Ep. 1779 - Dem Congressman Defends Aborting Christ on Joe Rogan
A “Christian” Democrat congressman makes a very anti-Christian argument on Joe Rogan, Hunter Biden gives a sobering piece of advice to liberals, and a creepy new product promises to secretly stream your entire day.
Click here to join the member-exclusive portion of my show: https://bit.ly/4biDlri
Ep.1779
- - -
DailyWire+:
Join millions of people who still believe in truth, courage, and common sense at https://DailyWirePlus.com
Ben Shapiro’s new book, “Lions and Scavengers,” drops September 2nd—pre-order today at https://dailywire.com/benshapiro
GET THE ALL-NEW YES OR NO EXPANSION PACK TODAY: https://bit.ly/41gsZ8Q
- - -
Today's Sponsors:
Birch Gold - Text KNOWLES to 989898 for your free information kit.
Balance of Nature - Go to https://balanceofnature.com and use promo code KNOWLES for 35% off your first order PLUS get a free bottle of Fiber and Spice.
Jeremy's Razors - Head to https://jeremysrazors.com/legend and subscribe today.
- - -
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
- - -
Privacy Policy: https://www.dailywire.com/privacy
With Christianity rising once again to play a dominant role in popular American politics, Democrats are seeking to control the narrative by sending some heretic state representative onto Joe Rogan to argue, I kid you not, that the holy mother of God had every right to abort the Messiah.
I don't, in the craziest Hollywood version of a political party recognizing a vulnerability, trying to win over the voters that they're losing, I could not possibly imagine a stupider thing for Democrats to do.
So we'll get into what he says.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is the Michael Knowles Show.
Welcome back to the show.
Do you ever think there's just not enough content these days?
You know, you say the one problem with our modern society, there's not enough content.
Well, a company has a solution, which is glasses that allow you to secretly record everything in public, in private, everywhere, and then live stream it and just have more and more content everywhere.
I have many pearls of wisdom for you, but first you have to text Knowles, Kenneth WLES, to 98-98-98.
It is very easy to look at our government right now and say things are moving in the right direction.
The economy is looking good.
The panic cans are totally disproven.
That's wonderful.
What about your personal finances?
Your personal finances are your problem.
You need to take care of them.
That is why tens of thousands of Americans are buying gold now from Birch Gold.
In the past 12 months, the value of gold has increased by 40%.
As a little bit of a gold bug myself, I'm quite happy about that.
Central banks continue to bolster demand for gold by buying in record quantities, and global instability and tension is the highest in decades.
But you can find peace of mind in gold.
Birch Gold makes it extremely easy to convert an existing IRA or 401k into a tax-sheltered IRA in physical gold.
Or just buy some to store at home.
Text my name, K-N-O-W-L-E-S, to 98.98.98.
Birch Gold will send you a free info kit on gold.
There's no obligation, only useful information.
With an A-plus rating with the Better Business Bureau, tens of thousands of happy customers, it is time for you to take control of your savings today.
Do it.
Text the word Knowles, KNOWLES, to 9898-98 today.
Religion is back in politics.
It is back in politics in a way that we have not seen in 25 years at least.
Religion went away from politics for a while.
I mean, you can never really take religion away from politics because all politics is ultimately religious.
But overt appeals to Christianity, to God, even to virtue and morality, that went away for a while.
In the 2000s, especially after 9-11, the secularists and the atheists used this as an opportunity to try to kick God out of the public square.
And this was the rise of Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins and Daniel Dennett and Sam Harris.
And atheism was cool and religion wasn't cool.
And politicians in both parties took note.
So the right started speaking in much more secular terms, started speaking in much more libertarian kind of terms, ideological terms.
The religious right from the 1990s kind of fell a little bit by the wayside.
The left hates God and hates religion.
And so that's been true since the French Revolution.
So they were happy as clams.
That is over now.
All that secularism, cringe.
Christopher Hitchens, at least he was clever.
The rest of those guys cringe.
Lame.
The idea that we have of atheists now is just Reddit tippers who don't shower on Reddit, you know, just with their fedoras on.
It's just, it's out.
So you're seeing much more direct discussions of religion.
For goodness sakes, you have the vice president of the United States giving lectures on Augustinian and Thomistic theology, talking about the Ordo Amoris, the Ordo Caritatis on Twitter.
We're back.
We're back.
Which makes a problem for Democrats because Democrats hate God and hate religion and they don't know how to speak about religion.
So they recognize the problem.
They send some state rep. By they, by the way, I just mean the left broadly.
It's not, I don't think this was cooked up in the halls of the DNC.
I don't think the Democrats are really unified enough to cook up a unified plan.
But they send this guy on, James Tallarico.
I'm ashamed that he has what appears to be at least a vaguely Italian last name.
James Tallarico goes on Joe Rogan, the biggest podcast in the world, to discuss his apparently devout Christianity and why his devotion to God and religion leads him to defend a ton of weird sex stuff and murdering babies.
So it just, I get suspicious when anybody, whether it's a televangelist or a politician, tells me that something is central to my faith when Jesus never talks about it.
To me, that should, I think, ring alarm bells as to what is the agenda.
Put a pause just right there.
First problem that he's got, he says, I just, I have some real alarm bells that come up when people say something about the Christian faith that Christ did not directly say, like in the red letters of your Bible.
But of course, our Lord, if you look at the entire text of scripture, our Lord directly says relatively few things.
Now, of course, all scripture is inspired by God and it is inerrant.
But the actual red letter words of Christ on earth, relatively few.
So is he saying that we can't come to any conclusions beyond that?
Why do we have the rest of the Bible?
Why do we have the entire Old Testament?
Why do we have the epistles?
Why do we have the book of the apocalypse?
Why do we have most of the gospels?
If this guy's contention is that if Christ does not directly say something during his sojourn on earth, you should ignore it.
That should have nothing to do with your faith.
Already you're starting out on real shaky ground.
He goes On.
What is someone trying to get across?
And I think if we're looking at the last 40, 50 years, the religious right has made a concerted effort to make homosexuality and abortion the two biggest issues for Christians.
And, you know, the Southern Baptist Convention was pro-choice until the late 1970s.
So this idea that to be a Christian means you have to be anti-gay and anti-abortion, there really is no historical, theological, biblical basis for that.
Okay, put a pause here.
Put a pause here.
So he starts out.
And look, you know, I love my Southern Baptist friends.
Southern Baptists have been great recently on the IVF issue.
You know, I have a Baptist grandpa.
But to say, hey, hey, the Southern Baptists supported killing babies, or at least tolerated killing babies, that's not a great argument.
That's a criticism of Southern Baptists.
But he says there's no ancient support for a Christian proscription on killing babies.
How ancient do you think the Southern Baptists are?
That's your example.
You know, that ancient sect, way back in antiquity, there were all sorts of rival claimants to Christianity.
The Marcionites, the Gnostics, the Donatists, the Docetists, the Southern Baptists, the Catholics.
Well, I don't think so.
But we do have sources from antiquity on this issue of abortion, even just that.
The oldest catechism that we have coming from, what, the second or third century, the Didache, prohibits abortion.
This is the oldest text of Christian teaching, how to be a Christian, how to live a Christian life, that we have.
We also see Christian sexual morality affirmed all the way back even before year zero, even before the incarnation.
Scripture could not be more clear on this issue in Leviticus, in Exodus, in the Pauline epistles, that, you know, the stuff that the fellas like doing on the Democrat side now, you're really not supposed to do that.
But what would he have us say?
Would he say, well, you have to ignore all of the books of the Old Testament.
You have to ignore the letters of St. Paul because Christ didn't say them himself.
Well, you know what he did say?
He said that he comes not to abolish the law, but to fulfill it.
You know what he does say on the road to Emmaus?
He opens up all of the scripture to the people who are walking with him.
You know what he does say?
He says he won't change a jot or a tittle, not until all is fulfilled.
So even from within his own argument, which is sus and extremely circumscribed, even there he's contradicting himself.
Because when push comes to shove, he cares more about killing babies and doing weird stuff with dudes than he cares about the faith, than he cares about God.
So he's trying to talk himself out of this.
He keeps going.
Whole theological, biblical basis for that opinion.
Well, when was abortion even invented?
Well, there were certainly abortions in the ancient world.
Well, there's some, there's, and again, I haven't stated this enough to say this definitively, but there are interpretations of certain passages from the Torah where some folks will even say that there is some subtle instructions for how to perform an abortion in the ancient world, certain things to drink, things like that.
The point is that this idea that there is a everything he says, it just gets you so tangled up.
Because he says, notice how vague he's being.
He says, well, I mean, abortion's been around forever, right?
You know how we know that?
Because Christianity immediately prohibits it.
It's prohibited in scripture, thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not commit murder.
But also, we can just see in the practice of the church, the church immediately affirms you are not to have an abortion.
Full stop.
So what he is left with to defend his indefensible view is, well, there are interpretations of certain parts of the Bible, which I, the parts of the Bible that I just told you to ignore five seconds ago, but now because it's convenient to me, I'll cite them.
There are interpretations that some people think encourage abortion.
Oh yeah, there are interpretations?
Well, yeah, I mean, I can interpret just about anything, however I please.
The question is, are those interpretations reliable?
On what basis, on what authority are you making those interpretations?
Previously, you were citing the Southern Baptist Convention as the ultimate religious authority, but you're not really doing that because you're contradicting the Southern Baptist Convention when it's convenient to you.
Then you're citing what?
You're just citing yourself and your own whims.
And this is when it gets really, really heretical.
There is a set Christian orthodoxy on the issue of abortion.
It's just not rooted in scripture.
So there's the problem.
And I'll move on from this guy in a second, but what he's saying is showing you not just the problem Democrats have right now, which is as the politics becomes more religious and specifically more Christian and specifically more traditionally Christian again, the Democrats are on the back foot because they don't know how to talk that way.
Just like conservatives have a hard time speaking in secular liberal terms, left-wingers have a hard time speaking in religious terms.
So this guy is going to try to take his chance to be the, he's going to be the religious voice for the left.
But he's not only wrong in substance, he's also missing the point.
He says the notion that there's some Christian orthodoxy in an abortion is just not there in scripture.
So what God says about abortion and killing babies is, I think, clear enough from scripture.
But orthodoxy is true teaching.
And true teaching cannot really ultimately be determined from within the Bible, from within the text.
It's teaching.
So you are relying on some kind of authority.
Orthodoxy relates to when you have a text, when you have something to teach, and there are right ways to interpret it and wrong ways to interpret it.
So the only way to resolve orthodoxy is to have a way to interpret it, which in this case obviously has to come from outside of the Bible.
Knowing what books are in the Bible has to come from outside of the Bible because the Bible doesn't tell you.
The Bible is made by a church.
When our Lord creates the church, he gives authority, interpretive authority and other authority to a man named Saint Peter.
And he breathes the Holy Spirit on the apostles and he gives them certain powers and authorities and he gives them a great commission.
And this guy doesn't want to accept that.
But it's not just about him.
I mean, he's a complete joke, complete joke.
He goes on in this interview, it's so horrifying.
He goes on to say that the Blessed Mother, the Virgin Mary, what was so beautiful about the Annunciation, I kid you, I'm not even going to play it on my show.
What was so beautiful about the Annunciation is that she could have aborted Christ.
He goes on to, I'm not playing it on the show.
I'll tell you what he said.
I don't need to give him airtime for that.
Crazy stuff.
Crazy.
But where does he get it from?
He gets it from Pope Tallarico.
And I guess this is the broader issue, even beyond the religious questions that are coming up in politics.
This is the bigger issue for our politics.
Sometimes Catholics get criticized because we follow the Pope, and that's a whole separate conversation.
But the alternative to having a Pope is not not having a Pope.
The alternative to having a Pope is having every man be his own pope.
Either having some random church have the authority and claim the authority of the Pope, or just having every individual claim it.
So it's not that this guy doesn't have a pope.
This guy has just made himself the pope.
It's actually worse because the pope's power is limited.
The pope can't just go about and do whatever he wants and claim whatever he says is totally infallible.
This guy is not just making himself the pope.
He's making himself the pope and the church fathers and all the ecumenical councils for 2,000 years all in one.
That's what he's claiming.
You can't even really argue with him because if you were to debate him and say, no, no, here's what the Didache said, here's what the Council of Ephesus said, here's what the Council of Rome said, here's what this council said, here's what this, here's what Tertullian said, here's what Thomas Aquinas said, here's what, here's how the, he would say, yeah, yeah, but no, they got it wrong.
And I got it right.
This guy, I don't even, I think he's a Presbyterian of some sort.
Apologies to the Presbyterians who are listening that you have to associate with this man.
I think he started out as a Baptist.
You can't really argue with him because his problem is epistemological.
And this is our problem is epistemological.
And a lot of our confusion these days is epistemological.
Can we trust the experts?
Can we trust the government?
Can we trust anyone to tell us what a man or a woman is?
Can we trust our neighbors?
Can we trust this group or that group?
We don't know what to trust.
We don't have any sense of authority anymore.
And this isn't just a problem of our time that the elites are all lying to us.
There's some of that too.
But this is a consequence and a cause of liberalism.
Liberalism, which ultimately seeks the maximal autonomy for the individual.
So you take down the pope.
You say, all right, great.
You take down one pope, eight billion popes rise up in his place.
Except you don't have unity.
You don't have authority.
You don't have real authority.
You just have this wacko going on speaking about hideously blasphemous things and broadly just really ridiculous things, making himself look ridiculous.
Ultimately, this is an epistemological crisis.
This is not going to work out well for Democrats, but they can send this guy on.
If I didn't so hate the sacrilege that he engages in, I would say send this guy, make him the face of the Democrats.
Democrats right now, they got some bad faces right now.
The faces of the Democrats, this guy, Zoran Mamdani, and their biggest one, who we'll get to in just a moment, Hunter Biden.
Hold on, one second.
We're about to get back to a lot of important stuff.
But first, I have another important thing to tell you, and that is to go to balanceofnature.com.
Use promo code Knowles.
Balance of Nature, fruits and veggies, is the most convenient way to get whole fruits and vegetables daily, especially if you're focused on creating a healthier, happier lifestyle.
Nature is pretty good at giving us the nutrients we need through our fruits and vegetables.
So Balance of Nature takes fruits and veggies, freeze-dries them, turns them into a powder, then puts them into a capsule.
You take your fruit and veggie capsules every day, then your body knows what to do with them.
Balance of Nature is just one ingredient of a balanced lifestyle.
It has no intention to replace a healthy diet, exercise, sleep, or any other healthy habits.
It is intended to be used in concert with other healthy habits.
Now, I think generally I eat well.
I sleep a little bit.
When I'm on the road, though, I don't sleep at all.
I eat like garbage.
And so anyway, so it's nice that I can say, well, look, at least I have Balance of Nature over here to balance that out.
Go to balanceofnature.com.
Use promo code KnowlesKinner W-LAS for 35% off your first order as a preferred customer.
Plus, get a free bottle of fiber and spice.
That is balanceofnature.com promo code K-N-O-W-L-E-S.
Speaking of religious matters, the Israeli embassy in the U.S. is warning of anti-Semitism.
And it's not just a kind of broad, vague anti-Semitism.
It's not just a sort of way to shut down debate or anything.
They're pointing to real examples.
And it would be hard for someone to watch this example, at least, and dispute what the Israelis are saying.
This is from the Fresh and Fit podcast.
What do you guys think about Hitler?
What if the Jewish did something to the Germans that made them act a certain way, but nobody wants to talk about it?
Like the Jews don't want to take accountability.
That's what they do.
Yes.
I'm with you on that one.
Okay.
That's why.
That's why that was up to something.
So the Germans wanted to take them out.
There had to be something.
Like Germans wanted to take them out.
All of that.
The Holocaust was the only way he can take out a huge population, like a huge amount of Jews all in one setting.
But I already know what's going on.
Like I'm not dumb.
Like I know like the Jews did something.
That's why they're sitting up here.
They're trying to take back.
Like they're trying to take back and get repercussions, especially from America, like from Americans.
So they're taking over the government and stuff like that.
I'm telling you, how do we take them down?
How do we take them down?
Yeah.
I mean, I killed a motherfucker.
I had to say it.
My bad, y'all.
My bad.
All right.
Not exactly a televised Mensa meeting, but you get the picture.
You get this guy who says, what do you think about Hitler?
And then the girl says, I like Hitler.
And he goes, yeah.
And she's like, yeah, the Holocaust is fine or whatever.
Yeah.
And then we said, what are we going to do about those dastardly Jews?
And the girl says, we got to kill them all.
She said that.
And they say, yeah.
And that's so, you know, I have plenty of disagreements with the Israeli government over a number of matters, but I get why they are a little concerned about this.
It's a very popular podcast.
However, one thing that people are arguing is that this is something new.
And I don't think this is really new.
This kind of talk is straight out of Malcolm X. Malcolm X was saying the same kind of stuff even more recently than Malcolm X. You had Jesse Jackson.
You remember him in the 90s?
Jesse Jackson, race hustler, black guy in New York.
He called New York Jaime Town, I think.
I shouldn't laugh, but it seems so quaint these days.
Al Sharpton, same thing.
Al Sharpton started a race riot with the Jews.
So I think he also used the word Jaime.
I think he said, come get me, Jaime, or something like that.
So that's not new.
There has been a hostility to Jews, especially pronounced among prominent black people in recent decades.
That's been going on for a while.
The thing that is new is this previously was almost entirely on the left.
Malcolm X, kind of a, I guess you wouldn't, it's not like a hippie or anything, but he was a left-wing figure.
Certainly Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, left-wing figures.
Now you're seeing it creep a little bit on the right.
It's pretty minor.
It's more pronounced on social media, obviously, but it's relatively minor on the right, but it's there.
And I think a lot of people are missing the point of how that happens.
Though, and I really hate to say I told you so on this, I did call this, I've called this for years, where you're seeing it crop up mostly is on the irreligious right, mostly.
Guys who are not, I don't know, the guys on that show, I don't think they're showing up to church on Sunday in their Sunday best with their ties all done.
I don't think they're doing a lot of corporal or spiritual works of mercy.
Don't think they avail themselves of that.
I don't think they're very religious.
And I've said for years, while the, this is for at least 10 years now, as religion was beginning to enter back into American politics, you heard these phrases, Christian nationalism.
We're a Christian country.
We need a great awakening, or we need a reconquest of the Protestant churches, or you're especially seeing a mass conversion to Catholicism.
And a lot of the libs were screaming about this, whining about this.
They hated it.
This is terrible.
I hate Christian nationalism.
And I said, if you think Christian nationalism is bad, just wait till you see un-Christian nationalism.
You think the religious right is bad?
Wait till you see the irreligious right.
You're really going to hate that.
And I like the religious right.
And I like the Christian nation.
I like Christian empire for that matter.
But if I were a lib, well, the left actually hates the Jews now too, much more clearly than the right does.
But if I wanted to protect multiculturalism and tolerance and getting along and all this, I would not be going after the religious right.
I'd be going after the irreligious right if I were on the left.
And I might even make common cause with those Christians.
Turns out there are worse people in politics than Christians.
Now, speaking of the podcast circuit, Hunter Biden, he's back, baby.
He's back.
He's not holding back.
He did another podcast interview for some reason now.
And this time he wasn't extolling the virtues of crack as he did on the last show we were talking about him.
But he has an analysis of what happened in 2024.
The Democrats just find, what are we now?
What are we going to be?
Are we going to go?
Are we going to be more religious?
Are we going to be less religious?
Are we going to be more woke?
Are we going to be more establishment?
He's got an answer.
Hold on one second.
Wait a minute.
You stop living like a myth.
Start shaving like a legend.
What is the difference?
I couldn't possibly tell you, but you need to buy Jeremy's Razors, the politically incorrect razor for men.
Equipped with five barbarade blades and a moisturizing aloe strip, Jeremy's Razors are sharp enough for thick, beastly scruff, yet smooth enough for daily use.
Hundreds of thousands of abominable beasts agree.
Jeremy's Razors delivers barbarade blades right in the palm of your hand.
While other razors snap or treat you like garbage, Jeremy's offers a world-class shave without the shame.
Try Jeremy's Razors today for only $7.99.
They ship right to your man cave.
For every Jeremy's Razor sold, a liberal loses his pronoun.
What do you think about that?
If you're a man who relieves himself standing up, head to jeremysrazors.com slash legend and subscribe today.
That is jeremy'srazors.com slash legend.
Jeremy's Razors, don't just mix the metaphor, shave it.
My favorite comment yesterday is from Razzie P. Razzie P says, it's not nice language, but I think this is about the First Lady of France.
It says, didn't that nasty bat groom a 14-year-old?
I'd say that part is a bit more concerning.
Okay, is that bat?
Does one call a woman a bat?
I don't know that I've heard that before.
A ding bat, I've heard.
Okay, anyway.
Yeah, to me, that's also part of the reason that I think it would be hard for the president, First Lady of France to prove actual malice here is there is a lot of weird sex stuff around the case.
Sh a woman was 39 when she first got together with this 15-year-old kid, right?
Maybe a 14-year-old kid?
I don't know.
That's weird.
Now, the French have always been into very freaky sex stuff.
So that's, I mean, the Marquis de Saud does come from somewhere.
But anyway, that's just another wrinkle in there.
I agree, though.
that to me is much more concerning than any suggestion that she's a fella.
Okay, Hunter Biden is on the podcast.
Speaking of a guy who knows a lot about weird sex, Hunter Biden is on the podcast circuit.
He's on some show called At Our Table, and he has a theory as to why the Democrats lost in 2024.
I will tell you why we lost the last election.
We lost the last election because we did not remain loyal to the leader of the party.
That's my position.
We had the advantage of incumbency.
We had the advantage of an incredibly successful administration.
And the Democratic Party literally melted down.
I think he's about 75% right.
People are going to disagree.
They're going to say it's great.
No, there's no way they had to try to switch him out.
No, you almost, if you're swapping out an incumbent, you're just giving up the game.
Joe Biden drooling on his shirt would have been a much better candidate than Kamala Harris.
I think he's right about that.
So Hunter is giving good analysis, which is leading some libs to say that this man, if they're not going to make that weird heretical freak from Texas, the face of the Democrat Party, they're going to make Hunter Biden, the man who can shine on Rogan.
That's the headline.
That's the headline from The Atlantic.
Finally, a Democrat who could shine on Joe Rogan's show.
Hunter Biden is unrepentant.
It was during last year's presidential campaign, Donald Trump's interviews with Rogan, Theo Vaughn, and Logan Paul resonated with many young men.
I can imagine that same audience watching Hunter tell Callahan about his crack addiction and thinking, give this guy a break.
Great.
Great.
Either one, pick either one.
You can, the guy in Texas or Hunter Biden, either of them can be the, or David Hogg, remember him?
He was going to lead the Democrat Party.
One of the five least likable Democrats in the entire country.
He was going to lead.
They wised up and kicked him out of the party, kicked him out of the leadership.
But still, they are really scraping the bottom.
I love that this is the criterion.
They say, well, who can hang on Rogan?
Kamala couldn't hang on Rogan.
Joe Biden couldn't understand what Joe Rogan was saying.
Who's our guy who can hang on Rogan?
Hunter Biden.
And I bet that's true.
I bet Hunter could hang on Rogan.
No doubt about it.
But think about why.
The reason that President Trump and J.D. Vance were able to hang on Rogan and their episodes were very, very successful and they came off great is because the whole time they were sitting there with Joe and they were saying, you know, this Democrat establishment, this liberal establishment, it is freaking corrupt.
It is this whole thing, the uniparty, it's corrupt and we're fighting against it.
That's why they can hang on Rogan.
The voice of the median voter, a man who comes at politics from an outside perspective.
This Democrat establishment is rough.
And the funniest part is, the reason everyone's saying Hunter would be great on Rogan now is because he's saying the exact same thing.
Trump and Vance go on, they say these Democrats, these elites, these uniparty guys, they're frauds.
And then Hunter goes on the crack podcast and goes on whatever this podcast was.
He sits down and he says, hey, we're frauds.
Our party, we're frauds.
We're stupid.
We robbed my dad of the nomination.
We shot ourselves in the foot.
We have no idea what we're doing.
We're totally incompetent.
And we smoke, and we're crackheads.
And the best of us, the best of us, the most incisive figures in the Democrat Party are literal crackheads.
Wow.
Did not see this implosion of what was once the main American political party happening.
Now, we turn from the future leaders of the left to the bright, the bright young figures on the right.
J.D. Vance comes out swinging against not just illegal immigration, not just face-tatooed gangsters.
He comes out swinging against legal residents who are brought into America to work.
He comes out against H-1Bs.
A massive shortage of these jobs.
And by the way, you see some big tech companies where they'll lay off 9,000 workers and then they'll apply for a bunch of overseas visas.
And I sort of wonder, that doesn't totally make sense to me.
That displacement and that math worries me a bit.
And what the president has said, he said very clearly, we want the very best and the brightest to make America their home.
We want them to build great companies and so forth.
But I don't want companies to fire 9,000 American workers and then to go and say we can't find workers here in America.
That's a story.
What did Microsoft say when you brought that up with Microsoft?
It seems to me.
Have you talked to them about it?
I have not.
I just became aware of this a couple weeks ago.
Somebody sent me an article about this and they said, well, and it maybe was Microsoft.
It wasn't Microsoft.
It was Microsoft.
It fired, I think, 9,000 people.
And then I was like, wait a second.
Record profits, record market cap.
But also saying they're desperate for workers.
So I have not yet had that conversation with Microsoft in my defense.
I just found out.
It's great.
It's great.
He's taken names.
He's focused on this real issue.
This way of talking about migration is the future of the right.
Ten years ago, the debate was, do we want to flood the country with legal immigrants or do we want to flood the country with legal and illegal immigrants?
Now the conversation is no illegal immigrants, maybe no legal immigrants, and we got to be real precise even about high-value foreign workers.
And it's for a number of reasons, social solidarity, maintaining a traditional culture, but also workers' rights.
So then Republicans become the party of workers' rights.
Meanwhile, Democrats are saying we're going to suppress wages.
We're going to flood the country with foreigners.
Forget about the common guy.
This is why the Teamsters didn't endorse the Democrats.
It's shocking that the Teamsters wouldn't endorse the Democrats, but maybe not so shocking when you see this shift.
That's the future of the right.
If the right is to have a future, that's where it lands.
So the Republicans have a pretty good vision of where they want to go, how they're going to navigate this moment.
Democrats torn between an extreme heretic and a crackhead.
Speaking of, we're talking about technology here, really dubious technology.
I have to get to it briefly at least.
There's a new hellscape technology coming to a community near you.
It's glasses called WAVES, camera glasses for creators.
Do we have a video of this?
This is it.
This is a spot.
Clip saved.
Got that clip.
Film and everything.
Come on.
Drinking beer.
Giving someone a high five.
Gotta save the clips.
We gotta record it.
I'm smoking a cigarette.
This is good content.
Wrong room.
Hey, my buddy.
He's wearing a funny costume.
Hunt him.
Hey, people playing poker.
Okay, I've had enough of this.
I've had enough of the content.
No more content.
Introducing waves.
They write camera glasses for creators.
Record in stealth.
Record in stealth?
We used to complain about a surveillance state, Big Brother.
Now we say, oh, how great is this?
We have a surveillance state with Big Brother.
Record in stealth, live stream all day.
To me, that's actually worse than the recording in stealth, the live streaming all day.
Pre-order now.
I know I've been part of this.
I know I've contributed to this issue because I put out a lot of content on the internet and I stream or whatever.
But I am calling for a complete and total shutdown of all content until we figure out what's going on.
We have too much content.
There's too much.
Stop the content.
We used to have television shows, movies, books, symphonies, operas.
Now we don't.
We don't have any of that.
No one goes to that.
No one sees.
We have content.
Slop content.
I'm reminded of a line from Chesterton.
I'll adapt it to the modern age.
The world will never starve for want of content, but for want of contentedness.
Anything about that?
Chesterton said, the world will never starve for want of wonders, but for want of wonder.
And I think something is happening here, too.
Why do I want to watch some 20-year-old smoke a cigarette?
Why do I need...
I don't need more content.
I don't need...
They don't have a social life.
They don't have a robust private life that gives them actual enjoyment.
So they have to consume other people's social lives as a parasocial relationship.
Or at best, they get invited to the beer pong party or whatever.
And rather than just enjoy that, they have to monetize it.
They have to commoditize it.
They have to broadcast it.
It's all content.
You don't need, there's a role for content, about 44 minutes a day.
That's good content.
The rest, you can live your life and you can be content.
Now, before we turn off all the content, there is one movie you should see.
You ever see a guy fight like his life depends on it?
Because it actually did.
Joe Pfeiffer did not just beat the odds, he beat the heck out of him.
Here is a look at Journey to the UFC.
I don't care what you did in your career the last five years.
What are you going to do tonight?
Be fired up to fight.
Try to finish the fight.
If you want to get into the UFC and this is where you want to be, be Joe Pfeiffer.
Pfeiffer left home at 16.
He spent the next few years homeless, bouncing around.
The pain that I know that kid went through and overcame, if you want to beat him, you got to kill him.
The second you lose, everybody forgets you.
I wasn't ready to be forgotten.
I was ready to be forgotten.
That's Journey to the UFC, the Joe Pfeiffer story.
Watch the premiere now, only on DailyWire Plus at dailywire.com.
Finally, finally, we've arrived at my favorite time of the week when I get to hear from you in the mailbag.
This mailbag is sponsored by Pure Talk.
Go to PureTalk.com slash Knowles.
Get your free phone today.
I spoke too long in the earlier segments.
I've missed you all being out of studio.
And so I'm going to fly through this mailbag so I get to all the questions.
Hey, Michael, I was just wondering what you think the acceptable age range is for a relationship.
As an example, I just asked a woman out who was 11 years older than me.
Do you think that's too much?
Should I look for someone a little closer to me and age?
Thanks for taking my question.
Good question.
It depends on how old you are and what you want to do.
If you are 30 and want to have kids, you should not date the woman who's 11 years older than you.
If you're 20, she's 31.
That's a bit of an odd age gap.
I don't know.
I mean, stranger things have happened, but, you know, the purpose of marriage is to have kids.
Not everyone gets to have kids.
People suffer infertility.
It's a fallen world.
But marriage is ordered toward having kids.
So a guy can marry a girl 11 years younger.
No problem.
Might make having kids easier.
If a guy marries a girl who's 11 years older, it's going to make it harder.
I'm not saying it can't be done.
I'm not saying there aren't arguments for it.
But that is something to take into account.
I wouldn't go much older than that, 11 years older.
I definitely wouldn't marry someone who's 25 years older than you and was your French teacher.
Don't do that.
Next one.
Hey, Michael.
I have a question about men's style when taking a woman out, particularly on a first date.
How much in the modern world is too much?
You know, probably dressing up in a full three-piece suit on a first date would come across as overkill to most women.
But on the other hand, showing up in a t-shirt and shorts is definitely underkill.
So where's the nice balance for modern guys to look like they take care of themselves and have class, but not look too self-obsessed or just sloppy and lazy?
On a similar note, there seems to be a debate among young guys and girls today as to whether or not it's okay for guys to wear chains, just like a generic decorative chain.
And I would love your take on the subject.
Thanks.
Great, great questions.
On the chain issue, if you are Italian, you are allowed to wear one chain.
I would encourage you to keep it tasteful and ideally underneath the shirt.
I know some of my fellow Gueds like to have the big fat chains over that don't.
Otherwise, just avoid it.
Just avoid it.
I used to wear a chain, sometimes with a crucifix, sometimes with a little cornicello as a little boy, eight years old.
But I would avoid it.
In terms of what you wear in a date, I really don't think a grown man should go in public without a collar on, at least a polo shirt, maybe a button shirt.
Some people disagree.
Look, if you're going to work out, if you're going to go, I don't know, cut down trees, you're going to go fishing.
I'm not saying you have to wear a collar necessarily for that, though I probably would, but I wouldn't do a lot of those things.
In any case, you should have that already.
You don't need to wear a three-piece suit.
You don't need to look like a total weirdo.
It depends how old you are, too.
If you're 21, you're going out with a girl.
You can wear a shirt, like a shirt rolled up sleeves, maybe a button-down collar, a shirt that buttons, not a t-shirt or anything.
I don't know, maybe Chinos, even jeans, probably okay.
You should wear shoes that are not running shoes, but that's fine.
You don't need to.
Now, if you're older, you're 30, 35 going out to dinner.
I would not go to dinner probably without a jacket on to most places.
Maybe if it's really like a lower end place, maybe a sweater, but even that, I would, you know, just you got to live within your society, but you got to, you got to dress for the job you want.
Dress for the girl you want.
Dress for the lifestyle you want.
Don't, don't LARP about it.
Don't, you know, don't show up wearing like crusader chainmail.
And like you're going to, you say, I'm a real hardcore traddie.
You know, I'm going to go kill the Saracens or something.
Don't do that.
Have it be within reason, but have it.
It's got to look good.
It'll look good.
Okay.
It's about you going on a date.
You want to attract a girl.
Okay, next one.
Hey, Michael.
I know that you and your wife have boys, but I'm curious, are you ever going to have any girls?
Yeah, I'd like to.
The problem is I'm not capable of producing one.
I'm too virile.
I'm too teeming with testosterone and manliness.
So I've not been able to.
I would like one because I don't want to be shoved in a home in my old age.
And I want my, do you think the boys are going to take care of me?
I need a daughter to help me.
And I think it'd be nice.
I need a daughter, obviously, if I want to grant criminals favors on her wedding.
And so I want one, but I guess it's just the T levels are too high.
I don't.
We need a cure.
We need a cure for me producing so many men.
Next question.
Hi, Michael.
I was thinking about the methods of our justice system, and I was wondering, do you think corporal punishment is justifiable for some crimes?
Singapore tends to cane their criminals as a deterrent.
What are your thoughts?
Thank you.
Yeah, that's a good idea.
I mean, I would stop short of, you know, chopping people's hands off like they do in Afghanistan or whatever, Africa.
But I think a low corporal punishment's okay.
Really, the way we would do it in a more civilized way is we would do what we used to do in this country, which is hard labor.
So you make the criminals turn big rocks into small rocks.
That's what we would do rather than actually flogging them constantly.
You can do that too.
I see no problem with it.
And in many ways, it's much more humane to do that and better for the person than to just let them languish in some dirty cell for 30 years.
Instead of that, how about we just go give them a bunch of floggings or have them do hard labor for five years?
If you told me I could either languish in a cell for 30 years for some crime or do very strenuous hard labor for five years, that's not even a question.
Time is very important.
Okay, look at that.
I flew through the questions because I know I was short on time.
I'm going to even try to get through one of the written mailbags.
Let's see.
There's so many.
I have so many.
Where's my mailbag?
I don't see it.
They didn't print out my mailbag.
These jerks.
Why didn't they print out my mailbag?
Okay.
From River.
Hello, Michael.
I'm 16 and a big fan of the show.
I'll be starting my junior year this fall.
My parents are really pushing me to go to college.
I, on the other hand, want to get my real estate license and start making money right out of high school, hopefully enough to afford a delicious Mayflower cigar.
I attend a small classical Christian school that's given me an incredible education.
And I don't think it makes sense to spend four more years and a ton of money on a degree that, in today's world, often doesn't hold much value.
What do you think I should do?
Thank you.
The pendulum had swung so much in the direction, especially around the time that I graduated.
I think that was almost the all-time high.
70% of high school graduates went to college.
That was way crazy.
Most of those people should not have gone to college with a huge waste.
We don't want the pendulum to swing too far in the other correction and overcorrect, though.
You know, a habit, or rather a virtue, is this nice happy medium between two bad extremes.
So it depends what you want.
You say, okay, I could get a real estate license and sell houses right now and make a bunch of money.
That's true.
Now you have to ask yourself, is that what you want to do in 10 years?
Is that what you want to do in 20 years?
Maybe it is, in which case, all right, there you go.
Is there a way to go from that to some other thing you want to do without going to college?
Okay, well, then maybe that's a good route.
But are you not so sure about that?
Are you not even aware maybe of the possibilities?
Do you do well in school?
Do you get good grades?
Do you enjoy learning?
Do you like books?
If so, there are some educational institutions that are still pretty good, somewhere you can get a true proper education.
I think I just gave the commencement at Ave Maria University.
I think of Hillsdale College.
I think of Thomas Aquinas College.
I think of Franciscan.
There are more where you can go get a proper education.
Even at some of the brand name, you know, prestigious schools, formerly prestigious schools, in some cases, it's still possible to get an education there.
Maybe you want that.
Maybe that's going to open your mind to possibilities that you as a 17-year-old don't or 18-year-old don't really know even exist.
Don't discount it immediately.
Go in with a plan and make sure the plan doesn't just get you through, hey, I'm going to make $100,000 by the time I'm 23.
