Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

April 20, 2023 - Dennis Prager Show

01:22:27

Blue Colorado

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Dennis Prager here.
	Thanks for listening to the Daily Dennis Prager Podcast.
	To hear the entire three hours of my radio show, commercial-free, every single day, become a member of PragerTopia.
	You'll also get access to 15 years' worth of archives, as well as the daily show prep.
	Subscribe at prager-topia.com.
	Hello, everybody.
	Dennis Prager here.
	Here being Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
	And I have a talk tonight in a nearby university in Ohio, actually.
	I love Pittsburgh, one of my favorite cities.
	Good to be with you, my friends, as we watch the epic battle.
	I mention this almost every day because people don't believe it.
	Even many people who are not on the left don't understand that literally civilization is being fought over.
	And that is the case at this time.
	The loathing of Western civilization, the loathing of its basis, the Bible.
	The Judeo-Christian value system.
	It's beyond loathing.
	It is contempt.
	There is a contempt for it.
	If you say that you take the Bible seriously, you are considered a fool.
	And that idea has been transmitted to an entire generation.
	Indeed, two generations, maybe even three, because it was transmitted to my generation, the baby boomer generation.
	Intelligent people don't take the Bible seriously.
	It's a fairy tale about some creature up in the sky.
	That's the way it's dismissed.
	Meanwhile, it's only secular people who say that men give birth.
	It is secular people who advocate the castration of boys who say that they are girls and the removal of the breasts of girls who say they are boys.
	This is, it is a monopoly.
	These idiotic and evil ideas are a monopoly of the secular.
	There are secular people who don't hold these ideas, but all the people who do are.
	Here's a piece from the Federalist.
	Colorado's new trans-tourism law beckons red state kids for trans-interventions and abortions.
	Colorado Democrat Governor Jared Polis Signed a new law last week to circumvent red state bans on abortion and transgender treatments.
	While Republican lawmakers ramp up protections for vulnerable teens caught in America's contemporary transgender craze, Polis aims to make Colorado a destination for impressionable minors to seek permanent procedures from puberty blockers to surgery.
	That's right, California and Colorado.
	I don't know how Colorado became such a weird state.
	Morally weird.
	I don't care about weird that people wear sneakers on their heads.
	I'm not talking about that weird.
	I'm talking about morally weird.
	Yeah, you're 12 years old and your parents don't want you to have a hormone blocker because they know that you're a boy even though you say you're a girl.
	This didn't happen 10 years ago, let alone 50, 100, 100, 50, 200. It was exceedingly, exceedingly rare.
	Today it is more and more common because if you have any issue in your life, what you say is, oh, I'll solve it by changing sexes, as if you can change sexes the way you can change political parties.
	Although the truth is...
	People find it psychologically easier, some people, to change sexes than political parties.
	Here in Colorado, this is what the governor said.
	It causes a certain degree of nausea.
	Here in Colorado, we value individual freedoms.
	Really?
	You value individual freedoms in Colorado?
	Oh, there were no lockdowns?
	There were no mask mandates?
	You didn't fire people in the Colorado government who refused to get vaccinated?
	You believe in freedom of speech, that even if you don't agree with the speech, it should be on Twitter or Facebook or YouTube?
	You do believe that?
	Really?
	Well, you're the only Democrat who does.
	Only Democrat in power, let's put it that way.
	Here in Colorado, we value individual freedoms.
	I tell you, it's sickening the lying that goes on on the left.
	Really?
	You believe a 12-year-old can decide?
	In fact, the various children's hospitals that do these procedures, they believe that a 6-year-old can decide.
	They've said it.
	But you believe, Governor, you believe a 12-year-old can decide?
	What if an 11-year-old shows up in Colorado?
	My mommy doesn't believe that I'm a boy.
	The girl shows up, she's 11. What will Colorado do?
	10. Will they send them back to the parents?
	You can't vote.
	You can't vape.
	But you can decide to do incredible damage to your body and your psyche.
	At 12?
	And that's what he calls individual freedoms, the governor of Colorado?
	The Democratic Party is vile.
	It is truly vile.
	The President of the United States is a Democrat, and he has invited the guys with the bullhorns from the Tennessee Assembly to be honored at the White House.
	You should watch that video.
	The guy sneaked in a bullhorn into the chamber and egged on the crowd in the gallery.
	And they expelled him.
	And he's a hero to the left.
	These are heroes.
	I'm excited, excited, wow, by the work of advocates and legislators.
	To further Colorado's reputation as a beacon of freedom, a beacon of choice, a beacon of individuality where we live on our own terms.
	Really?
	The Democrats and the left are beacons of freedom, choice, and individuality.
	Hi, I wonder, I don't know the answer to this, but I wonder how do they treat a doctor who differed?
	With the Medical Association on Hydroxychloroquine as an early therapeutic for a person with COVID. Really?
	You honor individuality?
	Hmm.
	Is the University of Colorado at Boulder known for its free speech advocacy?
	Just asking.
	And I'm not being cute.
	I'm just asking.
	Senate Bill 23-188, signed into law Friday, opens the door for, quote, trans-tourism, unquote, in the state, allowing minors to seek abortions or gender-affirming health care services.
	It's so interesting.
	It's gender-affirming and sex-denying.
	Of course, they invented the term gender.
	This is a complete invention.
	The word existed, but it never meant what they do.
	They distinguish it from sex.
	That's how they get around it.
	Oh, yeah, your sex may be male, but your gender is female.
	Like, sex doesn't matter.
	Gender-affirming health care services.
	Well, we believe in sex-affirming health care services.
	Conservatives should answer that, or indeed, every non-leftist.
	We believe in sex-affirming health care services, and they believe in gender-affirming health care services.
	That's a very important distinction that should be noted.
	Teens seduced by trans ideology in Kansas, where lawmakers are preparing to ban interventions for minors, may travel to Colorado for sterilizing procedures under Polis' protection.
	With parental consent?
	Well, that's an interesting question.
	With parental consent, they're writing here in Federalist.
	I'm not sure that they're right.
	I don't think you need parental consent.
	You don't if you go to California, by the way.
	You don't need parental consent if your state bans these procedures for minors.
	So I think, I'm not sure the article got that right.
	I'll have to look into that.
	Similar legislation is under consideration, as in Kansas, in Wyoming, Nebraska, Oklahoma, and Texas.
	Utah Republican Governor Spencer Cox signed a bill to bar underage transgender surgeries earlier this year, but included provisions in the legislation to make the new law toothless.
	He's an odd governor.
	I'll go into that another time.
	So this is what they're proud of.
	On the abortion issue, I have been advocating for a while that the most important thing that pro-life people should push for is not bans, as much as right to be informed.
	That's what should be.
	Everyone who goes for an abortion should be shown a video or pictures of what they are doing.
	That's it.
	informed consent natural disasters airline cancellations and runway near misses supply chain issues inflation rising interest rates and sky-high government debt this is Dennis Prager for am fed coin and There's a lot in the news about what consumers cannot control.
	So let's talk about what you can control.
	You can control how you choose to invest and protect your wealth.
	That's why I choose to do business with Nick Grovich and his company AmFedCoin and Bullion.
	Now is a great time to own tangible assets like gold, silver, and platinum.
	With over 41 years' experience and tens of thousands of satisfied clients, Nick will help you make informed decisions and show you smart choices, which have been proven winners time and time again.
	AmphetCoin and Bullion?
	We'll sell you the right types of precious metals to get the maximum value for your money.
	Take control of your investments like I did.
	Call Nick and his team at Amphet Coin& Bullion at 800-221-7694.
	Americanfederal.com.
	Americanfederal.com The news is relentlessly corrupting news.
	What am I going to tell you, my friends?
	It's an astonishing time that we're living in.
	The collapse of reason.
	Michael Knowles is here, ironically, at the University of Pittsburgh.
	I'm in Pittsburgh for another appearance.
	He's at the University of Pittsburgh.
	He was supposed to debate a transgender individual who backed out, saying that she didn't know.
	Who Michael Knowles was.
	So I don't understand.
	She took the debate not knowing who he is.
	And then Michael Knowles, of course, is with Daily Wire.
	He has said that transgenderism should be eradicated.
	He never said transgender individuals should be eradicated.
	The idea is loathsome, of course.
	Nobody's advocating the death of anybody.
	Well, that's not true.
	I'm sure there are people advocating the death of Michael Knowles.
	And anybody who opposes this, what we have here, there are two groups that are involved in the protests on behalf of transgenderism.
	The ideologues, well, there are really three groups.
	First, the ideologues.
	The people whose ideology is to destroy the entire heteronormative system of Judeo-Christian Western civilization.
	That the ideal is, the normative, if you will, is you identify as the sex you in fact are.
	You marry someone of the opposite sex and produce a family.
	That is hated by the left.
	The very idea.
	They don't hate people who do that.
	They hate advocating it as the ideal.
	You must understand that.
	The nuclear family is detested as an ideal.
	They don't detest it.
	They detest it as an ideal.
	And it has been the ideal all through Western history.
	So those are the ideologues.
	Then there are the handful of people who identify as transgender.
	They have an obvious reason to protest and be vehement about the issue.
	And then there are those like the students screaming and yelling and stamping their feet.
	These are the young people in our society who need meaning.
	And they will find it in whatever leftist cause touches them.
	The meaning seekers, because nothing gives them meaning.
	Being an American gives them no meaning.
	Being a male or female gives them no meaning.
	And, of course, being religious in the traditional Judeo-Christian sense gives them no meaning.
	So they have found meaning in protest, specifically in this case on protesting on behalf of the transgender.
	So it has caused them to adopt a lie that men give birth.
	They will say that.
	So there are those on the left who say that Dennis Prager is not telling the truth.
	Because transgender men do give birth, but they don't say transgender men give birth.
	They say men give birth.
	If they say transgender men give birth, well, then transgender men give birth.
	But they don't say that.
	They say men give birth.
	That's the giant lie, one of the many giant lies of our time.
	So the president is honoring the Tennessee legislators who brought a bullhorn into the session.
	What am I going to tell you, my friends?
	We have a bad human being.
	His president is not a human that I differ with.
	He's a bad human.
	He's a bad human that I happen to differ with.
	That's what we have in the White House.
	NIH study recruiting 18-year-olds to learn unknown side effects of testicle removal for gender dysphoria.
	The NIH research said the side effects of surgically removing testicles from biological males has not been extensively studied.
	Gee, no kidding.
	You on the left, you are pro-castration of healthy males in the name of an ideology.
	And they're proud of it.
	That's why I wrote a column and I did a video for PragerU on the general uselessness of the conscience.
	If the conscience were strong, the world would be good.
	The conscience is not strong.
	The conscience in most people is a function of what they tell the conscience to think.
	Tell their consciences what to think.
	Their conscience does not tell them what to think.
	They're not guided by their conscience.
	They guide their conscience by their feelings.
	To be for castrating males, because they say that they are females, and then what exists once that's castrated?
	Is it allowed to say that this is sick, that this is unhealthy?
	Are we even allowed to offer that idea?
	And yet the number of doctors, disproportionately female doctors, because the female has to battle emotions like males have to battle their aggression and sexual predatory nature.
	We return.
	Just when you thought it couldn't get any better, Mike Lindell with MyPillow is launching the MyPillow 2.0.
	When Mike invented MyPillow, it had everything you could ever want in a pillow.
	Now, nearly 20 years later, he discovered a new technology that makes it even better.
	The MyPillow 2.0 has the patented adjustable fill of the original MyPillow, and now with a brand new fabric that is made with a temperature-regulating thread.
	The MyPillow 2.0 is the softest, smoothest, and coolest pillow you'll ever own.
	For my listeners, the MyPillow 2.0 is buy one, get one free offer with promo code Prager.
	MyPillow 2.0 temperature regulating technology is 100% made in the USA and comes with a 10-year warranty and a 60-day money-back guarantee.
	Just go to MyPillow.com and click on the Radio Listener's Square.
	To the buy one, get one free offer, enter promo code PRAGER or call 800-761-6302 to get your MyPillow 2.0 now.
	I have Alex Epstein, author of Fossil Future, Why Global Human Flourishing Radio.
	It requires more oil, coal, and natural gas, not less.
	He is the presenter of this week's PragerU video, Fossil Fuels, The Big Picture.
	Alex is a fighter.
	Alex is a truth teller.
	And it is a delight to have you on again, Alex.
	Alex, do they ever...
	With pleasure.
	Alex, do they ever invite you for debates?
	I would say I forced debates.
	Nobody is inviting me for debates at Greenpeace or something like that, or the Sierra Club fundraiser.
	I think it would be a pretty failed fundraiser if I were invited to debate.
	Tomorrow, though, here's an interesting thing.
	there's this event in Dallas called Earth X run by a guy named Trammell Crowe and the secretary of energy former secretary of energy Rick Perry helped organize an event and it's going to be him interviewing me and then the Texas state climatologist who's somewhat of a climate catastrophist so that's not exactly a debate but I think it'll be really interesting for people to see what happens when we square up against each other you're on the same stage together yeah Yeah, we're on the same stage.
	So Secretary Perry, former Governor Perry, is going to be moderating or discussing.
	And then, yes, it's me and we're on the same stage all together.
	And the Texas State Climatologist.
	You know, it's interesting.
	They say all the time that people like you, and for that matter, PragerU and me personally and others, that there's money in it if you defend fossil fuels or if you just take issue with the hysteria over existential threats to human life.
	Just review for a moment the ratio of money available You know, there are different studies on this, and some say four times, some say ten times.
	I don't think it's anywhere near that low, you know, on the order of a hundred times.
	Let's look at what is the most popular political view in the world today.
	It's the world that we should rapidly eliminate, the fossil fuel industry.
	So think about how much money and status is tied to that.
	Goal.
	So you think about just even in the US, we had this inflation reduction act.
	I mean, this is just a tiny drop in the bucket, but this thing was supposedly $400 billion per solar wind and batteries mostly.
	I documented recently on energytalkingpoints.com, you know, it ends up being trillions of dollars.
	This is trillions and trillions of dollars.
	Look at every major financial institution almost, leading corporations.
	How much money is in this?
	And then just the whole, you can't even talk about the money though, because it's the whole co-opting of the educational system.
	And so it's just everybody's job and status is tied to supporting the anti-fossil fuel movement.
	So it has what I call a moral monopoly, or it has had it.
	I think I've started to break it and others have started to break it.
	But just the idea that it's some profitable thing to be against the establishment, against the most popular political idea in the world, and that everyone supporting the most popular political idea in the world has no financial or status incentive, this is implausible.
	Well, it's actually a big lie, and yet people get away with it.
	So, what's the story right now on the percentage in temperature that if everything the Democrats want enacted, basically the end of the internal combustion engine car,
	I read, I think it was the Wall Street Journal, but I don't recall, 0.18% of the world's carbon emissions will have been reduced.
	Am I getting it right?
	No, it wouldn't be that of the emissions.
	You can think of the U.S. as something like one-seventh of the world's CO2 emissions.
	So if we eliminated all of our CO2 emissions, which I want to highlight, that means all of us dying.
	Jimmy, I was just talking about cars.
	The elimination of the car as we know it would be that, what percentage of the world's emissions would that affect?
	It depends on even what you consider a car, right?
	Like, transportation right now is about, like, fossil fuel-based transportation is 25% of U.S. energy, right?
	So, round numbers, if you're saying the U.S. is about 15. So you're talking about, like, it's 4% of the world's energy?
	Something like that?
	Right.
	So it would be, even from their perspective, essentially insignificant.
	I don't want to put any words in your mouth.
	Is that accurate?
	Yeah, I mean, I think there's something to this argument.
	But I think the real thing is they're claiming that, oh, everyone is going to follow suit.
	And I think this is where we should take issue.
	issue because if we're just committing a unilateral sacrifice and harming our mobility, destroying our standard of living, which just getting rid of the internal combustion engine totally destroys your standard of living, no question, right now at this point in economic history, then is China going to follow suit?
	Is Russia going to follow suit?
	I mean, we know this China has more coal, new coal in the process of being built than we have total coal in the United States.
	So this is just a total self-indulgent fantasy sacrifice.
	Fossil Future is his book, but we're having him on in particular because he's the latest PragerU video.
	Fossil fuels the big picture.
	It's up at Prager U.
	Dennis Prager here in Pittsburgh.
	Alex Epstein in Dallas.
	Alex Epstein is one of the foremost experts on the whole issue of fossil fuel, carbon dioxide, etc.
	He believes, as I do, that we are living in the age of hysteria, that there is an existential threat to human life and biological life generally from carbon dioxide.
	As much as men give birth.
	I don't want to put words in his mouth.
	That is how I would put it.
	We are living in the age of the absurd.
	And I have a view as to why we do.
	Not everybody who agrees with me that it is the age of the absurd agrees on the etiology.
	But I subscribe to the Chesterton, or alleged Chesterton statement, that when people stop believing in God, they don't believe in nothing.
	They believe in anything.
	And the world is coming to an end is an example.
	Why don't you, in a nutshell, Alex, because people need to hear this over and over, why don't you make the case for why you reject the idea that there is an existential threat to human life from carbon dioxide?
	Well, let me say, so we could have a discussion.
	I don't agree with the Chesterton thing, at least not in this context, because I'm not a religious person.
	I don't think it requires any faith to see that fossil fuels are amazingly good for human life, and specifically not to worship unimpacted nature.
	I think that's a lot of what goes on, is people worship, they want to sacrifice human beings to unimpacted nature.
	That doesn't answer your question directly.
	Could you restate the question?
	No, I know that.
	And let me just say...
	I 100% agree with you.
	You don't have to believe in God.
	You can believe in Zeus and understand that there's truth.
	I fully acknowledge that.
	But in fact, and I don't want to debate this with you, I would love to because I so admire you, but I don't want to get distracted.
	I'm just saying what I believe, the societal, not any given individual, the societal acceptance of absurdity does correspond to the fact...
	That we have abandoned Judeo-Christian principles.
	I agree with you.
	You don't need those principles in order to understand truth.
	I agree with you.
	But in fact...
	That would be an interesting debate sometime.
	Yeah, no, we should do it.
	It would be very good because people like you are my allies, and I am your ally.
	We only differ on what the cause of the absurdity is, not the absurdity.
	So that's why we're allies and why it matters.
	Okay, so I'm asking you to give a brief synopsis of why you, who would like to live a long life and want others to live a long life, are not worried as the climate extremists, which is now the norm, are.
	In other words, why isn't it an existential threat?
	Well, let's just look at this.
	And this is what the video does.
	And I got a really nice message from a former politician who said something like, I just posted this on Twitter, at Alex Epstein.
	He said, your new PragerU video, your 500 PragerU video will save the world.
	Which I hope so.
	I think it is a really good video.
	I think it's by far my best video that I've done.
	I think the core of why it's effective is it gives a very, very common sense way of thinking about the issue that nobody can dispute and that yet almost nobody follows.
	And I think it'll encourage people to follow it.
	And it's that when you look at fossil fuels, just like when you look at a prescription drug, you should carefully weigh the benefits and side effects.
	So we're thinking about fossil fuels impact on climate.
	We have to think about it in the context of fossil fuels benefits, including, crucially, fossil fuels have enormous climate, what I call a climate mastery benefit.
	They allow us to neutralize.
	Climate danger.
	Let's look at the past hundred years of using fossil fuels.
	What's happened?
	We've used them to power machines for billions of people to be productive and prosperous, which we could not have done at this scale without fossil fuels, including we've used all sorts of machines to make our climate unnaturally safe through heating, cooling, irrigation, crop transports, buildings, sturdy buildings, etc.
	And here's what's happened.
	We haven't taken a safe climate and made it dangerous.
	We've taken a dangerous climate and made it safe.
	The rate of climate-related disaster death is down by a factor of 50. It's down 98% over the last century.
	So your chances of dying from a climate disaster, the things we're supposed to be afraid of, is 1 50th of what it used to be.
	So fossil fuels have made the world an amazingly abundant and safe place.
	And then that's corresponding to one degree of warming, which obviously hasn't hurt us overall, even climate-wise.
	So how insane do you have to be to believe that another half a degree or one degree, the world is going to end?
	No.
	As long as we're free to use fossil fuels, the world will continue to get better.
	And any adverse climate changes, we can obviously deal with in the same way we've dealt with the adverse climate of nature for the last hundred years.
	It seems so evident.
	What world would we have had?
	Yes, that's right.
	It is.
	So let me ask you, what do you think animates the hysteria?
	I've never asked you that.
	And I don't know your answer.
	What will you say animates it?
	Yeah, so I talk about this a lot in Chapter 3 of the book.
	And so I think there's two things.
	And I think every time you see hysteria, these things are going on.
	It's anti-human assumptions and anti-human values.
	And just very quickly, the anti-human assumption is this idea that the Earth is what I call a delicate nurturer, that human beings are parasite polluters, and that our impact necessarily destroys our environment.
	And so that's why you get all these apocalypse predictions, and people never learn from them being wrong, because they have this false view of the Earth in humans.
	Earth is actually a wild potential that our impact generally makes better.
	We're not parasite polluters.
	We're producer improvers.
	But insofar as you have this, the false narrative about the Earth, which most people, including most scientists, do, you're always going to believe in apocalypse.
	So you don't really believe in the benefits of fossil fuels.
	They just seem transitory and the world is half the end.
	The other thing is anti-human values.
	And this is really true of the leadership.
	The reason they can't see the benefits of fossil fuels, say, to climate...
	Is they're not judging climate or anything else by how good is it for human flourishing.
	They're judging it by how little impacted it is by human beings.
	Their primary goal is eliminating our impact from Earth, including climate.
	So for them, even though we've taken a dangerous climate and made it safe, it's evil because it's impacted.
	Because we did it.
	So their real focus is on eliminating the evil of human impact.
	and they judge things by that standard.
	So for them, the benefits of energy are not really benefits because they've impacted the earth.
	Yeah, they think of children as evil.
	They think of all human impact as evil.
	And that's the root of it.
	So that's what I argue.
	Folks, watch the video here.
	He says it's the best he's ever made.
	I think they're all great.
	Fossil fuels at PragerU.
	Thank you, Alex.
	Thank you, Dennis.
	Hello, everybody.
	Welcome to the Dennis Prager Show, coming to you from Pittsburgh.
	I have a speech tonight at Franciscan University in Ohio, which is across the border here.
	Hence, I am at Pittsburgh at my wonderful station here, my Salem station in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
	I like Pittsburgh and Tampa, the two of my favorite cities in the country.
	There's a big difference between eastern Pennsylvania and western Pennsylvania.
	Western Pennsylvania is America that has not gone crazy.
	I think that's the way to put it.
	There are people who have gone crazy here.
	In light of this topic of gone crazy, incidentally, there is an interesting piece that I just had up that I'd like to share with you.
	Here it is, yeah.
	It's a piece in the Federalist.
	Your doctor asking for your pronouns isn't just annoying.
	It's a sign of the industry's decline.
	That's right.
	Last summer, I went to establish care at a new doctor's office, writes Elle Purnell, this woman.
	Incidentally, by the way, just as a parenthetical note, when you...
	Meet somebody.
	Let's say you're in a restaurant and the server, take a neutered term, which is done purposely in the neutering of the human species, used to be waiter and waitress, now it is server.
	You know why, right?
	After all, you would think server is more demeaning than waitress or waiter.
	I'm here to serve you.
	I don't know why that isn't sort of like master bedroom and isn't eliminated.
	But what they've wanted to do for years is to neuter language as much as possible.
	But when you do have your server come over, and you always, always, well, unless it's dubious, 99.9% of the time you make an assumption that it is a man or a woman.
	So if you would like something, sir, can I trouble you, sir?
	Right?
	Now, did you ask this person what their preferred pronoun is?
	What gender they identify with?
	On what grounds did you make that assumption?
	Why is that still allowed?
	I wouldn't be surprised if there will be an effort now to have people no longer say that.
	After all, you can't say boys and girls at Disneyland.
	You can't say ladies and gentlemen on airplanes.
	I don't know if you're aware of that.
	It's gone.
	Hello, everyone, or all our passengers.
	The British tube dropped the ladies and gentlemen years ago.
	Because they're not just ladies and gentlemen on the tube.
	They're ladies and gentlemen and other.
	Yes, a major number.
	Yet...
	In the course of your life, you almost never come across an other.
	Did you ever say to a waiter, sir, can I trouble you for another coffee, a refill, please?
	And were you ever told, I'm sorry, you've misgendered me?
	Why is that okay?
	Why is it okay for us to make assumptions?
	And by the way, it goes in the other direction.
	If somebody has transitioned, quote-unquote, and that person appears to you to be, let's say, female in every way, dressed, speech, face, hair, and you just to say, man, can I trouble you for some more napkins?
	There's no issue there.
	The issue is not accepting people on face value.
	In fact, face value is exactly how we assume people are male or female.
	The issue is that we are told there's no such thing as male-female, that it is purely subjective.
	That is why Michael Knowles is fighting transgenderism, not transgendered people.
	Last summer, this woman writes in The Federalist, I went to establish care at a new doctor's office.
	My beloved pediatrician, one of the few true family doctors left in the industry, had once kindly offered to keep seeing me until I have my own children.
	But I was in the midst of a post-college move, and that was no longer feasible.
	So I found myself in a waiting room Waiting through the moat of new patient forms that stand between patients and doctors all across America.
	Yes, that's another issue, isn't it?
	The bureaucratization of medicine.
	As many of those forms now do, this one wanted to know not only my sexual orientation and sex.
	That's interesting.
	Why would they ask?
	That I haven't seen.
	Sexual orientation.
	Why does that matter to a doctor?
	And in any event, and sex, but also the so-called gender I was, quote, assigned at birth.
	By the way, that's another Orwellian lie of the left.
	You're assigned at birth?
	No.
	You are at birth.
	We don't need any passive participle.
	You are not given at birth, assigned at birth, assumed at birth.
	You are at birth.
	You are born a boy or a girl, except in the infinitesimally small and therefore statistically insignificant number of people with ambiguous genitalia.
	Everybody is born a boy or a girl, and even they, now that we can...
	Identify chromosomes.
	We would be able to know if it's a boy or a girl otherwise.
	So I was asked the gender I was caught assigned at birth, whether I identified as transgender, and my preferred pronouns.
	Five separate questions.
	I would love to know what city this took place in.
	She doesn't write.
	As if that weren't enough, when the nurse walked me back into the doctor's office, she proceeded to ask me the same questions again.
	I might have pointed out that I already had to endure this interrogation once.
	I know I made a face.
	Looking back, I wish I'd thought fast enough to remind her that sex is an immutable characteristic that is neither assigned nor reassigned.
	But I was just ready to get out of there.
	Needless to say, I never went back.
	A colleague of mine had a similar experience filling out an online form for his daughter's upcoming medical visit.
	After spending 20 minutes trying to unsuccessfully click submit, he realized that while he'd already selected female under the tab for gender, there was a small separate box he had overlooked.
	Labeled sex, where he had to select female again.
	Wow.
	So at the doctor's office, there was sex and there was gender.
	Plenty of patients have been forced to jump through hoops like these.
	It's an obviously silly performance, since we all know doctors will treat you based on your real sex, no matter what you write down.
	We're not giving mammograms to men yet.
	At least I hope not.
	But having doctors ask about your pronouns isn't just an obnoxious chore.
	It's a sign of the healthcare industry's willingness to forego medical reality for a few ideological brownie points.
	And that is a sure sign of an industry in decline.
	What is happening to American medicine is very scary.
	With medical review boards taking licenses away from doctors who prescribed hydroxychloroquine, which is at worst harmless and at best life-saving.
	And then the children's hospitals that are proud to tell you that they do gender-affirming care on little children.
	Remember the ad I played for you, or the, I don't know if it was an ad or just a public announcement, by the Boston Children's Hospital, by one of its women doctors, that we are women spokesmen, that by age of six, there are so many who already know that they're transgender.
	This is Boston Children's Hospital, the children's hospital affiliated with Harvard.
	Medical school.
	I don't know if it's the more elite, the more destructive, or it's irrelevant whether you're elite or not.
	You're just destructive in any of these professions.
	The medical profession is now held in less respect than at any time in American history.
	Because you're mine.
	So I'd like to ask you a question.
	uh In light of something I just said at the end of the last segment, this is a perfect example of using a talk show to learn what people are thinking.
	Am I an outlier?
	And I might be.
	I might be.
	Medical profession is held in lower regard today than ever in American history.
	Now, that doesn't mean you're a doctor or my doctor, but the profession, with the children's hospitals that are utterly on board and proactive and advocative of...
	Surgery and other interventions like hormone blockers on minors and the suppression of doctors by medical boards who advocated any therapeutics like ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine, which are harmless drugs and which I believe to the extent...
	How much did I believe it?
	I took them.
	I took them out for about a year.
	I got COVID at least twice.
	I'm perfectly fine.
	And thank God I was never vaccinated in this regard.
	The sheep-like behavior of doctors, the advocacy of masks that was irrelevant to science, the advocacy of closing schools that doctors were behind.
	Of course, not all.
	But I am curious if it has affected you in the way in which you see the medical profession today.
	Okay, so I'm going to let go of a few calls here that I thank you for calling, but I want to do this one.
	Eric in Fort Worth, Texas.
	Hello.
	Hello, how are you today, Dennis?
	I'm well, thank you.
	Okay, so here's the deal with sex and gender, as I found out.
	If you search the net, you can find this out yourself.
	Sex, as you say, is, if you want to call it assigned, or you are, at birth, male or female.
	Then, as you grow older, you can decide about what gender.
	You are.
	Do you understand what I'm saying?
	Well, not only do I understand it, I have been explaining that for about five years.
	Perhaps you're not a regular listener.
	I know exactly what you're saying.
	Okay, so what you have said, I just said earlier on today's show.
	I know the difference, but they made it up.
	They made that up.
	Gender was a made-up term for subjective sex.
	Well, it's something that's happened since the 1950s, where you're kind of stuck in the 1950s, I feel like.
	Yeah, in terms of truth, I am stuck in the 1950s, 1850s, 1350s, and 50s.
	You sound like you are stuck in the modern age that denies truth.
	No, we're not denying truth.
	Oh, really?
	Would you say you're expanding truth?
	I see.
	Do you believe that men give birth?
	No.
	Do you know that at every university in this country, they say to kids that men give birth?
	Do you think that that's a problem?
	If you're talking about sex or gender, you have to just define which...
	No, no, no, no, no.
	I'm sorry.
	They say men give birth.
	They don't use the word sex or gender.
	That is the phrase.
	If you don't believe men give birth, you're a hater.
	Okay, but if a woman...
	Transgender into a man, that man can give birth.
	So therefore, but you just said to me you don't say men give birth.
	Well, it's a lot of semantics.
	Semantics are everything, okay?
	Either you say it or you don't.
	In other words, you said to me I'm stuck in the 50s with regard to truth.
	I said you're stuck in the 2020s with regard to non-truth.
	Would you say men give birth?
	And you said no, you wouldn't.
	Now you say it's just semantics.
	I wouldn't say that if you're assigned at birth as a male...
	Okay, alright.
	It's not a trick question.
	Would you say men give birth?
	If you deny men give birth on an American campus today, you are considered a hater.
	Well, I don't consider...
	There's two different things.
	A person that's assigned at birth as a man can't...
	Wait, you're not born a man?
	You're assigned?
	It's like you're assigned a certain bed in the hospital baby room?
	It's a little more complicated than that.
	No, no, no.
	Okay, I don't understand what that means.
	It's a little more complicated.
	But unfortunately, we have to take a break.
	I'm pleased that you called.
	It's an interesting, it was a very actually interesting call.
	If you believe that there is objective truth in any of these matters, you're stuck in the 1950s.
	Maybe the 1950s had a greater veneration of truth than the 2020s.
	Is that possible?
	But I understand the sentiment because there is this belief that the modern period, not modern, contemporary period, Is more wise, more bright, more enlightened, more moral than any period that has preceded us.
	Look around.
	You think that's true?
	Hi, everybody.
	Dennis Prager here.
	It is, and I don't say this often, an honor to speak to my guest, Heather MacDonald.
	She's a gift to this country.
	She's a lover of truth, and she's a fighter.
	It's not enough to love truth, although that already puts you in a minority, and I mean that literally, of human beings.
	But she fights.
	Her latest book, she's, by the way, at the Manhattan Institute, contributing editor of the Great City Journal.
	Book just came out, When Race Trumps Merit.
	Get that?
	When Race Trumps Merit.
	You would think it's a book about the Ku Klux Klan, or about Jim Crow laws, right?
	That's when race last trumped merit.
	When bona fide white supremacists were in charge of anything, and now the left has mimicked everything about the...
	Racists of the past, they believe race trumps merit, just like they did in the past.
	How the pursuit of equity sacrifices excellence, destroys beauty, and threatens lives.
	Again, when race trumps merit, it is up at DennisPrager.com.
	The last time I saw Heather McDonald was at a meeting in New York City a few months ago.
	May I say what you showed me, Heather?
	I'm going to say it because I'm still so proud.
	I was wearing my PragerU video socks with a very orange accent, which I otherwise would not have chosen, but if it's PragerU, I'm going to wear them.
	And here's the topper, folks.
	Heather had no clue that she would see me that day.
	No clue.
	It was a total shock.
	It was not worn for my sake.
	But immediately my shin went up.
	I shook my shin at Dennis.
	That's right.
	And I loved it.
	That was a great moment.
	I came back and told everybody about it.
	Now I'm telling literally everybody about it.
	Well, I haven't gotten any since then.
	I haven't gotten any since then.
	So I need a refill, Dennis.
	Okay.
	I'll let Prager you know.
	Thank you.
	I have a feeling they would treat you to it.
	All right, so you have been waging this battle, as I have, but you really have given all the data.
	That's the point.
	When race trumps merit.
	What I always wonder about these things is how...
	This is what preoccupies me, and then we'll get into the details.
	How did this happen?
	How did the most merit-based country in the world history come to have contempt for merit?
	Well, I think it's because of the history that you alluded to, Dennis, which is that for decades, for centuries, we did not operate consistent with our founding principles.
	And we really did treat blacks with gratuitous cruelty, heartbreaking contempt.
	It outrages me every time I read chronicles of black experience in the South and in the North, culminating in just the barbaric treatment in the 1950s in the South.
	I'm sorry, go ahead.
	Yeah, Tom, my fault.
	Go ahead.
	Whites are understandably deeply, deeply troubled and still guilt-ridden by that history.
	Now, I would argue that one can both acknowledge the fact that we were a white supremacist country.
	We were an apartheid country until quite recently in grotesque violation of our founding ideals.
	And I will at the same time assert without qualification that we are not that country today.
	We are not.
	There is not a single mainstream institution, Dennis, in this country, as you alluded to, that is not Working on behalf of blacks that is not exercising huge racial preferences in favor of blacks to try to hire and promote as many as possible.
	Americans today yearn to be post-racial, especially white Republicans.
	They're probably the most post-racial group in the country.
	They've had one love affair after another with black politicians, whether it's Ben Carson or Alan West or Alan Keyes.
	Herschel Walker, it goes on and on.
	Condi Rice, Colin Powell.
	What matters to conservative white Republicans is your values, not your skin color.
	Nevertheless, there's a significant portion who are still guilt-ridden, and they are susceptible to what is now simply a race hustle.
	And they are willing to destroy the standards of Western civilization in order to avoid the phony charge of being racist.
	Yeah, so are you, and this is truly just a question, I don't have an agenda here, are you saying that it is primarily concern for blacks?
	Or is it a disdain for Western civilization's standards?
	Or 50-50?
	I haven't thought about that.
	My initial reaction is to split the difference and say it's both.
	I think the willingness to tear down our standards and to impugn medicine, mathematics, is racist.
	I mean, how absurd is that?
	And yet...
	The leaders of medical profession, the leaders of the mathematics profession, our STEM journals, our STEM agencies in the federal government have all proclaimed that the extraordinary enlightenment professions that it is their privilege to curate are racist.
	So yes, it is contempt for Western civilization, but I think it is also a misplaced concern for Blacks, the belief that They, and certainly the MAGA hat-wearing Republicans, are continuing to oppress Blacks, and they, I think, sincerely believe, I mean, we all ask ourselves, can they really possibly believe this?
	Do they really believe that lowering standards and letting students into academic universities who are not competitively qualified is helpful?
	I think they actually believe that it is helpful and that they are the only thing standing between blacks today and a resurrection of the Ku Klux Klan.
	So my take is very similar, but I just want to amplify it for just one moment.
	I think that disdain for the West is at least 50%.
	I'll give you my example because you and I are sort of outliers even among our peers in our preoccupation with classical music.
	The former New York Times chief music critic Anthony Tomasini wrote that we should never think that Western music, Western classical music is the best music.
	Who's to say that Beethoven's Third Symphony is any better than Indonesian gamelin music?
	So that had nothing to do with American blacks.
	So it's on that basis that I think that the two aspects, the contempt for the West and theoretical wanting to help blacks, are at least evenly tied for motivation.
	My response to that, Dennis, would be that Tamasini would not have made that statement if we did not have our ongoing racial disparities.
	If our elites did not feel guilty about the fact that our traditions are not diverse by contemporary standards, that classical music composers in the canon are not 13% black, and that today our orchestras are not 13% black.
	So I don't know the context of Tomasini's comment, but...
	My guess is none of this would be happening if we did not have these ongoing racial disparities in terms of representation in meritocratic institutions and over-representation of Blacks in prison.
	In terms of the criminal justice system, if Blacks weren't over-represented in prison, the basic attitude would be throw the bums in jail and throw away the key.
	It is only because blacks are over-represented in prison that we have criminal justice reform, and it is only because we don't see blacks proportionally represented in our meritocratic institutions that we're saying that science is racist.
	So you think the animating impulse is guilt over prior treatment to blacks more than it is a disdain for the West?
	At this point, they're equal, but I think that if we didn't have racial disparities, if Google in a meritocratic system had 13% black engineers and computer scientists,
	which is at present impossible with maintaining meritocratic standards because the academic skills gap is so huge, and we can go into the numbers later, if we didn't have disparities, I don't think we would have turned on Western civilization.
	We only turned on Western civilization when we started noticing disparities and feeling guilty about them.
	But at this point, it kind of doesn't matter because...
	No, no, I agree.
	I just so admire your thinking.
	I was curious how you explain it.
	All right, let me just remind people, When Race Trumps Merit is the Book.
	How the pursuit of equity sacrifices excellence, destroys beauty, and threatens lives.
	We'll get into all three of those with Heather MacDonald.
	When race trumps merit.
	How the pursuit of equity sacrifices excellence, destroys beauty, and threatens lives.
	By Heather MacDonald, who has researched this at least as much and probably more than any living person.
	Was it your piece that I read about?
	Was it the Museum of Modern Art in New York?
	Was that your piece a couple of months ago?
	Well, the Metropolitan Museum staged an exhibit.
	called The Fictions of Emancipation that argues that any time a white creates an abolitionist piece of art, he's engaged in white supremacy.
	Sorry, it was the Met, yeah.
	The Metropolitan Museum of Art.
	My mistake.
	Go ahead, yeah.
	Yeah.
	I mean, this is just appalling.
	The Metropolitan Museum is basically...
	Willing to throw out every single tradition of art in order to make the argument that a white artist sculpting with extraordinary humanity, sensitivity and empathy, a black woman who's enslaved in order to make an abolitionist, emancipationist work of art, that that sculptor is in fact simply trying to oppress blacks.
	The Met staged an entire show.
	Around that thesis, the title sort of says it all, called The Fictions of Emancipation.
	And if anybody needs a translation, what the Metropolitan Museum of Art is saying is that emancipation was itself just a ruse and a fiction.
	So this is typical.
	You have now museum directors turning on Western art itself, saying that everything is racist.
	If you're an abolitionist, you're a racist.
	Simply amazing, Dennis.
	Well, what's amazing is that people who you would have thought, after all, to become a curator of a major art museum, you presumably, at the very least, have to love art.
	Right.
	But they don't.
	Not anymore.
	I'm astounded.
	These people are the most privileged individuals in history.
	They have been given the incredible privilege of curating the greatest civilization, the most sublime works of beauty, of accomplishment, of understanding into the human condition, of being able to portray the landscape in ways that allow us to see it through new eyes.
	And yet they have now declared that their mission as museum Leaders and curators is so-called anti-racism.
	And what that means is turning on the history of 5,000 years of art, as Max Holleyn, the director of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, has announced.
	It also means, in the case of the Art Institute of Chicago, one of the great art museums in the world.
	I recommend that everybody go see its little corridor of 18th century pastel portraits, Rococo portraits.
	I have on my smartphones a pastel portrait you would like it, Dennis, of an extraordinary violinist with the most ironic modern glance.
	But the Art Institute got rid of all its docents who were providing Chicago school children Tours and lectures and understanding of the Art Institute's collections at no cost to the Institute because those docents were white.
	That is the only reason, and the museum did not deny this, the only reason that the docents were sacked was because they were white.
	This is part of a wave of white culling that is going across our institutions, whether with regards to But that's not racist.
	That's the Orwellian aspect.
	So, I want our listeners to understand, people who curate these museums, the directors, the curators of these museums of art, are in effect saying, That they have devoted their entire life to racism, to promoting racism.
	Do they ever look in the mirror and wonder, how did this happen?
	I entered a field which is saturated with racism and that's what I do when I'm not at home every day of the week?
	That's the big question we all have, Dennis, is do they really believe it?
	I get asked this all the time and I don't have any insight.
	But I'm going to use Occam's razor and assume that they do.
	That's the simplest explanation rather than they're living in this constant charade.
	I think that they are so committed to feeling that they are superior to everybody else that they believe it.
	Even though, presumably, when they started Art History School decades ago, they didn't believe it because this...
	This hatred of the West did begin in academia.
	Already in the 1980s, you had art history departments deconstructing art, saying that, well, it's all about simply class, propping up the power of the wealthy patrons of art.
	But it got worse and worse.
	But museums took a while to catch up.
	But I think now they do believe that.
	It just makes them feel virtuous.
	But it is absolutely tragic because, you know, Max Hollen has said that he's going to do an anti-racist narrative.
	He says, our museum now is all about narratives.
	We have 5,000 years of art here, and we're all about anti-racist narratives.
	Here's the reality, Dennis.
	The 99% of art in the Western tradition has nothing to do with race.
	Sorry, guys.
	It's not about you.
	It's not about us.
	It's about what interested artists 500 years ago, they weren't thinking in our racial categories.
	And now we have the supreme solipsism and narcissism of imposing our current obsessions on the past and canceling past works of art.
	If they do not pass our litmus test, that is profoundly self-centered, narrowing and limiting, and it prevents us from expanding outside of our petty selves into something much greater than ourselves, which is the artistic vision of these great artists of the past, whether it's painters, printmakers, composers, theater writers.
	It's a tragedy, and we are preventing students.
	If I asked this, Heather, if I asked this, who is the one in Chicago you're talking about now, Lane?
	Chicago is James Rondeau, who's a total fool, and I can back that up, read the chapter on him.
	It spent me hours, I took hours trying to transcribe.
	A speech he gave at the Des Moines Art Institute.
	And I spent hours getting down every uh, you know, like, uh-huh.
	So please read this statement and see what our contemporary museum leaders actually sound like.
	I want to push it as if it were my own book, It's So Good, When Race Trumps Merit, How the Pursuit of Equity Sacrifices Excellence, Destroys Beauty, Threatens Lives.
	I'm going to talk about Threatens Lives when we come back.
	You're listening to The Dennis Prager Show with Heather MacDonald.
	I'm Dennis Prager with Heather MacDonald.
	The book just came out, When Race Trumps Merit.
	The subtitle, How the Pursuit of Equity Sacrifices Excellence Destroys Beauty and Threatens Lives.
	So, on to the threatens lives aspect.
	You concentrate quite correctly on the amount of murder, which is as life-threatening as it gets, clearly.
	Attempted murder and murder.
	That has increased in the pursuit of equity, and therefore, since blacks are disproportionately represented as violent criminals who are incarcerated, we need to stop incarcerating as much as we have.
	So, therefore, more people will hurt people.
	I want to, though, talk about the threat to lives.
	We get to that, obviously.
	But I want to throw one at you.
	And I haven't finished your book yet.
	I have it in three editions, I might add.
	I have it in Kindle, I have it in Audible, and I have it in hardcover.
	I just wanted you to know that.
	There is no...
	If you put it out in Braille, I would buy it.
	I'm curious about the Audible, because I was worried about the pronunciation capacity of the reader, so I haven't heard it yet.
	So I'm a little worried about whether she took on the Schiller in German or her French pronunciations for the artist names.
	Well, you can imagine how I feel.
	So my reader is confronted with all these Hebrew words in my Bible commentary.
	Exactly.
	I totally identify.
	So the one that I want to raise with you that is not about crime is the United Airlines having announced about a year ago that it's reserving...
	Half of its place is at its pilot's school for women and minorities, racial minorities.
	Are you familiar with that?
	And do you cover it in the book?
	And what's your thought?
	No, that got so much coverage already, but it's absolutely that I didn't cover it in the book, but it's absolutely standard.
	I mean, that's in a nutshell what's going on.
	In medical schools, you know, we all worry about a pilot being promoted on the basis of the trivialities and irrelevancies of sex or race.
	Same thing.
	Doctors that are now being pushed into medical school based on race, not academic qualifications, are being pushed through medical school based on race or sometimes sex rather than medical qualifications and into hospitals.
	So this is...
	Happening everywhere.
	And people should really start paying attention and demand an end to the race hustle and the lowering of standards in the name of diversity and say, we are going to apply our standards, whether it's for pilot school or medical school, medical research, and let the chips fall wherever they may.
	The standards are not racist.
	The standards are not the problem.
	When you say people should say this, what exactly do you mean?
	Because I get this every day, and I completely empathize with the person asking this.
	In other words, I feel their pain, not in the Clinton sense, but in a genuine, genuine sense.
	What should the average individual do?
	Well, the average individual may not have that much power.
	But anybody who has a public platform should be fighting back against the charge that any institution that is not racially proportionate is per se racist.
	And we should have the facts at our fingertips to explain why you cannot have meritocracy and diversity at the same time.
	The average person, if you're in a conversation with a colleague or a friend, Who insists on the systemic racism argument and is arguing that medicine is racist because there's not 13% black faculty members in medical schools or we have racial disparities in health outcomes.
	You know, we can start locally.
	Arm yourself with those facts that explain the academic skills gap and how it's, again, you cannot have meritocracy in medicine.
	And have diversity at the same time.
	If you want diversity, you're going to have to sacrifice meritocracy.
	Everybody can do that.
	Everybody can issue that in a tweet or on their Facebook page or what have you.
	The book is When Race Trumps Merit.
	Heather MacDonald, back in a moment.
	I'm speaking with Heather MacDonald, author of many terrific books, and of course the latest, which is a major achievement.
	And I want to get to my copy here, as I was bragging that I have it in every...
	Every format it's made, when race trumps merit, how the pursuit of equity, sacrifice is excellent, destroys beauty, and threatens lives.
	So, I was talking about the airplane pilot decision, and your chapters on the threatened lives are primarily about the crime issue.
	I'm going to ask a question because of my belief that truth matters, not because of any other reason.
	Is it fair to say that on any given day, on any random street, that statistically speaking, a white individual has more to fear from a black attacker than a black from a white attacker?
	That is absolutely the case, Dennis.
	If you look at the entire universe of interracial crime between blacks and whites on the one hand and whites and blacks on the other, Blacks commit about 85% of all interracial crime.
	Seven times more instances of black on white crime than white on black crime.
	That is, of course, the exact opposite of the narrative.
	It is amazing.
	This is perhaps one of the most egregious, shameless instances.
	Of media and political lying that we're having to live with today.
	We're now following the shooting of the boy in Kansas City, Ralph Yarl, and the usual maudlin outpouring that this is how black people die, that whites are gunning down blacks all the time.
	The reality is, so we have a new, well, black...
	You know, we used to have driving while black.
	Now we have from the mayor of Kansas City, in the wake of this Ralph Yarl shooting, existing while black.
	Well, I'm composing at this very moment a while white list of the amounts of assaults, murders, shootings, beatings up, bullying blacks on whites.
	And I apologize to your...
	Delicately sensibility listeners, because it is very unusual for whites to talk with this degree of frankness, and it makes many people very uncomfortable, Dennis.
	But the fact of the matter is, is that the vast majority of interracial violence is blacks beating up on whites and beating up on Asians.
	And we've all seen those videos.
	Elderly Asians being absolutely pummeled, stomped on by black teens, and yet the degree of racial ideology and bad faith is such that we go around pretending that the problem is white supremacy.
	It is simply stunning.
	Yep.
	You get to go to college campuses, and what happens?
	I have the same experience as you do, Dennis.
	The mob goes berserk.
	It is really something to be in the face of or in front of the student mob and to feel directly the degree of irrationality, of self-pity, of maudlin hysteria coming out of these students and knowing that the adults on campus of maudlin hysteria coming out of these students and knowing that the adults on campus are doing absolutely
	They are encouraging it, and every year these colleges are belching forth another 100,000 or whatever the numbers are of students that are absolutely indulging in self-pity and are seeing the world through utterly distorted or whatever the numbers are of students that are absolutely indulging Where was the last place you spoke?
	And did you actually get it?
	To finish your speech?
	I can't remember the last one.
	It may have...
	Well, I was at MIT last month debating...
	Go on.
	That was a debate on whether to abolish campus diversity bureaucracies.
	But that was mostly...
	The audience was mostly...
	MIT alums.
	There were very few students there.
	So, yes, that debate I continued.
	And you can people can find my opening statement on the web of the great MIT debate.
	So that was but the students basically were not there.
	And before that, I don't remember whether it was Holy Cross, but that was a walkout.
	Holy Cross was a walkout by students who tried to First take up all the seats in the auditorium, and then as I was discussing Renaissance humanism and Petrarch, they all decided that was the moment to leave, because my thesis was that as college students, they were the most privileged individuals in human history, because they had at their fingertips something that sold a song for.
	All right.
	We've got to break, and I've got to say goodbye.
	You're a treasurer in this country.
	When race trumps merit, folks.
	It's hard to put down.
	Thank you, Dennis.
	In the pursuit of equity, thank you, sacrifices excellence, destroys beauty, and threatens lives when race trumps merit.
	Dennis Prager here.
	Thanks for listening to the Daily Dennis Prager Podcast.
	To hear the entire three hours of my radio show, commercial-free, every single day.
	You'll also get access to 15 years' worth of archives, as well as the daily show prep.

▲