Ezra Levant critiques Miss America’s June 5, 2018, swimsuit ban as a "war on standards," questioning its relevance and feminist ideals while comparing it to gender shifts in the NFL and military. He and Andrew Clavin debate Supreme Court rulings like Jack Phillips’ Christian baker case, framing forced compliance with progressive views as a threat to free speech. Ontario’s June 7 election sees Liberal leader Kathleen Wynne’s failed plea to block Doug Ford’s PCs, while UK Islamophobia laws—like the eight-point definition criminalizing ideological criticism—spark outrage, with Anjum Chowdhury’s release highlighting extremist legalization. Levant argues these moves prioritize grievance culture over free expression, reshaping institutions and discourse in alarming ways. [Automatically generated summary]
Tonight, Miss America will no longer judge contestants based on their appearance.
Finally, I've got a chance.
It's June 5th, and you're watching The Ezra Levant Show.
Why should others go to jail when you're a biggest carbon consumer I know?
There's 8,500 customers here, and you won't give them an answer.
You come here once a year with a sign, and you feel morally superior.
The only thing I have to say to the government about why I publish it is because it's my bloody right to do so.
What is a beauty pageant without beauty?
I don't know.
I don't think it's a thing anymore.
It reminds me of the phrase in the book of Matthew, in the Bible, about salt that has lost its saltiness.
It's nothing.
It's like water that's not wet.
That's just not a thing.
I'm talking about the announcement that Miss America will no longer have a swimsuit competition.
Not just that, they won't be judged on appearance at all.
That's what their new boss says.
It's not just the swimsuits, it's physical appearance.
That is now gone.
Here's Gretchen Carlson, who runs Miss America, with the announcement.
We are no longer a pageant.
We are a competition.
We will no longer judge our candidates on their outward physical appearance.
That's huge.
Huge.
Oh, that's my chance.
I've never really had the figure.
That's code for I'm fat.
But I've got a chance now, since looks are out.
Here's a tweet by the Miss America Pageant with a very short video in it.
It's going poof, as you see, up in smoke.
Yep.
I mean, who knows?
Maybe people will tune into a beauty pageant without the beauty part.
Or maybe that puff of smoke is just a lot of investors' money just evaporating.
Maybe we could have the Indy 500 without all that driving part.
I'm just brainstorming here.
Now, the Miss America bosses say it's not a pageant at all anymore.
It's now a competition.
Well, okay, TV is full of those.
There's a ton of them.
American Idol, Canadian Idol.
They really got the ball rolling.
America's Got Talent.
X Factor, whatever.
I don't watch any of them.
I don't watch Miss America.
Reality TV, talent shows.
I think all this is now is Miss America is just another talent show, but only for women.
I mean, will prettiness even be a factor anymore?
If so, how will it be measured?
If not, then what exactly is this besides a weirdly named talent show?
I don't think Miss America is sexist, by the way.
I tried to find viewer demographics for its audience and I wasn't successful.
I found the age.
But my instinct, my hunch is that far more women watch Miss America than men do.
The show is often up against football games on other channels, so I'm guessing men watch the football, women watch the pageant.
It's my observation that men like to look at attractive women, of course, but women really like to look at attractive women and rate them and measure them as judges and judge them as a pageant tends to do.
Either in a mean way or an admiring way.
I mean, who do you think follows Kim Kardashian on Twitter?
It's overwhelmingly women.
She gives makeup tips and fashion tips.
Men don't want that.
I mean, if men want to look at Kim Kardashian, they're not going to watch her reality show.
Maybe they'll watch a video of her in a different form.
In fact, for decades, Miss America has been about empowering young women, about role models for young women, and prizes, including scholarships, ways for women to improve their lives, an example, a system, a pageant system from the grassroots up, city by city, state by state, and then Miss America at the top.
And everyone in the system practices a talent and poise and looking good, which usually means making the most of what God gives you, which usually includes being fit physically, which usually means exercising.
That's a good thing, right?
I mean, rocking a swimsuit could be done in a sexual way, or it could be the ultimate proof that you're mentally and physically at your best.
It's partly genetics, of course, but it's a large part effort and discipline, isn't it?
Well, that's gone now.
There are a lot of jokes you can make about a beauty pageant without the beauty part.
I mean, maybe Miss America itself still hasn't reformed enough.
The miss part implies you have to be young and unmarried.
Why the ageism?
Why can't a grandma participate, especially since it's not about stereotyping beauty anymore?
And America, Miss America, why so xenophobic?
Why not foreigners too?
And the most obvious part, the sexism.
I'm not joking so much anymore, of course, not in the age of transgenderism.
I mean, it's a competition, right?
That's what the new boss said.
Well, there are a lot of women's competitions that are now being cracked open.
Here's a women's competition that is allowing a man to join its mixed martial arts.
And that guy says he's a gal now.
And you're a racist, sexist, Islamophobe, transphobe, if you disagree.
So they let him fight as a her, and he obviously wins because he's a guy punching the girls.
Boy, that's a lot of fun, isn't it?
Same thing for weightlifting.
Here's a guy who just keeps on winning as a girl.
It's not that much fun for the girls to compete against boys so much for women's sports.
They had a good run.
But really, this is all just part of a war on standards, on objective standards.
There's a whole movement to normalize obesity.
I'm not talking about, you know, being a little bit fat.
I'm talking super fat.
I'm not talking about not being mean to fat people.
I mean lying, faking it, that being super fat is super attractive.
And it's healthy too, guys.
No, it's not.
Just like a man cutting off his genitals is not healthy.
Transgender men have a suicide attempt rate of over 50%.
Stop pretending that this is just great.
It's part of the war on facts.
The war on the truth.
Sorry, social justice warriors destroying objective standards of beauty is not a liberating rebellion.
It is rubble.
The reason why we love Michelangelo's statue called David is because it is objectively beautiful art.
It's been beautiful for centuries.
Imagine carving that out of stone.
It is not even a matter of opinion that that is one of the finest statues ever carved.
I suppose you could say you have a different taste, but then you're the one who's off, not Michelangelo.
Purple hair piercings.
That is not attractive.
That is not the standard of beauty that elevates and inspires and transcends our corporeal state.
That's my point here.
The war against Miss America is part of the war against feminine women and masculine men.
I believe that the Democrats and the liberal media consciously use the take-and-need fiasco to undermine the NFL, to destroy it, because the NFL is one of the last bastions of masculine men and strong strength left in the American popular culture.
It's not a place where you talk about toxic masculinity.
You ran too fast.
No, the left hates the NFL for its masculinity and loves to undermine it from the inside using this useful idiot who loves to wear his Marxist clothing while be paid millions.
Look, it's a reason why the military is being undermined too, why Justin Trudeau insists that our military missions be gender-balanced, as he said for his proposed mission to Mali, Africa, perhaps the most dangerous place in the world for soldiers right now.
Liberal governments across the West are doing this weird thing.
They're insisting that the military wear high heels in a bizarre walk a mile in her shoes campaign.
Yeah, it doesn't make a lot of sense, does it?
There are, look, you want to have competitions?
There are already competitions, reality TV shows, talent shows out there.
There are cooking shows and singing shows and dancing shows.
Miss America was an attempt to fuse civic virtues with personal discipline, with aesthetics, including making yourself attractive.
That's probably racist these days, so away it goes.
I think this new Miss America is going to flop.
Raging Public Debate Case00:12:59
And I look forward to seeing what replaces it.
I think men want to be men and women want to be women and they want to know how to do it.
I think there's a crisis right now in that so many of us just don't know how to be men or women because our role models have been smashed.
Miss America was not perfect, but it showed the way, a way, and it was pretty well at that.
I think just like the Boy Scouts showed boys how to be boys, that's gone now too.
Girls are now allowed in the Boy Scouts.
They had girl guides, but that wasn't enough for the social justice warriors.
They needed to emasculate the Boy Scouts too.
A beauty pageant without beauty.
I mean, seriously, would you tune in to watch it?
Stay with us for more.
Welcome back.
Well, I think you can sum up the theory of libertarianism, or even conservative libertarianism, as the right to be left alone, left alone by the government, and even left alone by your neighbor.
So what about the case of a cake baker who has Christian beliefs and a gay wedding couple, a same-sex couple, insists on a special gay wedding cake with a gay message written on it?
Is it fair for the baker to say, no, I don't want to do that, or is that discrimination?
Well, that has been a raging public debate.
And the United States Supreme Court has finally weighed in on it, and it wasn't close.
Seven to two, they ruled for the baker.
Joining us now via Skype to talk about this is Andrew Clavin.
He's the host of the Andrew Clavin Show every day on the Daily Wire.
It's a podcast Monday to Thursday.
He joins us now.
Great to see you again, Andrew.
It's good to see you, Ezra.
How you doing?
I'm fine.
Can you help me bring out some facts of this case?
Because I think it's important, the facts of the case.
This wasn't a shop turning away, like a barber shop turning away a gay person.
This was a very specific request for the Christian baker to engage in an expressive act contrary to his own conscience.
Am I correct in that?
Yeah, it's a really disturbing case once you get into the details of it, especially for someone like me who is truly a libertarian on this subject.
I've lived my life in the arts.
I've worked with all and known and befriended a lot of gay people through my life and only want the best for them.
But this is a true abuse.
The guy is a Christian baker.
He considers his baking, his cake making an art.
He's got like a palette as part of his logo on the shop.
And they came in, a gay couple came in and asked for a wedding cake for their wedding.
He had previously turned down other things that violated his Christian beliefs, like Halloween cakes, things with kind of pornographic or adult elements.
So this was not a first thing he said to them.
Hey, I serve anybody here, he said, but I don't serve every occasion.
You're welcome to buy anything that's in the shop, but I can't specifically make a cake, use my artistic expression to make a cake for your wedding because that would violate my conscience, which seems to me as narrow an ask as you could possibly get.
Just a little bit of goodwill, a little bit of leaving other people alone would have done a lot for the tenor of the country.
No, the gay couple can't do that.
They complain to the Colorado Civil Rights Commission.
The commission not only rules against him, but disses his religion, says this is the kind of use of religion that led to the Holocaust.
They have all kinds of, yeah, oh, it was amazing.
Because that's what the Holocaust was really about.
Hitler wouldn't have made cakes for the Jews.
And don't you know, today it's cakes.
And tomorrow it's a different kind of oven.
I shouldn't make jokes, but to me, what a horrific comparison.
I didn't even know there was something called the Colorado Human Rights Commission.
It sounds like there shouldn't be anything.
Well, this is the thing.
Completely, completely unelected commission on which there have to be members who are part of the apparently excluded classes like LGBT people and stuff like this.
So it's bound to be swing to the left.
It's bound to be in favor of the LGBT.
Previously, I mean, once you hear the details of this case, it really makes your head catch fire.
Previously, these guys had allowed that if you came in and wanted a cake that was against gay marriage, the baker, it was valid for the baker to say, no, I can't do that.
But the other way, it didn't work.
So it goes to the Supreme Court.
Another court rules against the baker.
It goes to the Supreme Court.
And unfortunately, even though it sounds like a good decision because it's 7-2, although how it could not have been 9-0, I don't know, but it's 7-2.
They ruled very, very narrowly.
All they said was the commission had been so bigoted, that Holocaust remark had been so over the top that the guy had been treated unfairly, essentially.
They did not rule on the bigger issue of free speech rights, freedom of religion rights, First Amendment rights, basically.
They didn't rule on that at all.
And basically, I mean, they left open the possibility that if this commission had just been a little bit more sneaky, if they had just hidden their hatred of Christianity, they might have gotten away with it.
And that is a, I find this extraordinarily disturbing because it's one thing, look, we all have rights to speak.
You know, talking about Nazis, Nazis in America have the right to speak.
Everybody has the right to speak.
But to force somebody to agree with you, to force somebody to celebrate what you are and what you believe, that seems to me so such a violation of free speech rights that I personally find it disturbing that two justices, what's her name, the RPG, they call her.
Ruth Beta Ginsburg, right.
And yeah, Ruth Etiginsburg, thank you.
Ruth Beta Ginsburg and Sotamair.
They basically ruled against this guy anyway, even though the commission had been unfair.
They said, well, that doesn't mean that he should be allowed to be discriminatory.
There's another case coming down the pike that I'm not as familiar with about a florist.
She also, who wouldn't make a bouquet, the same kind of thing wouldn't make a bouquet for a friend of hers, a guy she liked very much, but said, look, this is my religion.
I can't celebrate a wedding that I don't believe should be taking place.
And like I said, I've been friends with gay people both personally and politically all my life.
I have nothing, you know, I don't want to pass any judgments on them.
I don't want to tell them or anyone else how they should live their lives.
It's not what I'm about.
But this is a true bullying, fascistic, anti-American move to search out these guys and basically say we're going to run you out of business unless you violate your conscience.
It's really disturbing and incredibly disturbing to me that two justices voted against them.
Yeah.
And I can only imagine not just the legal fees, but the stress and the hundreds of hours of this baker's life that have been burnt up on this.
I mean, when, of course, the couple in question could have just gone down a few streets over to any other baker.
It's clear they want it to be punitive.
It reminds me of a crazy case.
I'm not sure if you saw this case, Andrew.
It was in Windsor, Ontario, which is just across the river from Detroit.
And my first thought when you were talking there was, I wonder if Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonomai are the other hard left judge who was appointed in her case by Barack Obama.
I wonder if the roles were reversed if it was a gay bakery that was being commanded to do a pro-Christian, I don't know, icing if they would have ruled the same way.
I really think that those two judges would have flipped.
But let me, can I just run this case by you?
And maybe you've heard of it because it got some coverage in the States.
In this case, we have a gay activist couple and we have a Christian baker.
There's a case in Windsor, Ontario, where there is a female aesthetics salon where they do waxing of lady parts.
It's a place that guys should never enter into because it's a place of women's mystery and us fellas don't need to know anything about it.
Windsor, like Detroit, has a fairly large Muslim population.
And one of the female aestheticians at this Windsor place is a Muslim woman.
Okay, so that's what she does, fair enough.
And then one day, a pre-op transsexual, a fella with all his fella parts, goes there and says, I want a lady wax, even though he's not a lady.
He says, and this Muslim woman who's the aesthetician says, I'm sorry, I don't touch fellas other than my husband.
That's part of my religion.
And this thing is going to the Ontario Human Rights Commission, $50,000 at stake.
My question to you, Andrew, is who do you think is going to win?
Who has the higher poker hand in politically correct poker?
A Muslim woman who doesn't want to do a pretend female waxing on a fella or a transgender guy who hasn't had his twig and berries cut off yet demanding service.
Like, tell me that's not a hell of a case for Ruth Bader Ginsburg or Sonoma Meyer.
That's something that would make their heads explode.
I did hear about this case.
I have to admit, it made me chuckle a little because I always love it when leftist special interests clash and they start to devour each other.
But, you know, the very fact that the case is coming up, it points to so many things.
One of the things that it points to is that the worst possible people, the smallest minds, the nastiest, the least able to leave other people alone, are bringing these cases to court.
So these cases are coming before committees and courts when they could just be so easily avoided with just the slightest bit of goodwill, just the slightest bit of saying, oh, you know, that's your religion.
It makes you uncomfortable.
I'll go elsewhere.
You know, I mean, how hard is that to say to somebody?
I mean, we all should treat each other that way.
So that's the first thing.
And it is the outgrowth of this leftist philosophy of grievance and victimhood that somehow this elevates you above other people.
It means that you don't have to pay attention to their rights, but they have to pay attention to yours.
It's like when I get heckled when I give speeches and these people come in and they shout things out as if their incredible victimhood gives them some right to intrude on other people's lives.
It's so small, it's so bullying, it's so mean that it's just horrible to me that the court even has to look at it.
Who's going to win?
How do I know?
I mean, the problem with the left is that they're so dishonest and so intellectually corrupt.
Their ideas are so intellectually corrupt that they're perfectly able to say, like the Colorado Commission said, well, in this case, we'll go this way, and in this case, we'll go that way, because it's not really a principle.
It's just, you know, who is more of a victim in this moment in our imaginations.
You know, it's just the whole thing is despicable.
There's no principle involved.
The only real principle is free speech and freedom of action and freedom of choice and freedom of religion.
And if we stick to those principles, all this victimhood and grievance-mongering and picking on other people and bullying would go away.
Yeah, you know, I think in the case of this Windsor transgender case, I think the fella is so craving of attention that he wants litigation.
He probably sought out the most egregious situation possible for two reasons.
First of all, if he really is accepted at a female aesthetician, that's the ultimate proof that he is a woman, because after all, only women get to go there.
And I think like this cake same-sex couple, of course, he could have just gone down the road or the block somewhere else, but he insisted.
I think that they're trying to politicize and litigate every aspect of personal life.
And I think that's the war the left has on the culture to turn every damn thing into a political moment, a Marxist moment, and to turn us all into identity, culture warriors.
I don't know.
It's completely not surprising any of these things to me.
NDP's Political Gambit00:11:35
Last word to you, Andrew, I think we're going to see a lot more of these.
What do you think?
We are, and it's so disturbing to me, who really, as I say, is a libertarian who just wants people to, you know, what do I care how people live, you know?
As long as they're not hurting me or anybody around them, it doesn't mean a thing to me how people live, who they sleep with, who they love.
I don't lose a minute's sleep over it.
But how can we leave them alone if they're not going to leave us alone, if they're not going to leave other people alone?
And if they're coming after our most important rights, our right to think freely, speak freely, worship freely.
Those are so much more important than who you sleep with.
It's so much more important than your sexual life.
How can we leave them alone if they're not going to leave us alone?
There you have it.
Wise words.
Andrew Clavin, always great to have a moment of your time.
You're so busy.
Thank you for making time for us today.
It's always a pleasure to talk to you, Andrew.
Thanks.
All right.
There you have it.
Andrew Clavin.
He's the host of the Andrew Clavin Show on the Daily Wire.
It's a podcast that you can catch Monday to Thursday.
Stay with us.
More ahead on The Rebel.
That's why a vote for the Liberal Party can mean so much.
The more Liberal MPPs that we send to Queen's Park on June 7th, the less likely it becomes that either Doug Ford or the NDP will be able to form a majority government.
By voting liberal, you can keep the next government, conservative or NDP, from acting too extremely one way or the other.
By voting liberal, you can keep the next government, conservative or NDP, accountable to you.
By voting liberal, you can keep Doug Ford and the NDP from having a blank check.
So with a few days left, my message is this.
A vote for the Liberal Party is a vote to keep the next government in check.
A vote for the Liberal Party is your best bet to make sure that the next government is not a majority government.
And the next government is thereby held to account for all voters.
Well, there you have it.
Liberal leader Kathleen Wynne.
She is the premier for, I guess, a couple more days, basically admitting that they don't have a chance.
Every single poll for weeks has shown the Liberals in third place.
And I guess she's just admitting the obvious and taking the air out of the balloon that she even pretends she can win.
I actually don't think it's that bad a pitch.
It shows a drop of, I don't know, humility that she's not even going to pretend to win.
I'm not sure how compelling it is to say vote for us because we're not going to win, but joining us now.
They're talking about this weirdness.
This is our friend David Menzies.
He's David, what do you make of that?
It's not often that a loser admits they're going to lose before they lose.
Well, first of all, Ezra, anytime I see Kathleen Wynne at a playground, the first thing I'm doing is looking for Ben Levin, and thankfully he wasn't in that picture.
Secondly, I was completely shocked by that announcement.
It happened on Saturday.
And it was not that it's unprecedented, but it didn't work back in 2001 when the NDP Premier of BC Desange said more or less the same thing.
And the results of that election were the Liberals 77 seats and the NDP party, well, let's put it this way, you could have a caucus meeting in a Mazda Miata, which is a two-seater for those who aren't car aficionados.
So first of all, I don't think it's going to work.
Secondly, I think it's desperate.
Thirdly, I think an unintentional beneficiary of this, Ezra, is the PC party.
If people are on the cusp of, hmm, liberal NDP, NDP, Liberal, and this makes them go, okay, Wynne, I don't like, and if she's promising to step aside, I'm going to go back to Liberal.
And that means a loss of a few seats, even a few seats, because they're saying it's a close election, Ezra.
Maybe the PCs go right up the middle and get that majority.
That's one thing that could happen.
People would say, well, I don't like Wynn.
She says she's leaving.
So I'll vote Liberal because I sort of feel comfy with them.
The other is them saying, well, Wynne is gone.
She says the party doesn't have a chance.
If I want to stop Ford, I don't have two choices now.
I only have one choice.
So you could see a coalescing of the anybody but Ford vote behind the NDP.
I don't know which way of those is going to cut.
Yeah, I ultimately think that most people have already made up their mind.
I don't think, despite her announcement, Ezra, and despite some other things in the news, that the Liberals are even close to forming the official opposition even.
Whether, like I said, I really see the PCs going up the middle.
And now the question is, it seems more and more that this has to be a majority mandate for Doug Ford because now the whisper campaign that Andrea Horwath originally dismissed is now warming to about the idea of a coalition with her and the Liberal government.
So this is going to be crucially important on Thursday.
There's some news.
Doug Ford's late brother, Rob Ford, who I think in many ways was more beloved than Doug, he had more problems than Doug.
But I think that he was so authentic and his problems were so authentic and the way he was bullied by all the fancy people, I think there was a lot of love for Rob because he suffered in front of us.
Yes.
And news comes that Rob Ford's widow, Renata, On behalf of her kids, Doug Ford's nephews, he's a nephew, are suing Doug Ford and the family company called Deco Labels, claiming that he has not been dealing with them fairly.
The timing of this lawsuit is just days before the election.
It looks ugly.
It looks like a family feud.
I don't know who's right.
Either way, it's sort of sad that the family's having a quarrel.
Will it have any impact on the election?
You know what, Ezra?
First of all, I just want to say this.
I saw the news yesterday.
Kevin Donovan, the investigative reporter for The Star, broke it.
The statement of claim was filed on Friday.
We should say absolutely nothing has been proven in a court of law.
Having said that, my heart was breaking for those two kids, because when you think of it, Ezra, what they're faced with is on one side, if you listen to one of the sides, their mother is a substance abuser.
Then on the flip side, the mother is saying your two uncles, Randy and Doug, are basically embezzlers, draining a company like Deco Dry, spending your legacy.
My heart broke reading this story.
I also feel that if these are unfounded allegations, the potential damage to Deco, the family business, if I'm a supplier, I'm running to the credit department of Deco and making sure my bills are paid up.
Because you know, business, even though it's a private company, it's fueled on rumor, right?
And if what she's saying, you know, has a whiff of sincerity to it, that could be a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Right.
I don't want to talk about the business side or even the family side.
I want to talk about the political side.
My instinct is people say, well, this is a family feud.
It may be embarrassing, but what's that got to do with this election?
I don't know if any Ford supporter is going to say, ah, I'm now going to vote for Kathleen Wynn or Andrew Horfrath or vice versa.
My view is it's just a little bit embarrassing, but embarrassment is, you know, people who would be embarrassed by the Fords were never for them.
I don't think this is going to move the needle at all.
Yeah, I think we're in a different era.
As you know, the allegations of Gary Hart back in the 80s having an affair destroyed him.
Now we saw with Trump, you know, having an affairs with a Playboy bunny, a porn star even, the American public has collectively shrugged.
I think.
Thanks to Bill Clinton for that.
Well, that is the precedent, right?
Or you could even go back further, although it wasn't reported in the day to the Kennedys, right?
But I think people right now, for the most part, by and large, Ezra, that I would rather have someone morally flawed who is a great leader than somebody who is morally pristine and is a lousy leader.
And I think that's what it comes down to.
And I don't think this is going to move the needle one way or the other.
Although Horwath and Wynn have jumped on this.
And I've got to tell you, I was offended a little bit about the insincerity that I determined from what Wynne was saying about the kids.
She is right.
That is who you have to ultimately feel sorry for.
But please, Premier, Sperez, what did you put your kids through when you left your husband?
He had to sleep in the basement while your lover was in the master bedroom with you and the kids were still living in the residence.
It's all a mess.
What I sort of chuckled at was Kathleen Wynne putting out press releases, statements, and tweets saying, I really care about the kids, but this just goes to show.
So I mean, you know what?
I can hardly wait for this election to be over.
Give me, in your final moments here, give me your prediction.
Is it going to be a PC majority with Doug Ford as the next premier?
I'm predicting a PC majority, Ezra, and I'll tell you why.
I sense the needle moving, not about these two things we talked about, but in the last two weeks, almost on a daily basis, Andrea Horwath and her candidates, who I call the new not-ready-for-prime time players, you know, the woman with the Hitler meme, right?
The two candidates that disparaged the poppy, the candidate who called Toronto's first black police chief a coon.
And it goes on and on.
There are so many more.
I think people who were thinking of voting NDP, maybe even in protest, had, if you will, a come to Jesus moment that who are these people?
Who are these radicals?
Who's going to be the Minister of Finance?
Who's going to be the Minister of Education, Minister of Health?
I don't see a depth of talent there in terms of brains.
And, you know, I mean, God forbid, even the Liberals looked spectacular compared to that.
I think I sensed a shift away from radicalizing Ontario with an NDP government.
We saw what happened from 1990 to 95, rather.
We're seeing what's happening in the Democratic People's Republic of Alberta with Notley.
And I think that's what turned the screw, Ezra.
Well, I hope you're right.
I mean, I think most Ontarians are not following it as closely as you.
Most people don't read a newspaper.
So, for example, the Toronto Sun, which has been breaking a lot of these great stories on the candidates.
Correct.
People who are tuned in are following that.
I don't know how many people are tuned in.
And I know that at least there is some vetting here where there wasn't in Alberta.
So I hope you're right.
We'll find out.
And if I can just interject, Ezra, the advanced polls have been very robust, more than 20% increase compared to the last provincial election.
So I think it's going to be a pretty solid turnout.
And I think people, yes, you're right.
Tommy Robinson vs. Anjum Chowdhury00:02:06
So many people are disengaged.
Ask them about Ontario politics.
They can't tell you what the issues are.
Ask them about the latest Kim Kardassian tweet.
Oh, they'll quote you chapter and verse.
But I think there's a critical mass that are going to come out because they realize what's at stake here.
Yeah, I sure hope you're right.
Well, David, great to see you.
Thanks for covering me so much.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you for the Ontario election beat for us so well.
Got it.
Folks, stay with us.
and more ahead on The Rebel.
Hey, welcome back.
On my monologue yesterday about Tommy Robinson getting 13 months in prison while Anjum Chowdhury is about to be released from prison.
Liza writes, Those eight points to describe Islamophobia are so ridiculous.
They're going to have to lock us all up.
Well, the most terrifying thing about those eight points that define Islamophobia is that they all relate to opinions about an ideology, or at least six out of eight of them did.
You can't criticize Islam for being old-fashioned.
Yeah, Islam boasts that it's old-fashioned.
It's immutable.
It cannot be changed.
They say that.
You can't criticize Islam for being sexist.
It is in the black and white text.
You must accept Islam's criticism of the West.
What does that have to do with committing a crime against a person?
This is a one untouchable ideology.
Imagine, just replace Christianity or any ism, capitalism, socialism for Islam, and you'll immediately see how bizarre that is.
But that has been the law that the Metropolitan Police in London have been applying at least for seven years.
Frazier writes, Chowdhury will likely instigate bloodshed soon after his release.
I think so.
I think he's pretty good at walking right up to the line and not going over, although obviously he miscalculated because he's been in prison.
But he's very provocative and he couldn't be clearer.
Tune In At Noon00:02:15
He is crystal clear about his goals.
Turn the United Kingdom and indeed the whole world into a theocracy.
He really is the lawyer face of ISIS-style terrorists.
That's what he was convicted of.
On Peter McElvana's speech about Tommy Robinson at the Rebel Live on Saturday, John writes, Impressed Peter McElvana came all the way from the UK to tell us about Tommy's tour of the UK Parliament by his good friend Lord Pearson.
It gives me a bit of hope.
Yeah, me too.
The thing about Lord Pearson is he's a lord.
He's a member of the House of Lords.
So if I understand my UK Constitution and Parliament right, he doesn't have to face election.
He doesn't have to face any real forms of discipline at the hands of a party.
He can't be kicked out of his seat.
I guess he could be stripped of his party status.
But I think it's wonderful.
I think Lord Pearson is brilliant.
I think what he did was very courageous.
But I would like to see that more by elected MPs.
You'll recall that even the Labour MP from Rotherham was demoted by the Labour Party for speaking bluntly about rape gangs.
She was from the riding herself.
That's the show for today.
By the way, you should tune in if you're free in the middle of the day at 12 noon Eastern Time, 10 a.m. Mountain Time, 9 a.m. Pacific Time.
I do a show on YouTube every day.
Today we showed proceedings from the House of Commons in the United Kingdom, a pack of Labour MPs attacking YouTube, an executive from YouTube, haranguing him for not banning Tommy Robinson from YouTube.
It was very illuminating, and it's just an extra hour a day I do on TV.
It's less produced than my evening show.
I don't have interviews, but the fun thing about it is it's live and I take comments in real time from the public.
So if you have time at noon hour, if you're on the East Coast or the other time zones I mentioned, tune in on YouTube and let me know what you think.
We have thousands of people do every day and I think it's become a bit of a thing.
It's a little bit fun and things that don't quite fit into my evening show I put there.
So please consider tuning in every weekday at 12 noon Eastern.