taylor Swift, who's singing a banal ditty about getting dumped one time?
More than one time, I guess.
Who would you rather your daughter listen to?
Lil Nas X twerking on the devil?
Or Taylor Swift, who's gonna just like shake it off, shake it off?
Obviously Taylor Swift.
She's all American.
She's conservative.
She's pretty and she's normal.
And I know that she's a lib, but she's already the biggest star in the world and I just don't think it's smart for conservatives to make an enemy of her and an enemy of her fans.
Her fans are, broadly speaking, pretty normal people.
And we should be normal too.
And we should be happy that there is one pop star out there who's not actively degrading the culture every single time she takes a breath and sings about it.
Okay?
That does not seem like a good idea.
The woman conducts herself with class.
She's dating a football player.
It's American.
Let's be on board with that.
Okay, let's try to mitigate the potential damage of, you know, Biden-Swift 2024.
Now, turning to women who are not temperamentally conservative, the chief diversity officer of Harvard University stopped the presses, pull over your car, turns out that woman was just caught plagiarizing her academic work.
I know, I know, it's shocking.
Because Harvard, you know, would never be caught up in a plagiarism scandal.
And more to it, Chief diversity officers are held to the absolute highest academic standards, right?
When I think of people who get their jobs through merit and merit alone, I think of chief diversity officers, a position that did not exist five years ago and should not exist because it's a shakedown racket.
Yeah, they got her.
The woman's name is Sherry Ann Charleston.
She's Harvard's first Chief Diversity and Inclusion Officer, of course, because the position wasn't real.
It's still not real, but it didn't even exist on payroll until just a handful of years ago.
Not only did she plagiarize, remember Claudine Gay, the recent former president of Harvard, she plagiarized something like half of her academic work.
This woman has plagiarized part of every single publication that she has ever written.
Forty in total.
Forty instances of plagiarism in total.
Looks like the chief diversity officer had a more prolific publication record than the former president of Harvard.
But I guess it's because she was just cutting and pasting a little bit more.
This all thanks to reporting from the Washington Free Beacon, Aaron Siberian.
It's a great journalistic work being done out there.
Cherry on top, this woman served on the committee, the search committee, that picked Claudine Gay.
The place is so rotten, we've got to just keep picking at this.
This is so, this is like shooting fish in a barrel.
Chris Rufo, Aaron Siberian, some other conservative journalists started this up.
And now, we just pick them all off.
Just get them all fired.
It's the perfect tactic.
Because plagiarism is perfectly adapted to these types of people.
These types of people, the pro-DEI, the chief diversity officer, the race hustling ideologues of the left who get installed in these positions, they are, by definition, poorly educated and dishonest.
They're poorly educated.
If they were capable of doing real academic work, they would be in a real academic field.
They would have a real academic job.
But they can't.
They're not capable of that.
So they end up doing these fake pseudo-academic fields because it's easier to get good grades.
And here's where the dishonesty part comes in.
Here's where the deception part comes in.
It's just a big hustle.
It's a big racket.
Where you can just aggrandize your own fake victimhood, and the more you do that, the more lucrative it is for you.
So, these people self-select as being the least educated, most dishonest people in academia, and we know that.
It's on their business card, okay?
Let's just pluck them all up.
Just look down the publication list of all these people, throw it into ChatGPT, throw it into some AI program, and say, find me the plagiarism.
It's going to come up for, like, all of them.
Okay?
And that's a great way to do it.
The liberals will say this is a cynical approach.
They'll say, you've got an end in mind.
And you're just backfilling it.
You're justifying the end in mind, which is to fire all these people, with the justification that they engaged in plagiarism.
To which I say, you're darn tootin', you bet I am.
I'm not saying that the ends justify the means.
I'm not saying that good ends justify immoral means.
There's nothing immoral about exposing plagiarism, about exposing a serious, the highest academic offense you can possibly commit.
And it's a good academic end.
These people should not be in these positions.
Claudine Gay, this woman Sherry Ann Charleston, probably most of these academic administrators, 90% of whom didn't even exist.
Their jobs weren't at the universities 10, 20 years ago.
Just get rid of all of them.
That's the left's power center.
We've got a major weakness here.
They still feel some degree of shame over that weakness, at least publicly they express it.
Get them all.
Love it.
Many more where that came from.
Now, let's turn away from Harvard toward a good school, the Catholic University of America.
Has just fired a professor that we talked about on the show, I think, yesterday.
A professor in the psychology department, a woman named Melissa Goldberg, she was a psych lecturer, invited an abortion doula named Rachel Carboneau.
The abortion doula is like a regular doula, which is just a hippie term for a midwife or a helper at a birth, except instead of helping the women give birth, she helps the women kill their kids.
And she does all sorts of weird witchcraft.
She does Reiki.
And again, if, you know, witchcraft you, if Hogwarts wanted to bring this woman to go give a lecture, I guess I would understand it.
But the Catholic University of America, that doesn't make a lot of sense.
So, really, really good news.
Catholic University has announced that they have not only scrapped this lecturer lady, the abortion doula, but they also fired the professor who brought her.
And that is great.
Give me three cheers for cancel culture, baby!
Because this woman obviously has no place at the Catholic University of America.
If you could be so misguided, so ignorant, or so deceptive and subversive as to bring a witch who kills babies to give a lecture on human life to your Catholic University class, then you have no place at that school.
And so I'm really, really glad that they did this.
We need more of this.
You know, there was cancel culture, and then the right said we need to cancel cancel culture, the right being influenced by libertarianism and left-wing ideas like neutrality.
They said, oh, we've got to cancel cancel culture.
But I've got a third suggestion, which is, no, we should cancel the libs.
Cancel them because, as I mentioned in my book Speechless, I guess I don't have a bell on the road, you are going to live under some standards or others, so they should be good standards, not bad ones.
They should be true, not false.
One of the big problems that we deal with in our society is identity.
Everyone is always chattering about identity, racial identity, sexual identity, this identity, that identity, but no one knows who they are.
So the identities are always shifting.
We're all Rachel Dolezal in this culture, okay?
Am I this kind of oppressed group?
No, I'm that kind of oppressed group.
No, I'm this.
No, I'm that.
There's a guy, a guy I know, just got married to a woman, but he refers to himself as queer.
Still, after he got married to the woman, and I thought, how?
He's white?
He's married to a woman.
He's relatively wealthy.
He's extremely well-educated, well-credentialed.
How is he queer?
But I realize he's queer because He needs some identity.
If you're just like a straight, rich, white guy who's married to a woman, that's nothing to you.
You need a struggle.
You need some deeper identity.
So then you say, OK, I'm queer.
What does queer mean?
I don't know.
It means you're gay.
No, you're not gay.
You're bi.
No, you're not bi.
No, you're a pygmy midget.
No, you're not this.
You're a Zoroastrian.
And it just goes on and on and on.
And the reason people don't know who they are is because the culture is turned away from God.
I don't mean that in any kind of simplistic way.
I mean that as a matter of God's definition.
Moses in the burning bush.
Moses talks to God, who is speaking through the burning bush, and he says, who shall I tell them you are?
And God says, I am that I am.
Being himself.
I am that I am.
And so, as a priest friend of mine pointed out, if you ground your identity In I Am That I Am, in being, you will know who you are.
And if you don't, you will be left with a pathetic question, which is, who am I?
And your identity is going to go on and on and on.
The Catholic University, I'm proud to report, knows what it is.
It's a Catholic University.
They're going to teach Catholic things.
They're going to not teach non-Catholic things.
Would that we could all have that clarity of identity?
We on the right, we can't even do that.
We said, no, we're a huge tent.
We let everybody in.
Oh yeah, we got transgender communists and every... You can be conservative and be... Yeah!
We're everybody.
We're everything and we're nothing.
Okay.
Well, that's how we get to the confusion that we have now.
Speaking of identity, people's identity might be changing because Elon Musk is going to turn us into cyborgs.
Musk has just announced the first implantation into a human being of a neural link chip.
Neuralink is the technology that Musk has been working on for a long time and made a big leap forward in it about three, four years ago.
He said, okay, we've got the chip.
We're doing tests.
Still a lot of people were skeptical of ever going to a human.
Well, now we've got a chip in a human.
The chip is the size of a quarter.
The chip sends out brain signal data to an app.
The app decodes the data and translates it into actions.
Meaning you can control devices with your thoughts.
People who are, say, extremely paralyzed, you know, not just they have trouble moving around, like they're just totally paralyzed, they might be able to communicate.
They might be able to communicate faster than you can communicate.
This kind of technology could help the paralyzed communicate, it could help the blind to see, it could help the deaf to hear, and it could meld human beings with robots and open us up to hacking.
Hacking our own identities or being hacked by, you know, the Chinese Communist Party or something.
Is it a good thing?
It's going to help people who have really severe injuries?
Or is it a bad thing and it's going to destroy humanity and bring on the apocalypse?
I will answer that question for you in just a moment.
First though, they say the eyes, that we're talking about here like the blind seeing, the eyes are the windows to the soul.
They also say that the windows are the windows to the house.
Which is why you gotta check out Renewal by Anderson.
Right now, text KNOLLS to 200-300.
If your house is feeling a little chilly right now in the thick of winter, you may need to consider window replacements.
And I get it.
For most homeowners, window replacement is not something they've ever done before, and it's a daunting task.
Well, luckily, There is a company that will do the work for you.
Renewal by Anderson is your one-stop shop for window design, manufacture, and installation.
Windows play a crucial role in regulating indoor temperatures.
If you notice a spike in your heating or cooling bills, it might be due to inefficient windows.
Don't put it off any longer.
Renewal by Anderson offers limited, fully transferable, and best-in-the-nation warranty coverage.
I have heard unsolicited from a carpenter who says, That Renewal by Anderson makes the best windows that he sees on any houses that he works on, and coincidentally, I have a cousin that works for them, and he's been telling me for years how great they are.
Renewal by Anderson is offering a free in-home consultation on quality, energy-efficient, affordable windows or patio doors with special financing options.
Text NOLS to 200-300 for a free consultation to save $375 off every window and $775 off every door.
These savings won't last long, so be sure to check it out.
Text NOLS to 200-300.
That is NOLS to 200-300.
Texting Privacy Policy and Terms and Conditions posted to textplain.us.
Texting enrolls for recurring automated text marketing messages.
Message data rates may apply.
Replies stop to opt-out.
Go to widowappointmentnow.com for full offer details.
Back in 2021, Elon Musk said that once Neuralink develops, you could probably save your brain like a video game.
Like, you know, do-do-do-do-do, right now it's late January of 2024.
Save Okay, and then, you know, you keep living, you know, a month or so, and then, God forbid, something happens to you.
Okay, well, you already saved the file, so you're gonna lose your memories from February 2024, but you got the file, and you can just reanimate yourself, and you'll basically be you.
You'll lose a few memories, but you'll be yourself.
Whatever you means.
That's what he promised, and he does seem to be achieving a lot of his transhumanist goals.
So, is this good or bad?
Some people saying, this is awful, we, you know, kill it, shoot it, shoot the technology, we don't want this, it's going to bring on the end of the world and destroy humanity.
Some saying, well, what's the matter with you?
You're a Luddite.
This is a way to help people who are severely disabled to be able to live better lives.
Which is it?
Well, that's the distinction.
I think you've hit on it.
That is the distinction.
If this technology is used to restore the functioning that is proper to human beings, if it is used in a way that is medicinal and therapeutic, then it could be a good thing.
If, however, the technology is used to augment humanity, to transform humanity, not to fix a problem, But to create a new type of human.
Then I think that's probably very, very bad.
You can think of it as the difference between adoption and surrogacy.
Adoption is a beautiful, wonderful thing because it extends through race and charity.
The ability to fix a problem.
The problem being a child born out of wedlock, a child who potentially could have been killed through abortion, a child who is without parents.
And the child gets parents.
And that fixes a problem.
It's a beautiful, charitable, graceful act.
Surrogacy is when you breed babies and treat human beings as commodities and sell them on the open market.
Very, very bad.
It's like the difference between a dog shelter and a breeder.
Except there's nothing immoral about breeding puppies.
There is something immoral about breeding humans.
Humans are different from puppies.
Humans are morally significant creatures.
And if you augment humanity through this new technology such that it's unrecognizable, well, you may have just abolished humanity.
You might be committing an immoral action on that immoral creature.
That's it.
And the problem right now is the way Elon Musk talks about it.
It's a little bit of both.
Which is it?
Well, the answer is going to be that we need a lot of regulation on this.
Industry regulation would be good, self-regulation from the companies developing this, I guess it's mostly Elon, and government regulation.
I know, words you're not supposed to say if you're a right-winger, but when we're talking about abolishing man, when you're talking about transcending Homo sapiens and turning Homo sapiens into Homo Deus, God, man, as Yuval Harari, a darling intellectual, public intellectual on the left, suggests, then I think you need a little regulation.
Now, speaking of transhumanism, dreadful, dreadful story coming out of Montana.
A Montana family is losing custody of its 14-year-old daughter for opposing transgender ideology.
This Montana family says, That their daughter is a girl and not a boy, because girls can't become boys, and they've now lost their daughter.
This is because the school that the daughter went to said that the girl was suicidal, so they called Child Protective Services.
And Child Protective Services, in its infinite wisdom, these government bureaucrats said, oh, well the cure is to treat your daughter like a boy.
And then what?
Put her on puberty blockers?
And then what?
Put her on cross-sex hormones?
And then what?
Chop off her body parts?
And then what?
And do things that there is no evidence would improve her life at all, and even if there were, which there isn't, are obviously false?
Yeah.
And if you don't do that, parents, we're going to take your kid from you.
Your little kid.
Your little 14-year-old kid.
And that's exactly what they did.
We want to believe That this trans issue is a sideshow?
Oh, it's just some weirdos who want to swim on the girls swimming team, and I don't really care about girls swimming.
Oh, it's just some stuff going on in the bathroom in San Francisco.
There's weird stuff going on in all the bathrooms in San Francisco.
I don't care.
Montana.
Fourteen-year-olds being taken away from their parents.
Because the parents believe what everyone has believed for all of human history until six or seven years ago.
Happening now, in pretty conservative places.
Same thing happened in California, not too long ago, to a California mother, and ended extremely tragically because the daughter, after being run through the gamut by the pro-trans people, and being told she should trans, and she, very sadly, ended up killing herself.
Here's the mother's testimony.
My name is Abigail Martinez.
It has been three years and 164 days since I lost my daughter, Jaylee.
I miss her every single day.
Let me tell you how she died.
My daughter was murdered by a gender ideology.
CPS took my daughter when she was 16 years old.
It was helped by her public school counselor, an LGBTQ group rise, and another trans-identified girl.
My daughter was taken from her loving home because the state of California claimed I was abusive.
For not affirming her trans identity.
I lost my daughter over a name and a pronoun.
Even after I promised to call her a male name, it wasn't enough.
My daughter was not a boy trapped in a girl's body.
She had mental health issues.
Obviously.
Of course.
You know, if you think you're the opposite sex, obviously you have a mental health issue.
Much like anorexia.
If you think you're really fat, but you're really skinny, you've got a mental issue.
You've got a defective perception.
And usually other mental health issues as well.
What happens?
Steak comes in, says, oh no, no mom, sorry.
Oh, you're a Christian?
Yeah, we're going to take your kid, and then we're going to push your kid into extremely harmful ideologies that statistically will very likely lead them to kill themselves.
Which, we warned you, we said if you don't do exactly what we say, your kid might kill himself or herself.
Yeah, well, it turns out actually they're just as likely or more likely to kill themselves if they do what we tell them to do.
But, you know, anyway, we're the state and you're not the state.
And what, you're a Christian?
What, you're a Jew?
What, you're a Muslim?
What, you're a reasonable agnostic?
What, you're an even semi-reasonable atheist?
You believe anything that people believed until around 2015?
Yeah?
Nope?
You don't get your kids anymore then?
Happening right now.
What's the answer to this?
The only answer that could possibly fix this problem is for the good of society, and especially for the good of the poor people who have fallen prey to this confusion, to eradicate transgenderism from public life entirely, the whole preposterous ideology at every level.
Because it has to be defined in law.
What a man is has to be defined in law.
We were talking about how no one knows their identity anymore, that's behind a lot of this trans stuff.
If we as a society can't define what a man is and what a woman is, then we can't do very much of anything.
We, the reasonable people trying to figure this out, we will be rendered impotent.
And very bad actors will not be rendered impotent.
They will impose their definitions.
Because there will be order.
There will be definitions.
The law, some kind of law will be enforced.
Because we live in society and people have to make decisions.
And people have to move on and do things.
So if we are struck impotent, we the conservatives, well, we don't want to be telling people, you know, Oh, you live your life, you do you, do whatever you want in your own bedroom, just don't make me pay for it or whatever.
You know, you can put on a dress and call yourself Sally, Jim.
Okay, that's going to be codified into the law.
And the conclusion of that is not going to be some big burly fetishist going out and, you know, getting his jollies off marching down the street in a tutu.
The conclusion of that is going to be the state coming in and taking your kids away from you because you don't want to pretend that your little son is a girl.
That's the conclusion.
So are we going to grow the anatomical features to actually enforce that or not?
Don't think it's so well we'll cross that bridge when we get to it.
We're on the bridge.
The bridge is here.
Now, speaking of eradication, turning from eradicating ideology to eradicating actual people, Joe Biden is mulling his response.
To the Iran-backed terrorists.
Is he going to launch an attack and eradicate this actual group of people?
Is he going to go target the mullahs in Tehran?
This is obviously in response to the Iran-backed terror attack on an American base which left three American soldiers dead.
What's he going to do?
A lot of war hawks Are invoking the ghost of Ronald Reagan.
Hear this all the time.
Most people do not want war with Iran.
Most people do not want the U.S.
to get bogged down in another Mideastern war because we did it for over two decades and we didn't appear to have accomplished very much at the end of it.
And you can blame that on Joe Biden or you can blame that on George Bush, but whichever political leader you want to blame it on, that's what people are seeing.
And so, You've got, on the one hand, the Doves on the left and the right saying, we don't want to be involved, bring the troops home, let's stop being involved everywhere on Earth.
And then you got the Warhawks saying, whatever happened to peace through strength?
What would Ronald Reagan do?
And there's a meme going around right now.
They're saying, 1988, Iran mined an American ship.
U.S.
ship hit with an Iranian mine.
He gets blown up.
There was no loss of life, thankfully.
And what did Reagan do?
He sunk half the Iranian Navy.
That's what he did.
Good old Gipper back in the day.
Where'd that gumption go?
Where'd that cojones go?
First of all, the Iranian Navy is like three ships, okay?
They don't have the most robust force in the world.
But what did he do?
He sank two Iranian oil platforms, three warships, several boats, and he took down two fighter jets.
So, you know, that's a pretty robust response.
That's true.
And they're all going to point to that.
Well, let's rewind a little bit.
1983.
This is probably a more apt analog.
1983, Iranian-backed militants attacked U.S.
troops in the Beirut barracks and killed 241 U.S.
troops.
Two hundred forty one.
That's a lot of U.S.
troops.
And what did Reagan do?
Nothing.
No, not nothing.
He didn't retaliate.
So that's the nothing.
And then he pulled all of the U.S.
troops out of Lebanon.
And you might say, well, he shouldn't have done that.
He should have retaliated.
I'm just telling you, what did Reagan do?
It's complicated.
And we play this game on the right all the time.
Who gets to be the most like Ronald Reagan?
Who's the... No, I'm the interpreter of Ronald Reagan.
No, I'm the interpreter of Ronald Reagan.
You especially see this with the Squishes.
All these Squishes, many of whom hated Ronald Reagan at the time, now they're the standard bearer of Reagan conservatism 40 years later.
But no, it's a little more complicated than that.
And rather than just try to dig up people who have been dead for decades, I think we need to answer, bringing eternal principles to changing political circumstances, what we're going to do right now.
But if you really want to know what Reagan would do in this situation, since we are digging up the body of Ronald Reagan, we do have the ghost coming out here.
Seems to me very clear the analog is, do not start a war with Iran.
If you're Reagan, you just pull out.
A lot of people don't want war, including the Libs.
We'll get to them in a second.
First, though, guys, this is a no-brainer.
You want to protect your kids from the leftist indoctrination that is rampant in the establishment media?
Here's how you do it.
Start a 14-day free trial to BentKey, the new kids entertainment app from The Daily Wire.
BentKey is the only streaming app that offers high-quality, family-friendly shows that reflect your beliefs.
BentKey features amazing characters and timeless stories that will spark your kids' imagination and curiosity with hundreds of episodes that your kids will love and you can trust.
With new episodes streaming every Saturday morning.
Remember Saturday morning cartoons?
Well, they're back, baby!
And they're better than ever.
But don't take my word for it.
See for yourself.
You can try BentKey for free for 14 days.
No catch.
No gimmick.
No hidden fees.
Just fabulous content that your kids will love and you can trust.
All you have to do is use the code UNLOCK at BentKey.com and you will get 14 days of unlimited access to BentKey's world of adventure.
Go to BentKey.com.
Use code UNLOCK at sign up to start your trial.
Today.
My favorite comment yesterday is from Levi Warren 6222 who says, Ilhan Omar saying we are brothers and sisters worries me considering her relationship to her brother.
That's a good point.
One does not wish to, some of you might wish to be like a brother of Ilhan Omar.
I don't know.
The unmarried ones.
Maybe you do.
I don't know if you do.
Maybe you do.
I don't know.
But you're right.
Most of us, we don't want to be like a brother of Ilhan.
I agree.
I totally agree with that.
On this issue of the U.S.
getting more or less involved in the war in the Middle East, there is, oddly enough, a consensus now.
You've got most of the GOP base saying, no thank you.
You've got some of the prominent GOP players saying, no thank you.
You've got a lot of the left-wing base, probably most of it, Saying no thank you.
You even have a host on MSNBC, maybe not openly, but when she gets caught on a hot mic on her own show, Joy Reid on MSNBC, you hear what she really thinks about Joe Biden's response to the Middle East.
Over the weekend, President Biden said he's ready to take action if Congress is serious about solving the border issue.
If that bill were the law today, I'd shut down the border right now and fix it quickly.
And Congress needs to get it done.
Starting another f***ing war.
He's still trying to kill the deal.
Starting another effing war.
Uh-oh.
Look, this happens sometimes.
When you're on air, you cut to a clip, and then you think your mic is cut.
So I will, let's say, I could have done it during this clip.
You cut to the clip, and then, I don't know, I need to blow my nose.
Or I need to go yell at Professor Jacob, or producer Mr. Ben Davies, or whatever I'm going to do, right?
You do it, and then you hope you're off.
But sometimes they leave the microphone on.
Beautifully here, she's expressing her real feelings about Joe Biden right now.
This is a Democrat hack.
Joy Reid is as Dem-hack as it gets.
She's going, here we go, Joe Biden again, starting another effing war.
This guy driving me crazy, I'm gonna pull my hair out, I hate this guy.
Everyone, everyone is sick of Joe Biden.
Everybody.
Your uncle, your co-workers, the Republicans, the independents, even the big libs on MSNBC.
The guy is in trouble.
He's begging Taylor Swift to campaign with him.
Bad shape.
That's very good news for Donald Trump, especially because Donald Trump... Donald Trump remade the GOP in a lot of different ways.
And he didn't, you know, make a hard break from history, a total destruction of the GOP, as all the squishes and the never-Trumpers want to say.
Actually, what Donald Trump did, inasmuch as he changed the GOP, was to restore it to what it had always been.
The GOP, for most of its history, was skeptical of foreign intervention, was cautious in the use of military force abroad.
That changed a little bit with the neocons toward the end of the 20th century and the early 21st, but most of the time was pretty restrained, up to and including Ronald Reagan, saying, no thanks, we don't need to be in Lebanon.
On tariffs?
The GOP was founded on tariffs.
It was a protectionist party for most of its history.
Even when the free traders took over at the end of the 20th century, you still had massive steel tariffs coming up under Ronald Reagan.
You still had George W. Bush raising tariffs.
And then, obviously, Trump makes it a big deal.
On immigration, GOP had always been restrictionist until the squishes got control at the end and they said, oh, we need unlimited migration.
It's just got to be legal and we can give amnesty to all these illegals and what.
So Trump restored it.
The war part is really big though.
The GOP, the conservatives were more restrained in their foreign policy.
And that's the popular position right now.
They told me, if I voted for Trump in 2020, We would get another war in the Middle East.
And they were exactly right.
I voted for Trump in 2020.
We got another war in the Middle East.
This is a huge winning issue for Trump right now.
Sorry, for the Republicans and the presumptive Republican nominee who's obviously Donald Trump.
Major, major losing issue for Joe Biden.
Don't believe me?
Take it from the horse's mouth.
That horse being Joy Reid on MSNBC.
Now turning to even less Articulate, left-wing spokesladies.
Corinne Jean-Pierre, over at the White House, was just asked about a very inconvenient conflict in the way that Joe Biden has talked about the border.
You see, because when talking about how Donald Trump dealt with the border, Corinne Jean-Pierre and the White House and Joe Biden said that it was very, very racist.
If you ever want to shut down the border at all, very, very racist.
But then, when Joe Biden starts to talk about potentially shutting down the border, that is different.
Somehow.
Back in the winter of 2018 and the spring of 2019, President Trump vowed to shut down the border with Mexico using almost the identical language that the president used on Friday.
Many, many, if not most, if not practically all Democrats called that xenophobic and even racist.
Why shouldn't people make the same conclusion about this President's threat to shut down the entire border with Mexico?
So we believe the new enforcement tools that currently don't exist, that will be -- we believe that will be part of this bipartisan agreement will be fair.
We believe it'll -- yes, it'll be tough, but it will be fair.
There are different definitions, right, of what that looks like, of what actually shutting down the border looks like, right?
So we're going to let them work through it.
We don't know what that looks like exactly, right?
What we are asking for, what the president wants to see, is that we deal with the challenges at the border.
There are not different definitions of shutting down the border.
Shutting has a clear meaning.
Down the border.
Those are all pretty clear concepts.
But she knows there's no... Here, I'll give you the answer.
How is it that when Trump does something, it's racist, but when Biden does the exact same thing, it's not racist?
Trump is Trump, and Biden is Biden.
That's their answer.
I'm not being glib.
That's it.
That's their real answer.
You know how black people can't be racist?
That's what they say.
They can, obviously, but they say black people can't be racist because racism is when white people do bad thing, or do a thing that we just disapprove of in any way, or really do anything at all.
That's racism.
In the definition, They say racism is when white person does such and such to black person.
Well, the same thing is true here for Democrats and Republicans.
In the definition, Democrats can't be racist and Republicans are racist.
So what's the solution to this?
Some Republicans want to try to flip it on the Democrats and say, no, you're the real racists.
You know, you actually, when you really think about it, you're the real racists.
I don't think that really works.
I don't think the term means much of anything at all.
I'm not sure that it ever did mean much of anything at all.
If now racism means you think that white people are entitled to any rights or respect in society, which is I think what the Democrats mean by it, then just forget about it.
Or if it means that you, I don't know, you recognize that there are different races, I think that's what they also mean, at least when white people do it.
So whatever it is, we should forget about that.
Okay, we oppose injustice, we oppose cruelty, we think that things ought to be fair, so we support all those, but you'll never win with racists.
You'll never win using the Democrats' words.
You'll never win using their framing.
You gotta give people a new framing to see the world in a new and more accurate way.
