All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 3, 2023 - Dennis Prager Show
01:20:53
Nobel Prize Loser
| Copy link to current segment

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 PragerTopia.com.
Hi everybody, welcome to the Dennis Prager Show.
Welcome.
I sit here in awe of the ability of the sophisticated elites of the earth to engage in intellectual and scientific fraud.
This might be the most absurd Nobel Prize Well, no.
Giving Barack Obama the Peace Prize when he hadn't even served as president, that might be the record.
But the Nobel Prize has lost its stature because even that has been politicized by the left.
The Nobel Peace Prize in Physiology or Medicine It's awarded to a pair of scientists for their work that led to the, I'm reading from Newsweek, MRNA COVID-19 vaccines.
Do you believe that?
By the way, if this is...
Okay, now they're...
There they are.
Now this...
They're getting all these awards.
Dr. Catalin Carrico and Dr. Drew Weissman.
They got a Nobel Prize for a vaccine that didn't work and that has caused a great number of people terrible repercussions.
It's not even a vaccine.
The vaccine has been known to be defined as injecting a live virus to induce antibodies.
That's not what is happening here.
It's experimental, aside from everything else.
Wow.
Kathleen Carrico and Drew Weissman were awarded on Monday for their work on identifying a What is the word that you would normally use?
That...
Created within you antibodies to forestall the disease.
The Nobel Assembly at Karolinska Institute has praised the scientists' work on transforming vaccine technology.
Boy, is that true.
Through the groundbreaking findings which have fundamentally changed our understanding of how mRNA interacts with our immune system, The laureates contributed to the unprecedented rate of vaccine development during one of the greatest threats to human health in modern times.
Hmm.
The laureates contributed to the unprecedented rate of vaccine development.
Yeah, but if the vaccine rarely worked and caused a fair degree of harm, I almost have a collection of stories of completely healthy people falling over and dropping dead.
I don't recall this in my lifetime.
Since the announcement, many have taken to X, formerly Twitter, to question the praise for the scientists and the effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccine.
Vince Langman, an ex-user, wrote, A Nobel Prize for a vaccine that didn't prevent people from getting COVID and caused thousands of young, healthy adults' hearts to explode.
We are living in the twilight zone.
That is correct.
We are living in the twilight zone.
That is a very good way of putting it.
Wow.
We should talk to Mr. Berenson about this one.
This is really, it's a corker.
You've got to admit it, my friends.
I have not witnessed this very often in the past.
So there's a big question here on which governor has more chutzpah, Pritzker or Hochul.
They are now complaining about illegal immigrants.
So, Pritzker, who is one of those people that proves the weakness of the human conscience, because he lives perfectly well with his conscience.
Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker calls on Biden to direct migrants away from his state.
Despite boasting, it was the most, quote, most welcoming in the nation just two years ago.
You see, truth is not a left-wing value.
That is my point.
It is one of the most important things you could know about the world.
They would never say it's okay to lie, but they don't care about the truth.
And so, obviously, they end up lying.
He's the most welcoming state in the nation, and now he's complaining that they're coming.
I can't even think of an analogy, and I'm good at analogies.
I think in terms of analogies.
We are the most welcoming state in the nation, we in Illinois.
But if you come, we won't welcome you.
Okay, I get it.
Pritzker joins New York City Mayor Eric Adams in New Jersey, Governor Phil Murphy among liberals, complaining about the influx.
These are truly disgusting people.
It's a fake, it's a make-believe world, the world of the left, and therefore of the Democratic Party.
And I know you'll all talk, not all, the respondents are, well, look at Trump.
Whenever I have dialogued or debated a person of the left, it has been fascinating because when I raise a point, another topic is raised.
So if you raise this topic of, oh, we're all for opening the border, and then they come to their state or city, and then they're opposed to it, then they will tell you, well, what about Trump?
And that sort of ends the discussion for them.
Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker has become the latest Democrat to beg President Joe Biden to divert migrants away from his state.
It comes just two years after declaring his state quote, the most welcoming state in the nation and expanding immigrant protections.
As I said, he joins Mayor Eric Adams, New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy, and they didn't include the Governor Hochul of New York.
They are liberals.
This is the Daily Wire, which is not, excuse me, the Daily Mail, which is not left or right.
It's an equal opportunity offender.
I know I've been the butt of two articles.
They're hardly friends of the right.
They profess pro-migrant policies and ask that they be not housed in their jurisdiction.
Chicago has seen 13,000 migrants arrive in the city since August 2022, and the surge is expected to cost taxpayers $302 million by the end of the year.
So tell me...
I wish I could be broadcasting right now to a million leftists.
How do you deal with this in your mind?
I would only want to hear, I wouldn't argue.
I want to understand the left-wing mind.
It is okay for millions of illegal immigrants to inundate other places.
In the United States of America, but not their place.
So what does one call that?
I don't even know the term.
Not narcissism and not hypocrisy, although it's obviously hypocritical, but it's such a minor charge given the offense.
Yes.
What you should do illegal immigrants is inundate other cities, not ours.
Gold dealers are a dime a dozen.
They're everywhere.
What sets these companies apart and whom can you really trust?
This is Dennis Prager for AmFedCoin and Bullion.
My choice for buying precious metals.
When you buy precious metals, it's imperative that you buy from a trustworthy and transparent dealer that protects your best interests.
So many companies use gimmicks to take advantage of inexperienced gold and silver buyers.
Be cautious of brokers offering free gold and silver or brokers that want to sell you overpriced collectible coins.
They appreciate more than gold and silver.
What about hidden commissions and huge markups?
Nick Grovich and his team at AmFed always have your back.
I trust this man.
That's why I mention him by name.
Nick's been in this industry over 42 years, and he's proud of providing transparency and fair pricing to build trusted relationships.
If you're interested in buying or selling, call Nick Grovich and his team at AmFed, Coin& Bullion, 800-221-7694.
AmericanFederal.com.
AmericanFederal.com.
That is Prager here.
I'm reading Governor Pritzker, J.B. Pritzker, whom the people of Illinois elected.
The majority of people, not all.
President Biden.
Isn't that interesting?
It's not even dear President Biden?
Isn't that odd?
Or dear Mr. President?
President Biden?
Sounds like it came from a Republican.
In the 13 months since the first busload of asylum seekers arrived in Illinois from the border, our state has undertaken an unprecedented humanitarian response to the arrival of now over 15,000 people.
Governors and mayors, listen to this.
Governors and mayors from border states have shipped people to our state like cargo in a dehumanizing attempt to score political points.
See, that line shows you that there isn't an honest bone in J.B. Pritzker's body.
When he said we're the most welcoming state in the Union, was that not for scoring political points?
Why on God's earth is it a political point?
If we're one country, why should only border states be inundated with illegal immigrants?
The people in the non-border states push for it, and then when they come to their states, they howl.
It's beyond belief.
The people of Illinois are kind and generous.
I wonder if he thinks that of the Republican people of Illinois.
Just curious.
We believe in the fundamental right of every human, especially those facing persecution, to find refuge and live with dignity in this great country of ours.
But as the numbers being transported to Chicago are accelerating, the humanitarian crisis is overwhelming our ability to provide aid to the refugee population.
So I'm just curious.
Did you speak about this when they overwhelmed the ability of El Paso to provide aid?
Why not?
Because he didn't care.
Because he scored political points by saying, Illinois is the most welcoming state in the Union for these people.
The welcome and aid Illinois has been providing to these asylum seekers has not been matched with support by the federal government.
Oh, so that's it.
We are now seeing busloads more migrants at increasingly higher rates being sent specifically to Chicago each day.
As it should be, you're the most welcoming state in the Union, Governor Pritzker.
Our state government has been forced to dedicate over $330 million to provide humanitarian aid, and that amount is increasing each day.
So why didn't you protest the inundation of other places?
By illegal immigrants.
Why not?
It's a long letter.
That's enough.
Enough of that.
God.
Democratic Party.
Democratic Representative Cuellar carjacked in Washington, D.C. I'm not happy for this man.
My heart goes out to him, in fact.
This is another example of Democrats being bitten by the evils that they promote.
I wonder if he was a defund the police guy.
I wonder if he was among those attacking the police for their racism.
Systemic racism, not for there being some individual racists.
I wonder if he thinks the people who did this to him did it because of poverty or because they're scum.
Are you allowed to say that about people who hurt other people?
Is there any time where the term is allowable?
No, I guess not yet.
You're only allowed to call Republicans fascists, but you're not allowed to call carjacker scum.
That is the rule on the left, and it perfectly exemplifies an ancient Hebrew principle, those who are...
Kind to the cruel will be cruel to the kind.
That is the motto of the left.
U.S. Representative Henry Cuellar, Democrat Texas, was carjacked Monday evening in the Navy Yard of Washington, D.C., roughly a mile from the U.S. Capitol.
That's amazing.
9.30 p.m.
As Congressman Cuellar was parking his car this evening, three armed assailants approached the congressman and stole his vehicle.
Luckily, he was not harmed and is working with local law enforcement, Jacob Huckberg, Cuellar's chief of staff, said in a statement.
D.C. alerts indicated that the suspects were black males wearing all-black clothing and had stolen a white Honda with Texas tags.
Which Hochberg indicated has since been recovered.
So, once again, I note, because it is never noted, never, there is a blanket over the crisis of blacks' involvement in crime, in violent crime.
Which is dismissed as racism.
So, all whites are racist is a perfectly legitimate statement.
Blacks disproportionately commit violent crime is a racist statement because truth is not a left-wing value.
Why is it important?
If you want to solve the problem, you have to look to where it is emanating from.
Is that not correct?
Think these three grew up with a dad in their lives?
I don't.
And the rhetoric, you are victims of a racist society, reinforces their right, in many cases, to hurt others.
One of my favorite organizations in the country is the Alliance Defending Freedom because that's exactly what they do.
And I'm bringing them to your attention and asking you to help them this month.
Ryan Tucker is Senior Counsel with ADF, and I have him on the line and on the video.
Ryan Tucker, welcome to the Dennis Prager Show.
I'm not hearing Mr. Tucker.
Thanks for having me.
Thank you.
Excellent.
So give me and my listeners some examples of cases you're working on now.
Well, one egregious example is out of Arizona.
We represented Arizona Christian University, a great Christian school that has partnered with a local school district in the Phoenix metro area for over 10 years.
And a large number of their education students served in the school district as student teachers.
Over the course of many years, and many have gone on to permanent employment there.
I think it's something like 17 different students.
But in a recent school board meeting, the district voted unanimously, five to nothing, to end their relationship with Arizona Christian University due solely to the school's religious beliefs about sexuality and gender.
Just to give you an idea of some of the hostile things they said, the school board accused the teachers of being, quote-unquote, Not safe.
Again, merely because of having a biblical view of marriage and sexuality.
There were no allegations that the students had done anything wrong, that they were out proselytizing or violating the district policies in any form or fashion.
Instead, they just didn't like their religious beliefs.
And so ADF was forced to file a federal lawsuit on their behalf.
We had a hearing before a federal judge there in Phoenix.
And shortly after that hearing, the other side wanted to talk, not surprisingly.
This is one of the most egregious examples, I think, of religious discrimination I've seen in recent years here at ADF.
And, you know, it simply points to the fact that the government can't show hostility towards people simply for their religious beliefs.
This was an attack on religious freedom.
The government officials cannot choose to exclude people simply because they are, in fact, religious.
So did they back down?
Great!
They did eventually back down and we recently were able to not only resolve that, the school district was forced to pay our attorney's fees.
And they also agreed.
Great.
I think that's great.
It was awesome.
It was a great result.
What's even better is the fact that they recently entered into a new partnership, a new agreement that was better than the original one.
So, you know, your listeners can go.
It's really an insane hearing or meeting that this board had.
There were several that took place even after that because there was some national outcry over these events.
But this is just another egregious example of hostility that, again, people of faith that are facing here in the United States these days.
I want to understand once again, the charge against, or the charge against them that led to the termination of a 10-year agreement of taking them, what is it, into schools to teach?
Yeah, it's just like any, you know, when you have a student at a university and they're in an elementary ed program.
You know, one of their requirements, you know, to eventually become a teacher...
I see, is to actually teach, is to enter a classroom.
So they had done this for 10 years, and then the Glendale, Arizona School Board 5-0 ended that agreement on the grounds that these students from Arizona Christian University rendered the classroom unsafe.
Did I get that correctly?
You did.
It's actually called the Washington Elementary School District in Glendale, Arizona, so Metro Phoenix.
This is a school district that was right next door to the Arizona Christian University.
So it's literally the district next door.
So these students, in order to finish their student teaching requirements, they were able literally to get in the car, go over to one of the many schools there.
This is the largest elementary school district in the entire state of Arizona, by the way.
Did they cite, forgive me, this is mesmerizing me, did they cite views of these students or are we inferring them?
No, what they did was they went to the university's website and started pulling statements from the university's website on their beliefs.
Oh, that's fascinating.
Alright, we're going to continue in a moment.
We're going to continue.
Please go to the DennisPrager.com and click on the ABF banner to help them.
They do this for free.
They're great.
When the government used emergency edicts during COVID to restrict the gathering and worship of churches, three pastors facing the risk of imprisonment, unlimited fines, and their own churches being ripped apart took a courageous stand and reopened their doors in the face of a world that chose to comply.
The Essential Church is a feature-length documentary that explores the struggle between the church and government throughout history.
This fascinating story uncovers those who've sacrificed their lives throughout history for what they truly believe in.
We discover why the church is essential and how we prove that this stand remains true from a scientific, legal, and most importantly, biblical perspective.
This is not your typical movie.
It'll change your life.
You need to see this movie with your friends and family.
The Essential Church is streaming today exclusively at SalemNow.com.
That's Essential Church, streaming at SalemNow.com.
Well, hello all.
Dennis Prager here.
The descent of the country.
In many arenas, in all of its elite arenas, it's quite remarkable.
Here's another story for you.
But I have an additional point to make beyond the obvious.
This is from Reuters, not what you would call a conservative source.
History is made, quote-unquote, as Michigan judges are ordered to use lawyers' preferred pronouns.
I'm smiling.
In case you're not watching this on video.
Michigan has become the first state to require judges to refer to attorneys by their preferred pronouns.
Which is interesting since the U is plural, singular, and not gender-based a word. and not gender-based a word.
So, it would only be if the judge refers to the attorney in the third person.
I don't know when a judge would do that.
You're overruled.
Your objection is sustained.
Does he ever look at the, or she ever look at the jury and say, her...
Argument or his argument?
Well, anyway, if they do, now if the attorney is non-binary, as Sean is, then what you will do, what is your current preferred?
Z? Is that correct?
When we refer to you here, it's Z. And that is how the attorney would be referred to.
It's a largely symbolic craze that it was involved with.
But I have another insight.
I looked this up, so let me continue.
A divided Michigan Supreme Court approved a new rule that allows attorneys to include their preferred forms of address or pronouns in the captions of court documents.
And requires judges to use those terms, quote, or other respectful means, I don't know what that means, when referring to those attorneys either in court or in documents.
The rule was adopted 5-2, goes into effect on January 1st.
Wrote Justice Elizabeth Welch in her concurring opinion, Is it a societal norm to refer to people with non-binary pronouns?
Do you do that?
Do you know anybody who does that?
That's now a societal norm, or is it an...
An elite, woke norm.
She noted that judges no longer refer to women attorneys as either Miss or Mrs. in court depending on their marital status, as was the norm years ago.
That is correct.
But a label of your marital status is not quite the same.
Because that reflects a reality.
You are married or you are not married.
But non-binary pronouns do not reflect reality.
You are either a man or a woman.
And you are what you were born.
You can say you are the other.
There is no law, and there should not be a law against your saying that if you are a boy, you are a girl.
If you're a girl, you're a boy.
But we don't have to go along with the distortion of reality.
You are either a boy or a girl.
You are born a boy or a girl.
The issue of ambiguous genitalia.
is so rare and in any event does not mean that you are both sexes.
It means you have the genitalia of both sexes.
you are still chromosomally and brain-wise and reproductive-wise, one or the other.
The rule chain generated a raft of public comments and testimony at a public hearing, Welch added, with objections ranging from grammatical Welch added, with objections ranging from grammatical and record confusion to personal beliefs, but the rule allows those who don't believe
But the rule allows those who don't believe that people can switch genders or be non-binary to use alternative neutral language such as attorney smith or plaintiff smith.
Okay, well, that's a good thing.
Thank you.
Justice Kira Bolden wrote in her concurrence that the new rule sends a message that Michigan courts are welcoming and inclusive.
Really?
Inclusive?
It includes people who deny that they are male or female.
Is that a victory for society?
Justice Bolden?
While Michigan is the first state court to amend its court rules to expressly include such comprehensive protection for personal pronouns, history is made by being the first, Bolton wrote.
And now comes a punchline.
But two other justices said the court should not get involved in such a divisive issue and that the existing judicial code of conduct Already requires judges to treat everyone with courtesy and respect.
This is a fluid political debate into which our judicial branch of state government should not wade, let alone dive headfirst and claim to have resolved, wrote Justice Brian Zahra in his dissent.
The new rules risk alienating those who disagree with the change and diminishing the court's legitimacy.
No kidding!
warned Justice David Viviano.
Okay, my friends, if you're really, really on top of things and you really, really know me, you know the point I'll make.
Tick, tuck, tick, tuck.
Buzzer, please.
Now, there are how many justices on the Supreme Court here?
What did it say the vote was?
The vote was five to two.
So four justices are named.
I have to find how the other three went.
Oh, no, I know how the other three went.
Only two justices.
That's right, only two justices voted against using non-binary pronouns.
Now, the two justices cited in favor of changing the nomenclature were women, and the only people, the only judges to vote against the change were male.
Five to two.
And it named the two opponents, both male.
When I note that women are playing a disproportionate role in changing the society, and in some ways quite negatively in the form of robbing children of their sexual innocence, of course I'm accused because the left doesn't care about truth.
It doesn't ask...
Did what Dennis Prager say, is it true?
They simply dismiss it as misogyny.
So if you say toxic masculinity, you're not anti-male.
But if you say that women are playing a disproportionate role in harming the society in what they're doing to children, let's say, or in making the society woke, as in the case of the Michigan Supreme Court, even though it is entirely accurate.
You are called names.
I am impervious to being disturbed by being called names.
Just for the record, all the attacks on me do is say, ah, I'm hitting the target.
And then I sleep like a baby.
And that's the truth.
I don't expect the left to argue on the question of, is it accurate?
Is it accurate is not a left-wing question.
How do we smear the person we don't want to say what is accurate is the left-wing question.
And here you have another example on the Michigan Supreme Court.
It's the men who voted against it.
We return.
Mike Lindell has a passion to help you get the best sleep of your life.
He didn't stop at the pillow.
Mike also created the Giza Dream bed sheets.
These sheets look and feel great, which means an even better night's sleep, which is crucial for overall health.
Mike found the world's best cotton called Giza.
It's ultra soft and breathable, but extremely durable.
Mike's latest deal is the sale of the year for a limited time.
You'll receive 50% off the Giza Dream sheets, marking prices down as low as $20.
Go to MyPillow.com, click on the radio podcast square and use the promo code Prager.
There you'll find not only this amazing offer, but also deep discounts on all MyPillow products, including the MyPillow 2.0 mattress topper, MyPillow kitchen towel sets, and so much more.
Call 800-761-6302 or go to MyPillow.com and use the promo code Prager.
So what do you think of that?
You think it's a coincidence that the only two judges to vote against changing pronouns in Michigan courts are male?
Do you think that's a coincidence?
So why did the women on the court vote in favor?
The only case in the United States, Michigan courts, if an attorney says, I want to be addressed as him and it's a she, or as neither, they, then you are to do so.
Why did the women on the Supreme Court there do that?
So, as I have said all of my life, each sex has to battle its nature.
Men have to battle their violent nature and their sexual predatory nature.
Women have to battle their emotions and their empathetic nature.
You can't run a policy on empathy alone or nurturing.
It needs to be channeled.
And women are not channeling, many women are not channeling these days into good arenas.
Leftism is a non-channeling of the nurture principle to an extent that it actually becomes threatening to actual nurturing.
So that's why I believe that it is...
It fell male, female, the vote in Michigan.
COVID vaccine poll finds more than half of adults are likely to say no thanks to the vax.
Again, here's the interesting part.
First, the overview.
U.S. adults, 52%, they will probably or definitely not get the new COVID-19 vaccine.
More than half.
That's fascinating.
According to the latest Kaiser Family Foundation vaccine monitor poll, Kaiser is on the left, so they had no reason to skew the vote in this direction.
Conversely, 23% of adults definitely plan to get the vaccine, while another 23% will probably get it.
Okay, that's obvious, given the breakdown of the numbers.
More than half won't or probably won't, and a little under half will or probably will.
All right.
Now, here is what I want you to hear.
70% of Democrats plan to get the new vaccine.
24% of Republicans.
That alone should make you a Republican.
That's a very dramatic piece of data.
It's from the Kaiser Foundation.
70% of Democrats plan to get the new vaccine.
Which is not a vaccine, but that's a separate issue.
And only 24% of Republicans.
7 out of 10 Democrats, 1 out of 4 Republicans.
Wow.
I'd like to meet the 24% of Republicans who plan to get the vaccine.
I'd like to know what makes them tick.
But I certainly get the 70% of Democrats.
Better safe than sorry.
Got that jingle, Sean?
Better safe than sorry.
I made this up years ago before the whole COVID crisis.
For the land of the free, better safe than sorry.
Well done.
Who did that?
Do you know who did that, Sean?
Who sent that in?
Do we know?
No, we don't know.
Okay, well, we need more jingles.
Those are priceless.
Better safe than sorry.
The trouble is, dear Democrats, you might be sorry.
See, that's what is missing from the equation of people.
The issue is not only is the COVID vaccine effective.
It was clearly quite ineffective.
But, of course, they had a heads-we-win, tails-we-lose scenario.
So if you would note that almost everybody who got the vaccine got COVID, they'll say, well, it was a milder case.
Really, how do you know that?
And what about all the people who had side effects, injurious side effects, including death?
We don't like to talk about that because we're not a truth-oriented society because the left is in charge.
But I'll tell you, this is a true liberal-conservative difference.
This is not even left-conservative.
This is liberal-conservative.
So here's a thought question for you, and I'd be very interested, actually, in hearing your theories.
Why...
Are liberals far more predisposed to getting this vaccine than conservatives?
Colin, I'm very curious.
I don't know if I could take all the calls, but I'm very curious what your theory is.
We have this statistically, and we have it from a liberal source.
The Kaiser Foundation, which has also been terribly hurt by the left.
Why do you think liberals are far more likely to take the vaccine now, let alone earlier?
Oh, this is so interesting.
I'm asking you a question.
I want to know what you think.
So this is a poll just released by the Kaiser Foundation, the Kaiser Hospitals, right?
And that is, overwhelmingly, Democrats will get or are likely to take the new COVID vaccine.
Overwhelmingly, Republicans won't.
Here's another piece of data.
Among Democrats, 58% are likely to take extra precautions, including wearing masks, foregoing travel, and avoiding public gatherings.
But just 16% of Republicans said they would be likely to do the same.
So why?
I think that this is extremely instructive.
The more you move to the left, the more you have fear, period.
Not only do they fear getting sick and dying when there is no reason to have that fear, or very little reason, to be precise, but they fear, they even fear, unless I realized when I was in college, I didn't understand it then, they fear...
Acknowledging male-female differences.
They fear much more likely marriage.
They much more likely fear having children.
Joe Biden said during, what was it, SARS? Nobody really was even paying attention.
Swine flu?
It's so interesting.
I'm commending myself for noting it then.
He said he would not go on an airplane.
He was vice president.
I wouldn't go anywhere in confined places now.
Isn't that amazing?
Who on God's earth thought that way about the swine flu?
He wouldn't go in any...
And I remember saying, what kind of leader is that?
He should be the first to go on an airplane because he's a leader.
Leaders don't cower.
Boy, was I wrong!
They certainly do.
But this is it.
It's a big amount of fear that animates the left.
Let's be honest.
If you see somebody today walking around outdoors, so both post-COVID and outdoors, wearing a mask, Unless they're Asian, because it's a cultural habit in Asia, don't you assume they're a Democrat?
Of course you do.
You would bet heavy odds that they vote Democrat.
Okay, let's see what you folks have to say.
Good, this is good.
In Florida, it's Vicki.
Hello.
Hi, Dennis.
Hi.
I just called in to add some more fuel to this argument.
I was a bull worker in Florida last year.
We had midterms.
And I have processed in-person people, many, many hundreds of them.
You could tell what party they were when you handed them their ballot because they were different ballots for Republicans and Democrats.
Right.
Every single person who came to my station wearing a mask, every single one was a Democrat.
Every single one.
There was never a Republican who came to my station wearing a mask, which is...
which is not to say every Democrat was wearing a mask, but everyone wearing a mask.
You're precise.
And it became comical.
It really became comical.
I could see them coming, and I thought, just reach for the Democrat ballot.
Oh, that's great.
That's what you should have done.
But you'd have been in trouble because if they would have said to you, well, how did you know that I'm a Democrat?
You couldn't tell them.
You're wearing a mask.
You're wearing a mask.
Now, I've run into this so many times.
I was at a stationary store, and I was looking around a woman to see something that was on the counter, and she screamed at me, stand back!
Stand back!
And I said, what?
And she said, you're not wearing a mask.
Stand back.
And I said to her, you're not wearing a mask either.
What's your problem?
That seems to me to be a logical response.
Oh, boy.
This is really revealing.
This is as revealing as the Michigan Supreme Court decision about men and women.
And this is about left and right.
This is the ultimate issues hour, as they would say in Britain.
I'm Dennis Prager.
The great issues of life.
If people had clarity on the great issues, they would have much more clarity on the immediate issues.
That's why, among other reasons, this is so important.
I've always gravitated to ultimate issues.
I wrote essays on the big questions like, is there an afterlife when I was in high school?
I just thought about them naturally.
We all have such individual natures.
It's really something.
Our natures are as unique as our fingerprint or our DNA. Be that as it may, here's a topic for you.
On an Ultimate Issues Hour.
And it's a big one.
Well, they all are.
That's why they're called Ultimate Issues.
I have devoted much of my life, if there's been one overarching theme, it has been the consequences of the death of religion or the consequences of secularism.
I rarely argue for God's existence.
I believe deeply in God, but I don't do that.
I argue instead for the necessity of God and the Bible.
I also find that to be much more effective because if you understand how important God and the Bible are, it's more important to me than your own belief system.
So here's a consequence of secularism that you may not have thought of.
I would say that America today is less forgiving than at any time in its history.
There is an antipathy, especially on the left, there is an antipathy toward forgiving people.
Past sins, including sins that may have occurred 10, 20, 30, 40 years earlier.
It's astonishing.
Somebody used the N-word in some context when they were in high school.
They have not since.
They have apologized profusely.
It doesn't matter.
Somebody harassed a girl.
20, 30 years ago.
I'm not talking about rape, but harassed a girl 20, 30 years ago, and it doesn't matter.
Apologies seem to actually make it worse.
The sharks smell blood when there is an apology.
They don't see a contrite individual interested in penitence.
A person they can destroy.
This was brought home, interestingly, just recently, when I was reading the script for a PragerU video on the President Grover Cleveland in the late 19th century.
Grover Cleveland Ran for president, and while running for president, he was accused of, while he had been either governor of New York or mayor of Buffalo, I don't recall which, of fathering a child out of wedlock.
He didn't get married until assuming office, I believe, or...
In any event, at the age of 40, and then he married a 21-year-old young woman.
There's a big age difference, obviously.
And apparently he was a man of...
How shall we put it?
A man who liked women.
And acted upon his liking.
When told of the affair, he acknowledged that he was the father.
There's mixed stories on how culpable he was.
For example, did he at all take care of the child?
He obviously didn't raise it.
He was a bachelor.
Among other things, but all of that is not relevant.
What is relevant is he acknowledged it and he still won the presidency in a far more religious, far more conservative age.
The more we abandon religion, the more mean Americans are getting.
This is a perfect example.
The smashing of the life and reputations and ability to even make a living of those who have sinned in the past, and though they have apologized, it has been held in contempt, their apology.
When Brett Kavanaugh, Judge Kavanaugh, now Justice Kavanaugh, was...
At his hearing, he was accused of having sexually assaulted a girl while in high school.
Now, I don't know, what would that have been?
30 years earlier?
A whole lifetime earlier?
His conduct ever since high school has been above reproach?
He was married with children.
He was an esteemed member of his community, whether you were Republican or Democrat.
But now, it was, of course, politically dominated.
The issue was a political one.
Nevertheless, it is par for the course today.
Especially among the anti-religious, which is the left, that you have no ability to apologize.
Your apology only means that you're guilty and unworthy of any respect.
In other words, our secular age has actually become less accepting of the concept of penitence.
Than we were in our religious age.
That's an ultimate issue for you.
1-8 Prager 776 877-243-7776 Do you agree?
There is far less forgiveness today than in the past?
And that it is Very, very much related to the abandonment of a religious sensibility.
It is such a major part of Judaism and Christianity, the idea of the penitent.
I mean, it's so central to both faiths.
The holiest day in the Jewish calendar, which we just passed, was the Day of Atonement.
You can atone!
The whole point is you can atone.
But not among many of the secular, certainly not the secular quote-unquote progressive.
You can't atone.
We gotcha.
We don't even need to prove it.
It is merely enough to be charged with something.
We're not talking murder.
You've said something, not even did something yet.
You said something bad.
You said something bad in private.
And that is enough to hang you.
Yeah, there's a consequence of secularism for you.
People not accepting.
Atonement.
Do you agree?
1-8 Prager 776-877-243-7776.
Ultimate Issues Hour on the Dennis Prager Show.
So this is a very important subject on the Ultimate Issues Hour.
And it's about a new America...
We had a president elected twice, not consecutively the only one, Grover Cleveland.
He fathered a child out of wedlock, and Americans still elected him.
And it made me think about how today that would go over.
You had Brett Kavanaugh cruelly, almost sadistically attacked.
for allegedly sexually assaulting a girl.
He was a boy.
She was a girl in high school.
When I think of the people cancelled There's two aspects.
There are two aspects.
Those whose lives are cancelled because they hold positions the left does not agree with, and there are those who are cancelled because of something they did in the past, and though they've led an honorable life, it is irrelevant.
They should be destroyed because of what they did 30 years ago.
This is new in general in American life.
It raises a question that I don't know the answer to.
I think the answer is actually both.
Are mean people more likely to go to the left?
And I don't mean liberal.
Left.
Or does the left make people mean?
And the answer is both.
This is a great example.
This is truly a great example.
Okay, let's see here.
Columbus, Ohio.
Jonathan, hello.
Are we on, Sean?
Jonathan, are you there?
That's rare.
I understand.
Okay, all right.
So you weren't on until now.
Is that your first words where I understand?
No, my first words is...
To respond to you, ask me...
Yeah, okay.
No, no, I didn't hear you.
I didn't want people to miss something you had to say.
Thank you very much.
I appreciate that.
What I was saying is, what I was getting ready to say was that I see that you've missed the understanding once again.
You were talking about forgiveness and people that are, it's hard for them to forgive or whatever it was that you said pertaining to that.
And I thought about it.
And you said, you were talking about apologies were not enough.
And I thought about it.
I said, well, wait a minute.
I haven't heard you mention one time about Donald Trump apologizing for some of the things that he's done within, say, the last 10 years.
And especially one of the things that I was speaking about was the fact that he didn't realize it.
I shouldn't say that.
I shouldn't give him that benefit of the doubt.
The fact that he traumatized women in different spots where he said, oh, they let you grab him there and they let you grab him here.
He has never once apologized for any of his dirt, okay?
But as far as apologies go, if you really look at the history, black folks are the most apologetic people on the face of their most forgiving.
I'll give you an example.
When their children are killed by whatever means, whether or not the police meant it or didn't mean it, or whoever meant it or didn't, they would go and sing a couple of hymns of We Shall Overcome, and it's a done deal.
Okay?
But here's what happens.
The police...
The first thing they do is they look back into the child's record and see whether or not he jaywalked at 5 years old or he stole a candy bar at 12 years old.
They don't do it for police.
And you know it.
See?
Okay, so let me react.
We have very different perceptions.
No, no, no, no.
I don't react.
I have to put you on hold, but I hate to do that.
I can't let you give a speech.
I have to react, too.
I don't give a damn what Donald Trump or you or anyone else says privately.
It's none of my damn business.
The immaturity and idiocy of our age, the lack of wisdom, is revealed by, and there are conservatives who believe this too, it's mostly on the left, but it's not only, that what people say privately is an indication of sin or an indication of a vile character.
I don't care what people say privately.
I care what they say publicly, and I care what they do privately and do publicly.
Number one.
So he has nothing to apologize for, and I think he did.
But he has nothing to apologize for.
Folks, it was locker room talk, and it's none of your damn business what I said to somebody and then some despicable human being decided to record and release to the world so that I don't get elected president.
That's what he should have said, and that's what I said on his behalf, and I'm not a fan of him personally.
I think he was a great president, and that's all I care about.
I don't care if my oncologist is a fine human being if I have cancer.
I only care if they cure the cancer.
He was a great president, especially for blacks, which doesn't mean a damn thing to you, because he's a Republican.
As regards forgiving interracially, who is more likely to be killed?
A white by a black or a black by a white?
I'm very curious to hear your answer, so I'm going to put you back on.
Okay.
What is more likely to happen?
A black by a black.
That's correct, but that's not my question.
If you don't want to answer it, I'll let you go.
Answer my question.
I'll answer yours.
I answered yours.
You answer mine.
What is it?
Who is more likely to be killed today, randomly?
A black by a white or a white by a black?
A white by a black or a black by a...
Say that again?
A black by a white or a white by a black?
I don't know the statistics on that.
Okay, I do.
And it's not even close.
But I thank you for calling.
We'll be back in a moment.
1-8 Prager-776.
So your forgiveness line didn't quite go over that well with me.
I'm glad you called.
I really am.
That you know.
Back in a moment.
I looked up Bureau of Justice.
Let's see, what is it?
Let me give you the exact title here.
Bureau of Justice Statistics, Department of Justice.
Violent victimization by race, 2008 to 2021, in light of what I just told by last caller in Columbus.
Number of violent incidents by victim and offender, race slash Hispanic origin, 2017 to 2021. Okay?
Violent incidents.
So, white on black.
White against blacks, 371,000.
I'm rounding off the number.
371,000.
Black on white, 2,382,000.
Given how many more whites there are than blacks, it is even more dramatic.
And let's see.
Asian.
Black on Asian, 191,000 violent incidents.
Asian on black, 11,850.
We have a problem here.
This is no more anti-black than to note To note that men are far more likely to commit violence than women is anti-male.
But it means that we have to monitor ourselves if we're male and that we have to work on males as a society to control their nature in terms of violence and that we have a A particular problem among blacks,
especially black males, though increasingly young black females, and to say it's guns, which is idiocy, in light of the fact that guns are available to every race.
Okay, anyway, I just wanted you to know when I asked the last caller who was more likely to be hurt, a black by a white or a white by a black.
It was related to his statement about how forgiving blacks are about police violence.
So how much more so, if you want to use that term.
And I haven't noticed that forgiveness in light of what happened after George Floyd.
But even if we were to grant it, there's a lot of forgiveness in all directions.
Okay, I am talking to you on this Ultimate Issues Hour about the decline in acceptance of apologies, the holding people responsible for things they did so long ago that has taken place primarily on the left.
But especially just in the post-religious age in which we live.
Okay, let's see now.
Bower Hill, Pennsylvania, and Rob.
Hello, Rob.
No, that's actually Bob.
Hello, Dennis.
It's a pleasure to have a few minutes of your time.
It is, Bob.
You're right.
I am so sorry.
Oh, no problem.
I had a professor 50 years ago.
I'm a subject of apology, forgiveness, and restitution, which he considered all components of the question that you are talking about as far as forgiveness.
And I remember him saying that in order to forgive someone, they have to ask for forgiveness.
Now, that's one side of the coin.
The other would be, as you were talking about earlier, No matter what it was, no matter how long ago it was, you should unburden yourself, and you, as the aggrieved, should forgive that person.
So how do you look at both ends of that?
Wait, I'm sorry.
You're citing me as saying what exactly?
No, I'm not citing you at all.
This is a professor I had.
Oh, okay.
So wait.
But the first one, he said, you need to ask forgiveness.
But there was a second point I missed.
Well, he would say you needn't forgive someone who has not even acknowledged.
Yes, that's exactly my position.
Of course.
God doesn't forgive you if you don't apologize.
Why should we?
That, to me, is a given.
It drives me crazy when people, you know, X murders Y and Z forgives X. Back in a moment.
People, today, this is the Ultimate Issues Hour.
I'm talking about the death of forgiveness.
You're held guilty for your whole life.
Things come out, people did 25 years earlier, and their lives are ended.
Apologies don't matter.
Even if believed.
It's a meaner age, the post-religious age in which we live, and there was certainly meanness then too.
But there's more today.
Mara Vista, California.
Gary, hello.
Hi.
Hi.
I'm a first-time caller at any radio show.
My father was a...
Well, bless your father, whether he's with us or not.
Yes?
But, of course, the issue is the if, if they repent.
I am very, very opposed.
I'm just as opposed to forgiving people who don't apologize as I am not forgiving people who do apologize, assuming that it is a real apology, which, by the way, is not an easy thing to always ascertain.
I fully acknowledge that.
But the destruction of lives because, or even if they said something recently, I mean, but people's lives are, this cancel culture, they said something which offended somebody and that's the end of their career.
I have read to you so many examples of that.
I will bring to your attention, maybe tomorrow, is a major story of a major success in the comedy world in writing the lyrics for shows and for comedy routines, for TV. Major figure.
I'll tell you tomorrow about him.
And he said that he doesn't believe that a man can become a woman or a woman can become a man.
And he has lost all his friends.
You are more likely to lose your friends...
This is really something when I think of it.
You are more likely to lose your friends if you say a man can't become a woman, and a woman can't become a man.
You are more likely to use your secular left-wing or liberal even friends than you are if you leave God and religion than to lose your religious friends.
Religious people are more, I believe, it's an interesting question for people to ponder, I believe that religious Jews, religious Christians Are more likely to retain a friend, if the friend's character is not changed and so on, who has left God and religion than liberals or leftists are to stay friends with a person who says men cannot become women.
That's pretty illustrative, I would say, of how sick things on the left are.
Especially compared to things on the right.
Northridge, California, and David, the famous David of Northridge.
Hello.
Hello, Mr. Prager.
Thank you.
My counterpoint to your argument is that back in the 1950s, the right wing was very famous for destroying lives with the question, are you now or have you ever been?
A member of the Communist Party, the have you ever been portion of that question suggests that there was no forgiveness forthcoming.
And in fact, people who were no longer members of the Communist Party and had been members in their youth, whether deluded or not, were blacklisted.
I'm just wondering if you accept that that is a...
A valid counterpoint to your argument?
Well, it is valid if the premise is accurate.
If, in fact, the fact that someone is no longer a member of the Communist Party may well have meant nothing.
They may still have been communists and aided communists without being members of the party.
I don't know of anyone who went from communist...
To anti-communist who was ostracized by conservatives.
I was not aware myself of the conservative beliefs.
I can't...
Right, okay, that's fair, that's fair.
So I'm answering your question then.
I don't know, I'm not saying it didn't happen, everything happens, but it is very much unlikely that conservatives would not have accepted with open arms people who went from communism to anti-communism.
And on communism, you can't have a middle road.
The greatest mass murder machine in history.
The greatest torture machine.
The greatest enslavement machine in one century that ever existed.
So it doesn't help to say, well, I'm no longer a member of the Communist Party.
It doesn't mean a damn thing.
Most of the people who aided communists or supported them or spoke on their behalf were not members of the party.
They were known as useful idiots, of which there are very many on earth.
I'm discussing the issue of the cancel culture as a form of rejection of people's ability Repent and lead good lives after having committed a sin or the instantaneous destruction of a person for a contemporary sin.
You can't misspeak as far as the left is concerned.
You misspeak once and we will ruin your life.
In some cases it's not even misspeak just to say a man can't become a woman and you are ostracized and your livelihood.
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.
▲
Export Selection