0:00 - Dwayne ‘The Rock’ Johnson: Run for Presidency a ‘Real Possibility’40:23 - NJ Gov. Chris Christie Vetoes Child Marriage Ban56:33 - Male Circumcision Ban Proposed In Norway1:01:56 - White Male “Pee Privilege” – Yep!1:14:20 - 89% of Colleges Reported Zero Campus Rapes In 20151:28:05 - Skirts For Boys At Private School!1:34:02 - Seventh Grader Suspended For An Instagram ‘Like’1:43:22 - Barack Obama or Karl Marx?1:50:38 - Donald Trump As The American Dream?Sources: http://www.fdrurl.com/true_news_05_15_2017Your support is essential to Freedomain Radio, which is 100% funded by viewers like you. Please support the show by making a one time donation or signing up for a monthly recurring donation at: http://www.freedomainradio.com/donate
Mike and Steph from Freedomain Radio at freedomainradio.com.
Please help us out.
Don't forget to support the show.
We need it at freedomainradio.com slash donate.
And I'm afraid we have to start the show this week with some tragic news that Mike's bromance has been shattered.
And it's been a lot of emotional support for Mike this week.
The Rock has betrayed.
Mike, and I think betrayed all right-thinking men everywhere who have the bromance of his undeniable charisma and bolder-like biceps.
Mike, how are you doing?
I'm hanging in there, but I don't know that the country will be doing particularly well in 2020 or 2024.
So instead of talking about James Comey and that in the True News show, we're going to talk about Dwayne The Rock Johnson, who is going to run for president, folks.
No one else seems to really care about this or be talking about it past the byline here or there.
But this SOB is going to run for president, and he's going to be damn near unbeatable if and when he does.
So I just want to get out there first, start talking about him, get this information into the hands of as many people as possible, and warn people that disaster is coming.
Because in a time and place where immigration and the migrant crisis and all of that, that is pretty much the biggest issue facing the world, and certainly America as a whole currently.
Dwayne Johnson on it seems to be absolutely terrible.
Now, it's difficult to actually ascertain what he really thinks, considering it seems to be a giant bowl of soup when it comes to verbiage, a whole bunch of Hopi-changey nonsense, which, not that surprising, since he's friends with Barack Obama— But at the same time, I want to go through it, expose it as hopey-changey bullshit word salad nonsense, and prepare people for what's coming down the pipe.
Because one of the most admirable things about Dwayne Johnson and why I like him is because he's an incredibly driven, hard-working SOB. And there's not a whole lot of those running around on planet Earth present day.
But he just became world's sexiest man.
He just became the highest-grossing movie actor in a single year.
He's conquered Hollywood, pretty much.
He's able to open all kinds of movies worldwide, do big box office.
The man likes a challenge.
Where do you go after being the top-drawing Hollywood star?
Where do you go?
Well, you probably go to politics, and he's got the right friends that are going to be pushing him in that direction.
And it's certainly not like the Democrats have a whole lot of people in their back pocket ready to run in 2020 or 2024.
You got Michael Moore out there going, we need to run The Rock.
We need to run Oprah.
Wouldn't surprise me if that's where we go, because Lord knows Elizabeth Warren.
Oh, God, what, we can do Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders or find some fossil as Is Nancy Pelosi even going to be alive in 2020 to run?
Who knows who the Democrats will pull out.
But if they're smart, which they're not, so who knows if they go this direction, they're going to want to court a celebrity of some sort.
And someone like Dwayne Johnson, who's already been angling the run and talking about it for years and years and years, who has pretty much slayed a dragon and climbed a mountain when it comes to Hollywood looking for a new challenge, We're
good to go.
When the CEO of Under Armour, Kevin Plank, made some comments about Donald Trump.
Steph, would you like to read these comments?
Sure, sure.
He said, regarding Trump, I think he's highly passionate.
To have such a pro-business president is something that is a real asset for the country.
People can really grab that opportunity.
He loves to build.
I don't think there's any surprises here.
When you look at the president, he wants to build things.
He wants to build things.
He wants to make bold decisions and be really decisive.
I'm a big fan of people that operate in the world of Publish and iterate versus think, think, think, think, think.
So there's a lot that I respect there.
So this is not hugely complicated.
It's not an analysis of options.
It's just saying an object that is in motion tends to stay in motion and an object at rest tends to stay at rest.
It's not an endorsement of any particular policies.
It's just, you know, he likes the guy and the guy's been sort of battle tested in the field of actually doing things rather than being a lawyer or a community activist or, you know, the usual path to politics that most people take.
Now, if you were to read the synopsis of these comments by the Under Armour CEO on a place like Huffington Post or CNN or something, they would describe it as akin to a damn hate crime.
I like Donald Trump.
He's passionate.
He likes to work hard and get things done.
You can like people that are passionate, work hard, and get things done even if they're not working hard to get things done in a sphere that you respect and like.
Again, I like the fact that Dwayne Johnson is a hard worker.
When he works hard to run for president, I'm probably not going to like that very much, but I can respect the attribute of hard work.
Nonetheless, the Under Armour CEO had to be denounced from every angle, and the company issued a statement reminding people that engage is in policy, not politics.
Don't get mad at us because we said something vaguely nice about Donald Trump.
Don't get mad at us.
Well, people got mad at us, or mad at them.
And A couple of their well-paid endorsers of their products spoke out and were very, very upset, including an overly emotional woman who we won't talk about here.
But then Dwayne Johnson joined the list of people that were very upset and had to stand out.
So let's dive into this word salad.
Sorry, just for a moment.
Can I be a complete nerd?
What is Under Armour?
Like, I'm thinking a hockey cup, but I'm fairly sure it's not that.
It's like compression workout gear.
I actually own some and it's fairly nice.
It helps the sweat stay away from your body.
There's different types.
Sometimes it wicks away the sweat from your body.
It's stuff that a lot of athletes wear underneath their equipment and it's helpful.
A lot of people wear it when they go to the gym and work out.
Dwayne Johnson may or may not be in that category of people that wear Under Armour when they work out or at least he is in the publicity photos.
But yeah, that's what Under Armour is.
And, you know, if you want to spend 50, 75 bucks for a t-shirt that wicks sweat away from your body, Under Armour is a company to go with.
I like the fact that his name is actually a workout component.
You know, the plank is like, it's like a push-up workout component.
Kevin Bicep Push-Up!
Whatever it is, that's kind of funny.
He's running a philosophy show.
I just think that's funny.
Come on.
Alright, so Dwayne Johnson said this in response to this horrible, horrible statement by the Under Armour CEO. He said, quote, His words were divisive and lacking in perspective,
inadvertently creating a situation where the personal political opinions of UA's partners and its employees were overshadowed by the comments of its CEO." All right, we're going to stop here and let me just point out that I don't think there was anyone on the planet that thought as the words were coming out of Kevin Plank's mouth, That they somehow reflected everything that Dwayne Johnson and everyone associated with Under Armour thought.
Is there anyone with a brain that actually thinks that?
No, but we're in social justice warrior police land, or if you say anything vaguely nice about Donald Trump, you must be burned like a witch in a spit.
Well, I will certainly say Dwayne Johnson.
Massive pecs.
Enormous charisma.
Great hairdo.
Very white teeth.
Not an argument.
He has all these things.
He does not actually have an argument.
He also has talked about being friends with Hillary Clinton, or with the Clintons, and with Barack Obama.
I guess by that standard, he's really, really keen on the 100,000 bombs that Obama dropped on largely Muslim countries in the Middle East.
He must be really, really keen on the destruction of Libya and Syria.
He must be really, really keen on the transfer of massive amounts of control of American uranium to Russia.
Because, you know, he's actually friends with these people rather than just getting paid in a business relationship.
Oh, Dwayne.
Oh, you do not know what you're wandering into.
He could take me in the ring.
I'll take him by words.
We can play this game if he really wants to.
And it seems like he wants to.
So let's continue.
He says, a good company is not solely defined by its CEO. Yeah, no shit.
A good company is not defined by the athlete or celebrity who partners with them.
A good company is not a single person.
A good company is a team.
A group of brothers and sisters committed to working together each and every day to provide for their families and one another and the clients they serve, end quote.
Gobbledygook, word salad, feel good, fuzzy puppies and bunnies language.
Oh, he's running for president already.
Oh, one more.
Just one more.
Okay, probably more than one.
Bill Clinton credibly accused of being a rapist.
He's friends with the Clintons.
What does that mean regarding Dwayne Johnson's perspective on rape?
A little bit different than an economic relationship, which everyone understands is financial, is mutual benefit, is arm's length.
You're friends with the Clintons, man.
What the hell is your major malfunction?
He says from the safety of his Canadian studio.
Yeah, I like hard work.
I appreciate Donald Trump works hard and tries to get things done versus credible accusations of rape.
Yeah, those are directly comparable.
I see what Dwayne's upset about.
So he continues and said, we don't partner with a brand casually.
I partner with brands I trust and with people who share my same values.
Then why do you need to be paid?
You need to be...
Anyway, go on.
That means a commitment to diversity.
Oh, God.
Inclusion, community, open-mindedness, and some serious hard work.
Wait a minute!
He was praising hard work in a statement that you're upset about.
He was praising hard work.
Ooh, I have another one.
He's committed to diversity, but half the country that voted for Donald Trump, well, Donald Trump's just a hateful, nasty bigot, so at least half the population is not included in his inclusion and diversity because they're deplorables.
Good job.
Come on, diversity.
Just be honest.
It means non-white people.
Let's just be honest about that.
He appreciates inclusion as long as it doesn't include any comments that can vaguely be associated with a positive statement about Donald Trump.
Okay, that's great.
Open-mindedness.
You know, unless it involves a positive statement about Donald Trump.
Good God.
He continues and says, but it doesn't mean that I or my team will always agree with the opinion of everyone who works there, including its executives.
No kidding, Dwayne!
Nobody thinks that that is the case.
But nice, uh, it's...
The social justice scoreboard that people have erected where, oh, oh, guess what?
Someone that I'm vaguely associated with said something vaguely negative, so I must virtue signal against them.
No one thinks because the CEO of a company that you're associated with said something about Donald Trump that it reflects what you think about Donald Trump.
Nobody actually thinks that.
But it gives you a great chance to virtue signal, now it doesn't, if you're a social justice warrior cock.
Okay.
He continues and said, Great leaders inspire and galvanize the masses during turbulent times.
They don't cause people to divide and disband.
Wait, wait a minute.
Great leaders inspire and galvanize the masses during turbulent times?
He's not talking about Hitler, is he?
1930s in Germany, pretty turbulent.
He did inspire and galvanize the masses.
Hmm...
It's a problem with vague language you can apply it to—when you have vague amoral language, you can apply it to even horrible situations like the rise of Hitler.
Well, for God's sakes, most people that are great leaders are great leaders because they're willing to take a damn stand.
Now, if you take a stand, a strong stand, especially a stand in any type of moral issue or any political issue— You're gonna have a large segment of the population which doesn't like that, that opposes that stand, opposes your thoughts, your beliefs, And then stands against you.
So normally when people take a stand, they're not galvanizing the masses.
We all can't be word salad goop artists like Dwayne the Rock Johnson, who says some fluffy words with his pearly white teeth and big glowing smile, and everyone just goes, oh, he's so great.
Wow, it's amazing.
I feel so galvanized right now.
No, when you take a stand for anything important, there's going to be a certain segment that doesn't like you.
That's the way things work.
But, you know, when you've just spout a bunch of word salad, you can get away with just about anything, as long as you're pretty.
All right.
I don't, just to be completely petty, you know, just, I mean, I don't know if it's because he's got so little body fat or no subcutaneous fat or whatever, but when he smiles, it's like watching somebody crumple up a very handsome origami.
I mean, that man's got some serious lines and it's neither here nor there.
It's just a particular aesthetic that I noticed.
Well, that's why we're doing this, because if this SOB runs, he's going to win.
I mean, it's going to be very tough for anyone to beat him if and when he runs.
I'm not fully on board with Mike's analysis of whether he's going to win or not.
You have more respect for the American populace than I do.
I do think that Dwayne Johnson is a little outside the demographic of people who analyze this stuff.
And Mike, of course, he's my avenue to what younger people think.
There's a division here, but Mike's certainly got his perspective and we'll certainly see how it goes.
All right.
He continues and said, my responsibility here is not only to the global audience we serve, but also to the thousands of workers who pour blood, sweat and tears into making Under Armour strong.
Wait, hang on.
What kind of factories are these people running here?
I gotta know.
We need some underarmor.
Bring me a child's head to decapitate.
And then bring me the tears of broken-hearted women and we will cry them into the vat.
We must make underarmor, which means we must disassemble our workers, make them bleed and sweat and cry.
I mean, what kind of factory?
What is it?
Are you building iPhones in China here?
Is this like the secret Pepsi formula or whatever, where it's like, oh no, he gave away the secret ingredient, blood and sweat of infant children.
Oh my goodness.
He continues and says, a diverse group of hardworking men and women who possess integrity, respect, and compassion for one another and the world they live in.
End quote.
I don't like integrity, respect, and compassion.
I stand firmly against that.
This hallmark shit that no one can disagree with.
He says that he doesn't share the values of the company, but he seems to share the values of just about everyone in the company who've chosen to work for a guy whose values he hates.
I think you might want to rethink that if you even thought it to begin with.
Well, at the same time, the values that he supposedly hates, you know, Donald Trump works hard.
Hard work is good.
I like people that work hard and try and get stuff done.
That's Dwayne Johnson's life in a nutshell and probably his most admirable quality himself.
So I don't know what is a problem here, but something, something Donald Trump.
He continues and says, debate is healthy.
Oh, thank you for reminding me that, Dwayne.
I appreciate it.
Wait, wait, wait.
If debate is healthy, do you think it's really good, a good idea to be friends with Hillary Clinton who wanted to shut down Infowars, who wanted to shut down Breitbart and probably a whole bunch of other people?
If debate is healthy, aligning yourself with the left is not a great way to show your commitment to robust debate these days, given the amount of interference in free speech rallies the left is either engaging in or not opposing.
But Steph, Steph, stop trying to make intellectual sense of this, because he could just smile his big pearly whites and looks gorgeous.
So there, Aaron will just immediately think that he's correct, because purdy.
I bring to this debate, height.
He is tall, right?
Like, I mean, he's crazy tall, right?
Oh yeah, 6465.
Now, you know, some people are going to say, I'll just jump out of this Dwayne Johnson comments here for a second.
Some people are going to say, well...
Okay, Dwayne Johnson, he can run for president.
Donald Trump ran for president, right?
And Donald Trump didn't have any political experience, but there is a little bit of a difference here.
Let me just point this out.
Donald Trump ran a very successful company over the course of decades, decades, and grew it to a massive scale, billion-dollar company.
Okay, that's impressive.
That is significant business experience, which many people over the course of a long period of time have talked about, hey, wouldn't it be great if the government was run like a business?
Not saying I necessarily agree with that approach, but I'd like someone that understands economics and how people respond to incentives in a position of authority and government over someone that believes, I don't know, that you can just wish rainbows and puppies and socialism is going to work.
So Dwayne Johnson, yes, very successful guy.
Very successful guy.
Made a ton of money.
Pretty much incredibly successful at everything he's done except college football when he tried to rip someone's tongue out of their head.
That's a whole other story, and we'll get into that in the future.
If need be, if he runs...
But he hasn't run like a multi-billion dollar business over the course of many decades.
He has his own company, his own production company right now, which is pretty much on the back of him.
And given that he is a giant, beautiful charisma machine, without him, who knows if it would be successful.
That's not running a company that has worldwide business over the course of many decades.
It's very successful.
It's not the same thing.
So he doesn't have the business experience comparable to Donald Trump.
It's not even in the same universe.
So I just want to point that out because people are going to go, well, you know, Donald Trump reality show president.
Humming, humming, humming.
Dwayne Johnson, it's the same thing.
It's really not.
It's really not.
He has no business experience that's comparable.
And, well, we'll see what happens.
But let's go.
Let's mention as well, too, Trump didn't come out of nowhere in terms of running for office.
1987 to 1988, he considered a run for president.
In 2000, he actually entered a presidential race as a Reform Party candidate, got more than 15,000 votes in the party's California primary.
That's when California was a little bit different.
2003, 2004.
After he began hosting The Apprentice, he mulled the run for president and then ultimately decided not to go in.
In March 2011, there was a Wall Street Journal NBC News poll that showed Trump led an all presidential contenders, including...
Mitt Romney.
And he eventually ended up saying in May 2011 he was not going to run for president.
And there has been a whole bunch of times that, I mean, in February 2015 he decided not to renew his apprentice contract.
Some people thought he was going to run for president.
And he's been involved in Republican politics and gone to conferences and made speeches and all that since the 80s.
He's not jumping in out of nowhere.
Of course, the media wants you to think that he had no history in politics and all.
It just came out of nowhere.
But no, this has been something he's been talking about literally for decades.
And that is not the case with The Rock.
Yeah, Trump has been making political statements that are oddly similar to the exact position that he ran on and became president on.
He's been making that for years, talking about NAFTA and trade and those kind of issues.
He's been strong law and order.
He's one of the few people that talked about the whole Central Park Five, that whole rape case situation that everyone said, oh, falsely accused, falsely accused.
He put a letter in the New York Times, I believe it was, Speaking out against it, which you can go pull up the untruth about Donald Trump where we break that down in greater detail.
He was completely right about that, but it was another one of those situations where, oh, there's people here, let's just say wrongly accused and say it enough times and people believe it.
So yeah, he's been out there making political statements that have nothing to do with this word salad crap that Dwayne Johnson is vomiting on the body politic, and that's a bit different.
So let's continue with this quote.
Dwayne Johnson says, debate is healthy, but in a time of widespread disagreement, so is loyalty.
I always love the buts.
Debate is healthy.
But!
But!
I feel an obligation to stand with this diverse team, the American and global workers, who are the beating heart and soul of Under Armour and the reason I chose to partner with them.
My commitment is as real as my sweat and calluses that thicken daily.
Hashtag committed to the people.
Who said it?
Bernie Sanders or The Rock?
Committed to the people.
Hashtag.
Are you actually saying anything?
I stay with workers.
I stay with diverse and global workers.
I like things beating heart and soul.
Yes, yes.
Are you against hard work?
No, you're not.
Do you have a problem with Donald Trump?
Apparently you do.
Let's just get to the long and short of it.
All right.
So that was his virtue signaling on the Under Armour comment.
That was...
Terrible.
And we talked about it previously in a True News, but we didn't read the whole thing because, you know, I had to read this a few times and get over my tears for the cucking of Dwayne The Rock Johnson before doing this show.
But then he did an interview this week with GQ. Wait, wait, wait.
How much did he get paid from Under Armour?
Because it seems a lot of, like, I stand with these noble people and so on.
Usually a moral stand doesn't come with a whole lot of zeros on a paycheck.
So I'm a little confused about it.
But he's damn sure he's making a lot of money for it.
He's making enough to respond.
I assume it's a hell of a lot of money.
So it would be interesting if he mentioned that, you know, I get paid a lot of money to say this stuff as opposed to, you know, this stirring music of like, I committed to the people who...
Like, well, there's a lot of money in that.
I stand my beating heart with the Under Armour team because it's very profitable for me.
Nothing wrong with you making a big giant check to wear some damn t-shirts in your Instagram post.
Nothing wrong with that, but stop being such a bitch.
But if he really cared about them, wouldn't he give his services for free so their paychecks didn't have to be reduced to fund his endorsements?
Well, there's that.
All right.
This GQ interview, on running for president, here's the philosophical money shot.
He said, quote, I think that it's a real possibility.
A year ago, it started coming up more and more.
Let me just say, it's almost like that was planted and that question was repeatedly volleyed to build anticipation slowly for you running for president.
I'm sure that's unrelated.
Now, continuing, there was a real sense of earnestness which made me go home and think, let me really think.
Let me rethink my answer and make sure I am giving an answer that is truthful and also respectful.
I didn't want to be flippant.
We'll have three days off for a weekend.
No taxes.
End quote.
Okay.
You wanted to be very truthful and not flippant, but at the same time, we're just greeted with word salad goop whenever you open your mouth about any political topic.
Okay.
All right.
Fine.
Which tells you the exact demographic he's aiming at.
Hope and change.
Hopey changey.
2.0.
Let's do it again.
It's like Barack Obama on steroids.
Literally.
All right.
Well, Dwayne Johnson lets us point out he's half black and half Samoan.
So he's God's Photoshop, which is certainly going to help with many demographics in the United States that seem to vote along racial lines.
It's just an unfortunate reality of the world in which we live, and you can't overlook that when it comes to electoral politics and any kind of democracy or even a republic.
So...
He also spoke at the 2000 Republican Convention, and there's rumors and such that he was registered as a Republican before.
All the verbiage certainly sounds nothing Republican-ish other than, I like the troops!
Brave, strong statement, Dwayne.
You like the troops.
Wow, what a moral hero.
Now, given the fact he also attended the Democratic Convention that year, encouraged Wolf He now claims to be an independent witch.
I have to laugh about because, oh, this kind of non-committal, soupy language, and now he's an independent.
You know, he admires leaders, you know, leaders that take stands.
But I'm an independent.
Don't get mad at me.
I get it if you're a Hollywood star that's just trying to appeal to a wide demographic and you don't want to piss off lots of people.
Then stop talking about running for president and being a cuck, all right?
Stop.
because you get judged by different, different lenses when you're running for president and angling to run for president than if you just want to be a Hollywood star.
If you want to be a Hollywood star and talk soupy-goopy language so everyone likes you and old women come to your movies and say, he's so dreamy, you can do that.
But don't step in the political arena and expect to walk away unscathed, especially on shows like this.
He said on politics in this interview, quote, I have good friends who are politicians on both sides, quote, Clinton is a good buddy of mine.
Obama is a good buddy of mine.
A multitude of people who are buddies, end quote.
Clinton is a good buddy.
Obama's a good buddy.
Both sides.
Nope, that seems to be one side, Dwayne.
How come you're not mentioning any of the Republicans that you're friends with?
Either you're not friends with any Republicans or you're terrified that people are going to say negative things about you because you're friends with the Republicans.
So why are you saying you're good friends with politicians on both sides and not mentioning it?
Are you scared, Dwayne?
Are you a pussy?
You have how much money in the bank and you're not going to be honest with the people?
Stop talking about running for president.
Where's his diversity?
Where's his inclusiveness?
Last year, both presidential campaigns apparently reached out to Dwayne Johnson for his endorsement, which I completely understand.
I'd want his endorsement, too, if I was running for office.
Wait, are you saying that this show is not going to help us get Dwayne Johnson's endorsement for this show?
Yeah, not going to happen.
Not going to happen.
But I'll wear some Under Armour.
Not gonna go see his movies either.
I may watch them on Netflix if and when they show up if I don't cancel my Netflix subscription.
That Roger Stone documentary was pretty interesting.
Nice cameo, by the way, Steph.
But I'm holding out for House of Cards.
If House of Cards doesn't deliver, I'm out of Netflix, baby.
I promise everyone.
I promise.
That Dear White People thing had me hanging on the edge, but I gotta hang out for House of Cards.
I got a problem.
I'm gonna tap my wrist right now.
Oh, yes, yes.
House of Cards.
Kevin Spacey is an evil politician.
Give me more.
Okay.
Dwayne Johnson said, on people reaching out for his endorsement, he said, which I did not give.
I felt like, and give me a second because I've never said this publicly, so I feel like I'm in a position now where my word carries a lot of weight and influence, which is of course why they want the endorsement.
But I also have a tremendous amount of respect for the process.
I felt like if I did share my political views publicly, a few things would happen.
And these are all conversations I have with myself in the gym at four o'clock in the morning.
I felt like I would either A, make people unhappy with the thought of whatever my political view was, and also it might sway an opinion, which I didn't want to do, end quote.
I might have to take a stand.
Where's the B? Either A, or usually there's a B somewhere in there.
I think the B was it might sway an opinion, but he didn't include the B in front of it.
You know, that's fair enough.
He's speaking extemporaneously, but it always bothers me.
Like, either this, and it's like, okay, you've got to give me the second, man.
Don't leave me hanging.
It's like the conversational version of releasing the three greased pigs in a school and just, you know, saying, it's A, it's B, and D, and then there's no C there, and people just get confused and look for the damn pig.
So, all right, he says, how do you think, well, the interviewer asked, how do you think Donald Trump is doing?
Oh, boy, how's he going to get out of this one without saying something of substance?
Let's see.
Quote, hmm, with any job you come into, you've got to prove yourself.
And personally, I feel that if I were president, poise would be important.
Leadership would be important.
Taking responsibility for everybody.
If I didn't agree with someone on something, I wouldn't shut them out.
I would actually include them.
The first thing we do is come and sit down and we talk about it.
It's hard to categorize right now how I think he's doing other than to tell you how I would operate, what I would like to see.
End quote.
So Dwayne Johnson's already got the political not answering a damn question thing down.
So congratulations on that front.
But how do you think Donald Trump's doing?
Well, I would do this.
That's not what you were asked, Dwayne.
Good God, help me.
Well, I'd also like to point out, just in the last two paragraphs, I feel like I'm in position now.
I felt like, if I did share my views publicly, I felt like it was either A, I feel that if I were president, I feel this, I feel that, I felt this, I felt that.
It's like, oh, I guess we know which demographic he's trying to appeal to as well.
I wouldn't mind.
Oh, yes, he says this stuff.
I mean, I just, I picture ovaries just marching into a voting booth, pulling the lever for Dwayne The Rock Johnson.
Really, the visual is pretty striking.
It is, yeah, the feels thing.
You know, Dwayne, just by the by, I would not be overly averse to a couple of I thinks.
You know, the I feels, I get what you're doing, man.
I get you're making your pecs twitch and that makes the ovaries flip.
But a couple of I thinks for the brothers would not be the end of the world, man.
But he likes the troops and carries guns and is like a living embodiment of a G.I. Joe character.
So, you know, I think he's going to get the male demo regardless of what he says.
Okay, all right.
He said, the interviewer asked, what would you like to see?
I appreciate this interview actually trying to drill him down into something of substance.
That's appreciated.
Dwayne said, quote, right, I'd like to see better leadership.
I'd like to see a greater leadership.
When there's a disagreement and you have a large group of people that you're in a disagreement with, for example, the media, I feel like it informs me that I could be better.
Sorry, I won't keep doing that, but everyone listen for it.
So, this is out of the quote, but, so when the media is calling you the next embodiment of Adolf Hitler, you're supposed to go, this is informing me that I could be better, you know, because you took a stand on enforcing the law when it comes to immigration.
Okay, Duane, you need to take greater leadership when these people that disagree with you, whose economic Financial and societal goal interests are directly opposite of yours.
You need to take leadership when they say this and include them in some way, shape, or form.
You know, like when someone's trying to murder you, you need to go, oh, why?
Let me give you a hug and you need to include them in your life because, you know, it makes them easier to find a place to stick in the knife.
All right.
Continuing, he said, we all have issues and we all got to work our shit out.
And I feel like one of the qualities of a great leader is not shutting people out.
Wait, so basically, The Rock and Oprah are running.
They're just the same person.
Can you imagine if you had The Rock running and his vice presidential candidate was Oprah?
I mean, I said Dwayne would be unbeatable solo, but if that's the deal, yeah, that ticket's gonna win, folks.
That would be a whole heaping podium full of feels.
One of the qualities of a great leader is not shutting people out.
Unless you're the Under Armour CEO and said something vaguely positive about Donald Trump that I need to virtually signal against you because...
All right.
He says, quote, even if we disagree, we've got to figure it out because otherwise I feel as an American, all I hear and all I see in the example you're setting is, quote, now I'm shutting you out and you can't come.
Disagreement informs us.
The responsibility as president, I would take responsibility for everyone, especially when you disagree with me.
There's a large number of people disagreeing.
There might be something I'm not seeing, so let me see it.
Let me understand it.
End quote.
All right, Dwayne, listen to this show.
This is me and a bunch of other people telling you that you're wrong and you might not be seeing something.
No, I think you're seeing it, but you're Manicuring your political career at the expense of, I don't know, making a rational argument.
Okay.
Anything else, Steph, or should we just move to the next comments on the Muslim ban, which...
Yeah, let's do the next one.
All right.
He was asked, what are your thoughts on the Muslim ban?
He said, quote...
Which wasn't a Muslim ban.
Sorry.
I'm sure that's exactly what he said.
Wait, no, no, it wasn't.
No, it wasn't, because he's friends with Barack Obama.
I completely disagree with it.
I believe in our national security to the core, but I don't believe in a ban that bans immigrants.
I believe in inclusion.
Our country was built on that and continues to be made strong by that.
And the decision felt like a snap judgment.
Okay, I just got to stop there.
A snap judgment, you know, talking about...
Extreme vetting and increased security procedures like he was doing over the course of his entire campaign for the most part?
His entire campaign!
How do you call it a snap judgment when it was one of the policies that he was voted in to implement?
And the seven countries that were targeted were a targeted list of countries that developed as security risks under Barack Obama, his friend's administration.
Oh, and what's the first word?
What's the fourth word in that sentence?
And the decision?
What?
Felt.
Felt.
Like a snap judgment.
Stop feeling.
Stop it.
Stop thinking.
Stop feeling, man.
Oh, Steph, it continues, quote.
I feel...
Feel, like the majority of, if not all Americans, feel that protection is of huge importance.
But the ideology and the execution of national security initiatives is where we really have to be careful of not making those snap decisions.
It wasn't a snap decision!
Because there's a tail effect.
Within 24 hours, we saw a tail effect.
It grew to heartache.
It grew to a great deal of pain.
It grew to a great deal of confusion.
And it had a lot of people scrambling, end quote.
Yes, there was lots of George Soros and all types of liberal organization fueled and funded protesters that went to airports and waved banners and said, this is terrible.
Oh, my goodness.
This wasn't a real problem.
This was a propaganda campaign that was then broadcast on every mainstream media, hence liberal outlet, to demonstrate how terrible Donald Trump is.
You know, the same as they paid people to go cause trouble at his rallies.
Yeah, it's the same thing when it comes to this.
If you actually look at surveys of the American population, overwhelmingly they supported his immigration restrictions.
You know, just like they supported them when Barack Obama floated it.
But, you know...
Facts get in the way of a good word salad goop story, Dwayne.
Yeah, I mean, this whole virtual signaling thing, too.
Dwayne Johnson has a net worth of close on $200 million.
Where risky immigrants are going to come in and live is not where Dwayne Johnson lives.
Not going to take his job.
Yeah, a lot of people, you know, who circle Dwayne Johnson with, I'm sure, a completely hysterical sense of weaponry, they're going to keep him safe.
You know, he's going to live in his multi-million dollar mansions and he's going to take his private jets and he's going to be shielded from immigration decisions that are going to affect poor people, that are going to affect blacks, going to affect Hispanics, going to cut down on job interviews.
And you know where else there was a great deal of pain, confusion, and heartache?
Was San Bernardino shootings.
The shootings in the nightclub in Florida where a lot of gay men got gunned down and had their balls cut off and actually stuffed into their mouths.
And when I mentioned this last time, people thought I was making something up.
Oh no.
That's actually what happened.
You need to go and read up on this stuff.
The media didn't tell everyone that?
About the sickness of these people and what they did?
The media didn't broadcast that far and wide?
Oh right, it wasn't a photo that some way, shape, or form was sad and helped a liberal policy like, you know, a sad refugee child on the beach.
Ugh.
So yes, so it seems to be that when security concerns are so high overseas, these seven countries have no way, you have no way to identify who is who and what's going on.
They've got no security apparatus of any particular significance at their airports.
So I think what he's basically saying is that when Barack Obama identifies a list of seven countries that have very high security risks, and then, for a time being, Donald Trump attempts to curtail immigration from those countries, When you enforce a law based upon policies developed by Barack Obama, people are unhappy that they can't get into America.
So yes, when you exclude people from coming into America, they tend to be unhappy.
That's not an argument.
And again, all he's talking about here is heartache, pain, confusion.
People are scrambling.
Feel, feel, feel, feel.
I don't know.
Do you think steroids...
Harms your capacity to think?
Does it just, I mean, I thought it was more masculine and like, he just seems to, can you grow those kinds of muscles with massive amounts of estrogen?
It seems odd.
Maybe that's where the boobs come from.
I don't know.
But it does not seem particularly masculine to just feel, feel, feel, feel your way through things.
It's really just, by the by, removed from this, he may run for president thing.
It's sad that any kind of role model, and I would consider Dwayne Johnson, or at least would have considered Dwayne Johnson, a healthy role model for men in that, you know, I'm not going into the wrestling stuff or Hollywood stuff like, oh, that's, you know...
Really aspire to be that, but someone that really works hard.
He must have that same genetic makeup that Donald Trump has to where you need to sleep three hours a day and you can function in some way, shape, or form.
He started with seven bucks, he says.
He started with seven bucks in his pocket.
Yeah.
Very admirable guy when it comes to really picking himself up by the bootstraps, busting his ass, working hard.
The life of a wrestler is not an easy life.
Traveling on the road 300 plus days a year.
I mean, this guy has really, really worked hard to get to where he's going.
And that is admirable.
And I appreciate that.
And I would look at him as a role model and encourage people to say, like, hey, that's someone you if you work hard, good things are going to happen.
You might not be able to achieve something like what Dwayne Johnson has achieved in Hollywood, because maybe you're not born with God's Photoshop looking gorgeous, willing to able to have the genetics to work out to the degree that you can get that type of physique, chemically enhanced or not.
So maybe you won't be able to get there.
But if you work really, really hard and put your mind to something, you're going to be able to achieve something a whole lot more than if you just sit on the fucking couch and So I would look at him as a role model, but, oh man, moving in this angle, moving in this direction?
It's a shame that there—I mean, all these male role models, there's so few to begin with, and the ones that do kind of exist that demonstrate some masculinity— Oh, they always kneel before the altar of globalism and social justice bullshit and cuck out what it really matters.
And when you have $200 million in the bank, that's a really pathetic, sad thing to see.
So, Dwayne Johnson's running for president, everyone.
You heard it here, and I'll bet money on it happening, and I'll bet money that the SOB will win if and when it does happen.
I know Steph doesn't necessarily agree with that totally, but we'll see.
Well, I just hope it's not in...
In the next election.
And it very well could be, because it's not like the Democrats have anyone else.
Also, don't go watch Baywatch.
I think it's, no, it's coming out, and I just, I wanted to test a 4K thing, so I watched the preview.
It's with him and Zac Efron, and some black guy's talking to him and says, you people, and Zac Efron says, wait, you people?
And Dwayne Johnson's like, hey man, you don't get to say that.
You're just tanned.
You know, like, it's anti-white stuff, again.
So just don't.
Just don't.
Anyway, let's move on.
It's really strange to think that the future of United States immigration policy may be brokered in some way, shape, or form by Vince McMahon, who is close to Donald Trump, has his wife working in Trump's cabinet, donated lots of money to Trump's foundation and certain campaign apparatuses at various points.
And clearly has a relationship with Dwayne Johnson.
Just the idea of Vince McMahon negotiating like, all right, Dwayne, run in four years.
Don't run against the Donald upcoming.
The idea that our immigration policy may stand on the shoulders of Vince McMahon, that's a little maddening to think of.
But nonetheless, this is where we are.
This is an interesting timeline.
Maybe not the best, but an interesting one.
And for those who have no interest in Dwayne Johnson, very sorry that we spent 50 minutes on him, but trust me, it's going to matter.
It's going to matter a lot.
All right, let's move on from somebody who's really, really buff to somebody who's, I think, fair to say the polar opposite of buff.
We've got Governor Chris Christie.
Yes, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, who on Thursday conditionally vetoed a bill That would have outright banned all marriages from minors in the state of New Jersey.
Now, underage marriage is widespread in the United States.
You probably didn't know that, but it is.
Apparently 170,000 children were wed between 2000 and 2010 in 38 of the 50 states where data was available.
So that means it's more than that because the data was not available in those other states.
Now, although the age 18 is the minimum for marriage in most places, every state has legal loopholes allowing children to wed.
The New Jersey bill would have prohibited any marriage whatsoever for children under the age of 18.
So, the top sponsor of this measure was Republican Assemblywoman Nancy Muniz, who said at a committee hearing last year that she introduced the bill after hearing compelling stories of minors forced into marriages for religious reasons.
Huh.
The bill passed the Assembly and Senate with overwhelming support.
Okay, so then it reached the desk of Chris Christie, who wasn't busy closing a bridge to potentially kill people, and said, no, I'm going to veto this.
About 3,500 marriages involving at least one partner under 18 took place in New Jersey from 1995 to 2012.
So this is something specifically happening in New Jersey.
Of those, 163 involved at least one spouse, 15 or younger.
Most were religious arranged marriages.
So the idea in the United States, we're having people under 15 getting married, and the state, which has taken over marriage, which I certainly disagree with, but at the same time, all right, you've taken over marriage, marriage licenses, you now have the say regarding this.
You're going to approve 15-year-olds getting married?
It's almost as bad as being okay with people coming right out of high school, fresh out of indoctrination, signing up for hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt to get a degree that in no way, shape, or form they can pay for it.
We don't give a shit about kids in this country.
We just want to guide people along a profitable avenue that isn't going to get in the way or upset too many people that might impact their political career, like, you know, certain religious groups.
Yeah, the basic thing is that the child brides can't vote, but their husbands can vote.
And the elders of these religious communities can.
And this is something, it's quite shocking, for me at least, looking this stuff up.
And in 38 states, more than 167,000 children, this is almost all girls, some as young as 12, were married from 2000 to 2010, mostly to men 18 or older.
And it is really quite shocking.
So there's lots of legal loopholes.
That allow children under 18 to marry if you have parental consent or judicial approval.
Well, how much younger?
Well, laws in 27 states don't even specify an age below which a child cannot marry.
There's no bottom to this hole.
And it is...
Well, Steph, thankfully we know from the discussion you had with Daniel Horowitz that these judges always act in the most upstanding moral manner.
Oh wait, no, they don't.
And the idea that you get a judge that gets some pressure on them, doesn't want to be labeled some type of, oh, you're anti-religious, because you don't want a 15-year-old to get married.
You don't want a 14-year-old to get married.
You don't want a 13-year-old to get married to an older partner.
You don't want a 12-year-old to get married.
Yeah, that stuff has been approved in the United States.
We're not talking about a third world country here.
We're talking about New Jersey.
Now, Unchained at Last executive director Frady Rice, who we've talked about on the show before and is doing some good work at bringing some illumination to the reality of what's happening in the United States today, said, quote, The shocking truth is that child marriage is legal right now in New Jersey, and it's shocking that thousands of children have been married here recently, most of them minor girls married to adult men.
So...
Freddie Rice is actually interesting.
She got into this.
She was married as a child in an arranged marriage, and she's Jewish, so it was kind of like a Jewish arranged marriage, and she escaped that and has become an activist speaking out against it.
So it's not just Muslim arranged marriages.
It's also Jewish arranged marriages, and there's other religions that do it just the same.
Studies have also shown that child marriage is associated with mental health problems, poverty, and increased high school dropout rates, and a whole bunch of other really terrible stuff, because oddly enough, state-sanctioned sex with children doesn't exactly work out great for the child who's being raped.
So Chris Christie...
Go ahead, Seth.
Well, here's the odd thing, right?
So in Idaho, someone who's 18 or older, and if you have sex with a child under 16, you can be charged with a felony and go to jail for up to 25 years.
But Idaho also has the highest rate of child marriage of the states that provided data.
So in other words, Idaho allows marriages with an age difference that constitutes statutory rape.
Riddle me this, Batman.
How insane is that?
Well, a judge that meets people for 15 minutes and ponders a case can absolutely ascertain whether this is going to be a good situation for the child involved, right?
Right?
That can never possibly go wrong.
You know, like all those...
Child custody cases and all those family services cases where the judge makes the absolute best decision for the well-being of the child.
Oh wait, no, they don't!
And it winds up being a damn disaster where the child is used as a political pawn between the two parents where money is somehow extracted from the man's wallet due to the woman using all kinds of legal maneuvers.
So yeah, the history of the courts for being great at ascertaining what's best for the child aren't great in the idea that in any way, shape, or form it would be good for a child to 15 or otherwise to be married.
Like, come on.
Like, especially in the day and age where adulthood has been delayed by almost every mechanism imaginable, this prolonging of childhood in the United States is pretty disgraceful.
And then on top of it, on top of it, we're going to start saying, yeah...
The 15-year-old can marry.
Yeah, why not?
They can absolutely consent to that decision, make great choices.
Because, you know, again, going back to the student loan decision, people fresh out of high school, they make all kinds of amazingly wonderful decisions right at that age when it comes to their future and spending on these massive, massive student loans that they won't be able to pay back.
Yeah, I know that you need a cutoff age from a legal standpoint.
I know you need some kind of date.
And 18 is the date that we've chosen?
But for God's sakes, for God's sakes, can we at least look at it and go, maybe, you know, the 14-year-old shouldn't marry someone in an arranged marriage in some form or fashion?
Can we at least agree on that?
Apparently we can't!
You can't drink, but you can get married.
You can't drive a car, but you can get married.
And there is no infringement on religious rights in the U.S. legal system, right?
The Supreme Court has said that there's no problem with laws that forbid an act as long as it's incidental.
Like, if you specifically target a religious practice, then you're in trouble.
But if you simply ban a practice as a whole without targeting a religion, that's totally fine legally, at least according to the Supreme Court.
And of course, you know, religions say marriage kind of has to be Willing.
But child marriages, I mean, the whole point is that the woman, the girl, the child can't consent.
That's statutory rape and so on.
And these child marriages have a 70% chance of ending in divorce.
So it's even more risky than dating a leftist woman.
And that's saying something.
All right.
Well, Chris Christie touches on this a bit in his statement, which some people have defended him on saying, oh, this is very reasonable.
We'll explain why it's not in a second.
But he says, quote, That's so gross.
He continues and said, I agree with protecting the well-being, dignity and freedom of minors is vital.
But the severe bar, it's a severe bar this bill creates is not necessary to address the concerns voiced by the bill's proponents and does not comport with the sensibilities and in some cases, the religious customs of the people in this state.
All 50 states have established minimum ages for the issuance of marriage licenses and all 50 states have statutory exceptions.
New Jersey should not depart from that norm.
Why?
Why should New Jersey not depart from that norm?
You know what was a norm before?
Slavery!
Oh, New Jersey shouldn't depart from that norm.
It's the norm, not an argument!
He continues.
However, to ensure that the well-being of minors seeking to get married in our state is secured, I am recommending...
They're seeking to get married.
Sure, because you're 13 and you're like, hey, you know what?
I think I really, really want...
To hell with high school.
I'm just...
I really, really want to get married.
You know, that's...
Yeah, they're seeking to get married.
Oh, my God.
When you're playing with your Lego stuff, sometimes it just, you get that wash over you and it goes, you know what?
I want to get married to an older man.
That's exactly what happens to these young girls.
Yeah.
However, to ensure that the well-being of minors seeking to get married in our state is secured, I am recommending that this bill be amended so that a marriage license no longer be issued for a person under the age of 16.
Moral hero Chris Christie.
Thank goodness.
Thank goodness.
That's okay.
That's all right.
Never mind the fact that he's vetoing the bill that would actually ban that, and it's being referred back to, you know, they have to put it through again, and who knows if that'll even happen, and blah, blah, blah.
Quick question.
He continued.
Yeah, go ahead.
If somebody out there, I'm not suggesting that they should, but if somebody out there were to, say, create a religion that described paying taxes as immoral, Do you think that that same lenience for religious integrity and religious conscience would come into play?
I've got to tell you, I really don't think that would be the case.
I worship the god of Murray Rothbard, and it's my religious custom to not pay taxes.
Will that fly?
I'm not going to count on it.
He continues and said, I also would require judicial approval for the issuance of a marriage license to persons who are age 16 and 17.
Judges of the Superior Court have long been charged with reviewing marriage license applications for minors under the age of 16.
I have confidence that that same ethical, moral, and common sense values will be used in considering applications for marriage licenses for minors age 16 and 17.
Okay, so the whole reason that there is this bill is because there are child marriages, including, including 15 and younger, which requires parental consent and judicial approval currently in New Jersey, and 16 and 17, which only requires parental consent in New Jersey, the whole point of this is saying that this judicial overview isn't working.
And that's why it should be banned So the idea, like, we're just going to take the judicial approval and give it to 16 and 17-year-olds, and that'll solve the problem.
No!
That's not the point!
The point is that the judicial overview isn't working.
If you're going to say that a 15-year-old can get married to an older man, and the point winds up where they wind up getting divorced years later, she's railroaded into this marriage, and mental health problems, poverty, high school dropout, and all types of other nefarious stuff, the whole point is Is that this isn't working, but let's just apply this to an older demo where the stuff also isn't working and it'll be great.
No!
There's no data to support that.
Clearly, I think that our ancestors died in order to provide us a legal system that did not rely upon any objective definition of the law, but basically came down to how the judge was feeling that day about a particular situation.
I think that's really what people sacrificed and died for.
Not an objective legal system, but a whim-based subjective system of, I don't know, I think these guys will make a great couple.
Well, is there any type of safeguard to make sure that if you're up before a judge because you have a certain religious custom that the judge themselves doesn't belong to that religion, so maybe you can get some type of objective view?
Is there a safeguard there?
No, there's not.
There's really not.
So, yay, impartial judiciary.
Okay.
Let's see.
Where the hell were we in this whole list?
An exclusion without exceptions would violate the cultures and traditions of some communities in New Jersey based on religious traditions.
Judicial oversight would permit consideration of these factors in the 16 and 17-year-old time frame.
Finally, it is disingenuous to hold that a 16-year-old may never consent to marriage, although New Jersey law permits the very same 16-year-old to consent to sex.
Or obtain an abortion without so much as parental consent or parental knowledge, let alone consent.
That inconsistency in logic undercuts the alleged logic of the outright ban, excuse me, end quote.
So there's other stuff that makes no sense.
Therefore, we need to make sure that our underage marriage laws make no sense.
All right, Chris, thanks for that argument.
Why don't you just go close down another bridge?
Opponents of the measure said that exceptions should remain for young members of the military, 17-year-olds that can enlist with parental consent and pregnant teenagers.
You know, pregnant teenagers, likely those that have been raped.
Just pointing that out.
Christie is term limited out of office this year.
Yay!
That's great.
Well, Chris Christie is fantastic when it comes to pointing out that Marco Rubio is repeating himself 40 times within the confines of political debate.
Well, that's excellent.
Well, he's the type of person that I would really enjoy envisioning staring down Hillary Clinton in a courtroom and prosecuting her.
Chris Christie's history is all kinds of terrible when it comes to questionable legal and moral decisions that he's made in political office, which is why his presidential campaign got completely torpedoed.
And who knows where he may wind up?
I've heard his name floated, and I don't expect it to happen, but I've heard his name floated as possibly director of the FBI. An FBI director that loves children getting married for religious exceptions.
I'm going to vote no for Chris Christie as FBI director.
I don't think we vote on that position, but I just want to say no for Chris Christie in any position of authority within the Trump administration or any administration or anything other than a damn circus show from here on out.
Amen.
Globally, one in 10 girls under the age of 15 are married.
One in 10 girls under the age of 15 in the world are married.
And each year, 15 million girls are married before the age of 18.
That's 28 girls every minute, one girl every two seconds.
And Chris Christie, he loves it.
He's a big fan.
Speaking of age differences in marriage, this is a way to just wedge this joke in.
Charlie Hebdo had a cover after Macron won.
And he was basically saying, Emmanuel Macron, he will perform miracles!
And there's a picture of his wife pregnant.
I just wanted to mention that.
It's a pretty good joke.
And let's move on.
Well, let's just say, if Macron is proposing any type of disastrous foreign policy or domestic policy, which is to mean if Macron is proposing a policy, you can distract him very easily by just telling him that there's a Golden Girls reunion marathon on some television station.
And hopefully...
He'll disappear with a jar of Vaseline and some tissues and not pass the legislation.
Moving on, let's talk about a ban on young boy circumcision proposed in Norway, which, hey, I consider this a positive development.
The idea that we're going to mutilate children's genitals, whether they're female or male, I'm against that.
Big moral stand there.
Will the Rock praise my leadership for taking that stand despite the fact it's divisive?
Who knows?
Who knows?
Which way is the wind blowing today?
I'm not sure.
You know what's technically divisive is taking a third of...
nerve centers on a penis and sawing them off.
That seems to be defining a man from something fairly close and important to men.
So fairly divisive, usually without anesthetic. - That's a very good point.
Norway's Progress Party, the country's third largest party known for its anti-immigration policies, has supported a bill outlawing ritual circumcision of boys under 16, which is a common practice among Jewish and Muslim communities.
The draft law was passed at the party's weekend national convention after rejection of a compromise proposal to prevent state funding of the procedure rather than ban it altogether.
I love this.
The people are forced to pay for something that they may find morally repugnant.
Because, you know, religious tradition.
Great!
Its proponents claim that the religious right causes mental and physical harm to children and constitutes a serious violation of child's rights.
Yes!
Yes it does!
Raise levels of cortisol in your bloodstream when you just pop out of the womb that are still there months and months and months later.
Anesthetic, which doesn't work.
Many circumcisions without anesthetic.
You can go look at our presentation, The Truth About Circumcision.
You can go look with any of our interviews that we've done with experts on the topic, people from Intact America and such.
The dangers of circumcision, including the children bleeding out and dying from the procedure, are often not talked about very much.
And the positive benefits like, hey, you may get penile cancer if you don't get this.
It's so incredibly rare compared to the downsides that it's just appalling that that would be presented as some type of positive for it.
You might get an infection.
That's why we have antibiotics now, you know?
For God's sake.
Soap!
You have to wash.
Well, I don't want to wash it.
Let's just cut off the body part.
All right, let's make that case for other parts of children's anatomy.
Oh, wait, let's not!
Okay.
So, Evren Cohen, the president of the Jewish community in Oslo, expressed dismay over the bill.
Oh, feelings again.
Saying...
But the Progress Party must know they won't get a majority for this in Parliament.
It seems like they want to send a signal that we are unwelcome in the country, end quote.
Or maybe a signal that this is a barbaric practice that should be outlawed.
Do no harm.
Isn't that the oath that doctors take?
Well, not in this case, because religious custom.
General Director of the European Jewish Association, Rabbi Malcolm Margolin?
Thank you, Steph.
Good God.
He also blasted this, quote, disgraceful bill, end quote, vowing, quote, to act in every way we can to fight it, end quote.
He went on to say, quote, there is no doubt that this anti-Jewish decision is blatantly anti-Semitic because the bill does not harm Muslims who are not obligated to circumcise their children as infants and can perform the procedure even at an older age as the bill allows, end quote.
This whole thing, like being opposed to circumcision as anti-Semitic, this completely caught me off guard when I first heard it way back when.
It's like, okay, you just don't want them to cut off part of a child's anatomy for no actual medical value whatsoever because of religious custom and somehow this is anti-Semitic.
I'm anti-anyone that wants to cut off a part of a child's anatomy.
Call me crazy, call me nuts.
And there are Jewish groups that fiercely oppose circumcision as well and have an alternative procedure.
So are they anti-Semitic as well?
I don't know.
Maybe this rabbi can inform me of this case, but maybe we just don't like barbaric Century-old procedures that were designed specifically to reduce sexual pleasure.
You want to research Kellogg and his whole thoughts regarding circumcision.
Well, don't plan on eating lunch afterwards, but there you go.
So this gentleman also sent a letter to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu calling on them to intervene, saying, I have no doubt the state of Israel, the state of the Jewish people, cannot remain indifferent to it.
And I call on you to exert all your political influence in order to prevent the exclusion of Jews from life in various European countries, end quote.
If your life is dependent on the mutilation of a child's genitals, you really need to rethink your position and what you're doing.
And again, there are many Jewish groups that specifically oppose circumcision, have alternative procedures that you can stay with their tradition while at the same time not mutilating a child's genitals.
But yes, you know, we need to call Netanyahu because child genital mutilation needs to be preserved.
Are you kidding me?
And to all the people who think I'm Jewish, not circumcised.
Mentioned it before.
Not circumcised.
Raised as Christian.
On my grandfather's side, there was a stepmother or a stepwife.
Anyway.
All right.
You need to post a disc pic, otherwise no one's going to believe it.
Yeah, yeah.
You know, I just...
There's not a...
I don't have a cell phone with, like, that big a landscape.
There's no fisheye privilege to...
Anyway, let's move on to pee privilege.
Okay.
So Northern Arizona University now has signs outside of a campus restroom that ask students to consider whether or not they have pee privilege.
Yes, that kind of pee privilege.
Do you have pee privilege?
One sign questions informing restroom goers that they, quote, never have to think about gender identity, ability, or access when peeing, end quote.
Then they do!
Another sign expands upon the definition of pee privilege.
The shit I am saying in the current year still baffles me.
Noting that the ability to use a restroom without fear or concern for your own safety constitutes such a privilege, explaining that other factors like the gender binary or the ability to undoubtedly know which bathroom to pick contribute to pee privilege.
Similar signage, pictures of which were obtained by Campus Reform, which does really good work by the way, go check out Campus Reform, offers a guide for students on the do's and don'ts of encountering a transgender person in a restroom.
Feels like someone's in the wrong restroom?
The flyer questions, deliberately placing wrong in scare quotes and then advising students not to question someone who they think fits such a category.
Don't stare, the sign continues, suggesting that this person is probably aware that they don't fit into either restroom, quote, so they don't need any more eyes reminding them, end quote.
The sign does, however, confirm that students should protect not their own safety, but the safety of any transgender individual they may encounter in a bathroom, explaining that, quote, gender-variant people are at high risk of verbal, sexual, and physical assault.
Keep yourself accountable to make sure they're safe from others, end quote.
So pay no attention to your safety, the safety of your children.
We need to protect the safety of other people.
Okay, all right, that's the argument.
Now, the spokesman for the university told Campus Reform, we don't know who's putting up these flyers on our campus, but we are actively looking for them and taking them down as soon as we can.
These are not authorized by the university, so that's important to keep in mind.
But pee privilege, this is where we are now, pee privilege.
You know, Steph, after I drink lots of fluids and I have to go to the restroom, you know that little shake you get sometimes?
That's not, I don't even know what the heck the medical term for that is, but that little shake that men get, it's like, ah, ha, ha, ha.
That's not just a little shake that men get after they pee.
That's actually the pee privilege dance.
That is us reminding the world that we have pee privilege and lording it over everyone.
And the men, collectively, at the urinals, in the bathrooms, we do our pee privilege dance.
I'm exposing this now.
I'm gonna get my patriarchy card revoked.
But yes, that is to rub in the face of everyone who does not have pee privilege that, yeah, we can stand up and urinate and therefore we're better than you something something or who the hell knows.
You know, this will never end.
You understand?
No, this will never end.
This will continually escalate.
This sort of divide and hypersensitize people to other people's needs.
I gotta tell you, I mean, I sympathize with people who have gender identity challenges.
I mean, it really is a great challenge, and I wish them the very best on their journey.
But I gotta tell you this, as far as the feelings of particular groups go, in terms of The left asking me to care about the feelings of particular groups.
I don't.
I mean, I'm just going to come right ahead.
I don't.
I used to.
I really did.
And I was like, oh, I'm going to be sensitive.
I'm going to be careful.
I'm going to think and watch what I say and watch what I do.
and I don't anymore.
For the simple reason that nobody cares about, as a white male, nobody cares about how I feel.
Nobody cares that I was raised being told that white males are racist and sexist and male chauvinist pigs and misogynists and that my entire cultural history was nothing other than exploitation and slave owning and colonialism and nastiness.
Like nobody cared about my feelings.
Nobody cares about my feelings.
And I have reached this wonderfully liberating and peaceful place of I will care about other people's feelings, but they damn well better care about mine as well Because if you're in a situation where you only care about other people's feelings and they don't care about yours, that's just a recipe for exploitation.
So I don't care.
I mean, I care that these people are having challenges.
I don't care about the left lecturing me about sensitivity to other people's feelings because the verbal abuse that's been pouring out against white males for the last couple of decades from the left, they haven't cared about my feelings.
I'm just sick and tired of being used in this way.
Shockingly, Steph, you as a philosopher are asking for universality when it comes to these claims.
That's terrible.
That's absolutely terrible.
It's so freeing.
So freeing.
It's just like this, buttons don't exist in me anymore.
As far as the left goes, the lecturers, I don't care.
They can just make in noises, and it's just a kind of hysteria and control and manipulation and ultimately resource transfer.
Don't care.
Don't care.
You know what?
This is a good time to fit this in.
This isn't on the format sheet that I prepared, but at the same time, it needs to be said.
Mitch McConnell is encouraging...
I forget the man's name, Marion Garland, I want to say.
I might be getting that wrong.
But the person that Obama wanted to nominate as his Supreme Court pick that was rejected and ignored by the Republicans, Mitch McConnell is suggesting that he be made the director of the FBI. You know, because then the liberals will trust us and it'll be okay.
You know, this is like a peace offering.
When are these people going to get it?
When are people on the right going to get it?
Any peace offering or any type of look across the pond, let's hold hands, kumbaya, it doesn't work and you're just getting taken advantage of.
I wish that wasn't the case.
I really do.
I wish people could get together and live in whatever world Dwayne Johnson tries to create with his verbiage, but that's not the world in which we live.
So all these people that try and virtue signal or reach across the aisle and Let's work with the Democrats to hum and a hum and a hum.
No, the Democrats are going to oppose everything that Donald Trump wants, everything that the conservative base wants, every step of the way.
And until you understand that and internalize it, and Lord knows it's happened for how many damn years, and Republicans have rolled over and cucked every single time, including this recent budget.
Maybe these people could get it through their thick friggin' heads and understand that, hey, these people are our enemy.
They're our enemy, and they are opposing what is best for the American people, their safety, their security, their financial well-being long-term.
Maybe they could actually look at it for what it is and go, hey, let's not offer some type of I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
The security of the nation as Secretary of State by turning her damn email and the intelligence-gathering operations of the country into just a pass-through for any foreign government that wants to dip into her inbox that's not secured.
So, yeah, can we appoint someone who's gonna actually enforce the law?
It's kind of nuts that it seems partisan to say, hey, I just want the law enforced.
Hey, if some Republicans get caught up in that too, great, great, enforce the law.
I don't care who it winds on when it comes to political consequences of such.
But can we just get someone that can enforce the law?
I don't know why this is a conservative opinion.
We have immigration laws.
Can we enforce immigration laws?
No!
Can we not enforce the laws regarding taxation?
No, we have to enforce those.
Those are very important to be enforced.
Okay, I see.
I don't like this pick-and-choose nonsense.
And as long as we continue to kowtow, my God, I said we, as if I'm a Republican, which I'm not.
But we, sane people that believe in some semblance of Ah, freedom from an economic standpoint.
As long as we continue to kowtow to the wish of the social justice warrior Democrats, you're just going to continue getting more of this nonsense, and we are going to be destroyed every time we reach an election or attempt to compromise.
So, nah.
I have a mental image of a kamikaze pilot in the Second World War in Japan as he angles himself in for a self-destructive run, whispering, in the spirit of bipartisanship, dot, dot, dot.
No, no, it's win-lose.
And of course, immigration can't be enforced because they want to bring people in who vote left.
Taxation must be enforced so that they have the money to bribe the immigrants and illegal immigrants to stay and vote left.
I mean, this is always the same pattern.
Whatever benefits the left, they will enforce.
And they won't enforce stuff if not enforcing it benefits the left.
So it's win-lose.
I'm sorry it's come to this.
It's been pushed by the left.
But you can't compromise.
I mean, no one's going to end up liking you anyway.
No one's going to respect you.
The idea that they may withhold their positive opinion of you and that's why we've got to have creeping socialism and social decay.
Oh, come on.
I mean, if you can't handle people's dislike of you, don't be in politics.
Well, it's funny, too, because the people that cuck on this stuff, their people don't like them, the base doesn't like them, and the liberals don't like them anyway.
So they're just unlike to a larger degree, and they've completely betrayed any semblance of principles or the semblance of what they were elected by the base to go and do in the first place.
Just think of history 10 or 20 years from now.
If the left wins, you'll be written about contemptuously if you weren't on the left.
If the non-leftists win, like the sane people win who aren't on the left, Then if you compromise with the left, you'll be written about as a Chamberlain-style Benedict, Arnold's traitor to all that is good and virtuous.
If you stand up, yes, there's discomfort in the here and now, but just think of the wonderful, wonderful things that will be said about you in the future.
It's not immaterial.
Well, we get lots of praise in the here and now as well from the base, which is pretty rabid at this point regarding this continual cucking to social justice warrior, Democrat, insane, regressive leftists.
And it's weird to me that The possible appointment of an FBI director is on par when it comes to pee privilege, in that can we just have universality in enforcing the law and not just continually cuck and bow down to whatever regressive leftist group is screaming the loudest on that given day and getting magnified by the media?
There aren't a lot of these people, folks, by the way.
These regressive leftists, yes, you see them on college campuses.
Yes, there's a lot of them in that type of area.
But compared to the base of sane people in the country, And, you know, maybe we're great on a curve when it comes to sane people in the country.
But this isn't a lot of people.
This isn't a lot of people overall.
We have the numbers on the conservative side of things, on the sane side of things.
If you look at all these polls regarding many of Donald Trump's executive orders and policies he wants to implement, they're more than 50% supported.
So this isn't the majority, despite the fact that the media wants you to think it is.
And as evidenced by all these Feminist leftist groups that are just going bankrupt and ceasing to continue to exist, that should be some evidence for you that, yeah, not as all as the mainstream media tries to paint it out and make it seem.
Yeah, I mean, you get a bunch of demonetization happening and even Lacey Green seems to find reason.
Which I'll say, too, anyone that wants to cross the aisle and try and have a reasonable debate, I'm always keen on.
I always think that's great.
If you want to say, all right, well, let's have a conversation without slander, without name-calling, without any—I always think that stuff's great.
And I think people should learn from the Christians, from a love-your-enemy standpoint here.
I mean, Christians have always been very nice to Steph and I on this show, despite some very strong arguments that have been made previously about religion.
And— That certainly has helped win us over.
Like, wow, there's a lot of really nice Christians.
A lot of very nice people.
And that means something.
It matters.
Now, this doesn't apply to the people that are demanding that you talk about your pee privilege every five seconds.
But if someone actually wants to have a reasonable conversation and debate, hey, I say, let's have a debate.
Let's sit down.
Let's open our arms and have a reasonable discussion.
Reasonable discussion is always okay, as far as I'm concerned.
So let's move on to rape culture, which is not a reasonable discussion.
So 89% of colleges reported zero campus rapes in 2015, according to the American Association of University Women.
Wait, wait.
Wait, Mike, it's very, very important that you tell me how we can dismiss this finding.
Because it goes against the idea that rape culture somehow largely exists among privileged white men.
That's the general anti-white narrative we were talking about before.
So please, please tell me, I haven't read this one yet, tell me how we can immediately dismiss this data as somehow incomplete or inaccurate.
Well, let me just read from the USA Today article and how a woman tried to rebut this data.
She said, reported is the key word.
There we go.
Just because a school has no rape reports doesn't mean no rapes happened.
The findings very likely do not reflect the true state of sexual violence among college students since a majority of incidents go unreported.
In fact, a 2014 report by the U.S. Department of Justice estimates that 80% of student victims don't report their rape or sexual assault Okay, so I'm not going to do a full breakdown of the ways in which this report can be twisted, but what we're talking about right here are rapes on college campuses.
That's the stat, okay?
So she's throwing out this 80% of student victims don't report their rapes.
Okay, well, let's, for the sake of argument, assume that's true, right?
Well, I looked at this report.
Location where the crime occurred.
The people that said, at school, students were 4%, non-students, 2%.
And this had the little asterisk, wing-ding, woohoo, woohoo, next to it, saying, interpret with caution, estimates based on 10 or fewer sample cases, or a coefficient of variation which is greater than 50%.
So this means, this is meaningless information.
The sample size isn't large enough to actually demonstrate some facts here.
So they're talking about rapes on campus, and here, even in this tiny sample of 10 or fewer people, only 4% of the students were actually raped on campus.
So this is not even the same category of information.
Yeah, so she's trying to rebut campus rape, saying no, campus rapes happen by quoting 80% of student victims don't report it, but the study that she's quoting specifically says that only 4% of students report that the rape or sexual assault occurred on campus, which completely destroys her point and narrative, and backs up the people that provided the study in the first place.
Do these people just say no one's gonna read the shit that they link?
I mean, good God.
Quick question.
Does she take into account some of the false rape allegations that seem to have cropped up with fair regularity over the past couple of years about supposed rapes on campus, narrative of which tends to fall apart fairly quickly, lawsuits of which tend to bring out even more truth?
Does she talk about, well, of course, we have to remember that some of these rape claims turn out to be false, and therefore that number might be higher?
No, that wasn't included in her article, which if you wanted to present an actual...
Honest approach, you'd say, okay, well, here's some stats regarding underreported incidents, potentially, and here's the stats regarding false rape accusations.
No, that side isn't reported, and we'll get to why in a second.
But while I was looking for the study that she linked, I also found something interesting as well that wasn't included.
So 19% of student rapes and 22% of non-student rapes were committed by Blacks.
10% and 12% were committed by other slash mixed-raced individuals.
Alright, so by proportion of the population, this seems to be completely out of whack.
If we're talking about on-campus situations, now I know affirmative action is working strong, but I mean, there's still a disproportionate amount of Asians compared to the general population in colleges, and they also have the lowest rape rates.
So it's interesting here that you have a group, or groups that are Disproportionate when their responsibility for self-reported rapes here.
And that's not mentioned.
That's not important.
That goes against the narrative, and we don't want to talk about that.
So we're going to quote this study, but, you know, just pretend that that information doesn't exist.
Wow, that is kind of chilling.
She continues in USA Today, quote, Still, the 2015 AAUW report isn't as rosy as the previous years.
In 2014, 91% of schools reported zero rapes based on annual crime data disclosed by more than 11,000 colleges and universities.
So again, this year's study is 89%.
Has she brought up the degree of error in this study?
No, she hasn't.
I tried to find it.
I wasn't able to find it quickly.
But I guarantee you're not going to have a study like this where the error thing is less than three more often than not.
So it's within the margin of error.
But, you know, it's not as rosy as the previous years.
Narrative, narrative, narrative.
She continues, other studies have yielded a different picture of sexual violence on campus.
More than one in five students said they had experienced sexual abuse along with physical abuse and threats of physical violence.
survey by Fifth and Pacific and knowledge networks of more than 500 young adults aged 19 to 29 found.
18 to 29, sorry.
18 to 29.
Thank you.
So 500 respondents, which means throw it out in small sample size.
But let's say we do look at it.
I looked at the press release from these fine people and let's just see what they have to say.
They say, the survey shows that 57% of college students say it's difficult to identify dating abuse, substantive evidence of the need for increased education and awareness.
It's, I understand that there's people that are abused and don't really realize it.
I mean, this is Stockholm Syndrome, folks.
But when it comes to, like, rape or sexual assault, I think the lines are a little more clear.
So this press release and this The survey and the people doing the survey, I get the flavor of, like, no, no, you've really been abused because, I don't know, you had a drink and then you had sex that was consensual, therefore that's rape.
I'm getting that flavor from this press release, and you can read it in greater detail if you like, but, you know, 57% of the people aren't aware that they were abused in a dating manner.
Like...
Okay.
Well, and then they say, well, that means naturally we need increased education and awareness, which they'll get paid for, right?
I mean, so this is a whole bunch of people saying, well, you know, people, how about you simplify the definitions?
You know, if close to two-thirds of people don't have a clue what you're talking about, maybe what you're talking about is just crap, and you need to simplify your definitions and stop casting the net so widely.
And they do this all the time, and we've talked about this before.
We do this all the time.
Come up with these definitions of rape, which is such a powerful and charged and ugly word for obvious moral reasons.
They try and expand and extend this to the point where they can say there's an epidemic, there's more, there's more.
This scope creep fear-mongering is very harmful.
It destroys relations between the sexes.
And of course, for men and women who are genuinely raped, you are hijacking the horror of their experience in order to forward your political agenda, which I think is a form of exploitation.
There is no rung in hell low enough for my mental image of where that should be.
Well, this press release continues.
I just want to read this bit.
The final sample was weighed using the Census Bureau's school enrollment benchmarks for age, gender, race, ethnicity, and geographic region based on the October 2009 supplement of the Current Population Survey.
It is statistically representative of all 18 to 29-year-old college students in the United States with a margin of sampling error of plus-minus 5.4 percentage points.
So, if you get 500 survey examples and you're weighting it by race, like...
This is why in the previous study I mentioned you get the little wing ding next to the information because if you start weighting for percent of the population, let's say you only get like five black people in your survey, and then you weight it by percent of the population or by percent of college students that are black, you can easily skew data by not having a large enough sample.
And if you get a bias in either direction just because, oh, you just ask people that say yes or no, You're going to get data that's widely out of proportion with the facts if you have a small sample and you're weighting it.
So when stuff is weighted like this, again, it's another reason just to be a little skeptical.
And we noticed this when there was lots and lots and lots of Democrats and liberal leaning people polled in the presidential election.
Like, oh, man, Donald Trump's doing terribly in these polls.
Hillary's running away with it.
Well, when you poll plus 16 Democrats in your survey, yeah, Donald Trump's not going to do as well.
Funny how that works out.
So these are all the games that can be played with statistics.
And again, folks, like nobody that's saying out there is like, yay, rape.
We are pro-rape.
But when you try and present a problem that doesn't actually exist, such as rape on college campuses, It's not an epidemic.
It's not.
That is disingenuous and actually takes time, attention, and resources away from true victims that are more likely to be ignored as you focus your resources in a direction where there isn't as much of a problem.
You know, for example, Tommy Robinson's been doing some damn heroic work leading marches through city streets regarding the rape of a woman that the police For whatever reason, and you can dig into the issue yourself and look into it, for whatever reason, haven't been very excited about prosecuting, despite quite a bit of evidence, some testimony, all that kind of thing.
So maybe, you know, I take these people that are so concerned about rape culture seriously, if they were throwing weight behind clear cases.
Clear cases where there's a problem and a victim that is identifiable and she isn't getting justice.
That would be nice.
I'd like to see people address that kind of rape culture.
But that doesn't fit the narrative and therefore must be ignored.
So it's not about rape.
It's not about helping victims.
It's about the narrative.
And that is just disgusting bullshit.
Well, you just look at the number of Muslim grooming gangs that have been preying upon largely white British girls in dozens after dozens of Of cities and towns throughout England.
That is a huge problem with thousands and thousands and thousands of child victims of unbelievably brutal pedophilia.
And that would be something of...
But, you know, I guess everybody just likes tweaking at the white males again, sort of get the theme of the show.
The other thing I think is interesting, too, is there's a huge gap between the data, right?
So a fifth of these students have experienced blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
And it's like, well...
Very close to 9 out of 10 of colleges report zero campus rates.
You got 20% of all students.
Well, no, it's less than 10% of college with even one.
That's a huge gap.
Now, normally that huge gap would raise people's questions about the methodology.
But here it doesn't because there's an ideology and the supposed data processing to me is just a cloak over the ideology.
Well, you can just wave a flag that says, unreported, unreported, and then quote a study that says the exact opposite of what you're claiming it does, and somehow you're right.
So, just for your own edification, folks, here's some other headlines from this author from USA Today.
Quote, young people still don't completely understand what constitutes sexual assault, end quote.
Quote, offensive messages were reported this week on several college campuses, end quote.
Offensive messages, oh dear.
Quote, how universities have vowed to protect undocumented students, end quote.
Quote, notorious troll Martin Schlecki, I think that's how you pronounce his name, I'd probably watch it.
All right, now wants to visit your campus, end quote.
Horrible, horrible.
Quote, that Drexel professor who wasn't, okay, that Drexel professor wasn't actually wishing for white genocide on Christmas.
Was her issue that it was Christmas?
Like on that day?
Yeah, I mean, this is...
It's a narrative.
That's all it is.
It's a narrative.
She's on a side, and the data has to be skewed and manipulated to support the side.
That's all it is, folks.
Some of the professors, and I got this from one of Ann Coulter's books years ago, being really quite shocked at some of the people who end up as professors on American campuses, like people who are terrorists from the weather underground and so on, just end up as professors.
It really is quite shocking just what kind of standards or non-standards are there in the American university system for some of these people.
And I think this is, I don't know, it's horrendous stuff.
And let's stop doing all this gender baiting.
You know, there are real problems with ideologies that are not exactly in line with Western horrors towards all forms of rape.
And let's start examining some of those.
But that might put you in conflict with some of the other narratives.
So let's just find out if you really care about women or not.
And for the most part, it does not seem to be the case.
No, no.
Like, you know, maybe atheists being sentenced to death in Saudi Arabia, should he care about that?
No, no, 'cause that goes against your nerve and you just want a virtue signal.
Got it.
Female genital mutilation on the rise in the U.S. Might want to talk about that, but no!
Because white males don't fight back.
Well, that may not last forever.
Next we go to boys wearing skirts, apparently.
So, a North London private school has drawn up plans to introduce gender-neutral uniforms in response to a growing number of pupils questioning their gender identity.
I don't know if Bill...
Bill Nye goes to this school, but maybe they've watched some of his programming.
And why?
Why are they questioning their gender identity?
Is it something that has been buried?
I mean, I've seen these pictures, you've probably seen them too, on Twitter, where women are saying, you know, I had a long talk with my four-year-old son, and, you know, we've decided that we're going to switch his gender.
The kid's four, for God's sakes!
He doesn't even know how to play Jenga without something falling on his forehead.
But there is this, I don't know, I don't know what's going on.
Like there is this fluidity stuff that is like, I think in some cases being imposed by parents and being imposed by teachers.
And kids will nod along to what their authority figures say.
And this kind of leading, if that's what's occurring, it's just a thought that I have.
If this kind of leading is occurring, it seems to me enormously destructive.
But Steph, let's be real about this.
I mean, four years old, they're old enough to get married in New Jersey, so at least there's that.
Highgate School currently has an option for girls to wear a gray pleated skirt, but the school is consulting on a mix-and-match uniform policy, which will not specify a different requirement for boys and girls.
Girls can currently wear gray trousers or skirts, as well as dark blue jackets and ties, which make up the rest of the uniform.
Boys may not wear a skirt and also have to wait until they are 16 to wear earrings.
The headmaster at the school told the Sunday Times, quote, this generation is really questioning if we are being binary in the way we are looking at things, end quote.
So the headmaster is really into this.
Some parents did not know that their children were questioning their gender identity, he added, forcing the school to mediate between parents and pupils.
This is exactly the role you want the school playing.
Wait, but that must mean it's coming from the teachers.
I mean, you would assume that if a child is questioning his or her gender, ooh, sorry, gender identity, then this would be something they would be talking about with their parents.
But if the parents have no idea that the children are questioning their gender identity, then I would imagine it's coming from the teachers.
And I wonder, I wonder.
You know, it's interesting because people who say, well, gender is a social construct, gender is fluid, okay, then what we really, really need to do is get rid of laws like equal pay for work of equal value.
We need to get rid of all of the laws that mandate women get paid the same as men, because how do you know they're women?
We need to get rid of, obviously, need to get rid of circumcision, because how do you know that they're going to end up as a man?
And we also have to make sure we get rid of all quota systems regarding hiring of women and attempt to, like, you know, trust in Justin Trudeau.
The current year, he wanted to target 50% of his cabinet members as women.
Well, how does he know that they're actually real women?
They could be women who think that they're something else.
And so nobody ever wants to take that particular standpoint.
It's all of this deconstructing masculinity, deconstructing gender identity, and it never seems to spill over to other places that might relinquish state power over the economy.
So since race is also a social construct, we need to abolish all these affirmative action laws and start prosecuting doctors that treat the races differently due to increased prevalence of various diseases by race.
We need to start prosecuting them for malpractice, because that's clearly a social construct, so that should be taken into consideration.
The school already allows children to request that staff address them by a name of the opposite gender, which around half a dozen have done.
One boy has also been allowed to wear a dress to school.
Now, I didn't include this specifically so we could talk about one school, one private school that is, you know, allowing the boys to wear dresses if they want.
That's not why I included it.
I included it because parents need to be actively engaged in, if you're sending your child to a school or some type of group, you need to be actively engaged to find out what people are putting into their heads.
Because I mean,
Be just more engaged in your child's education because if you're not, it can have incredibly disastrous consequences if the wrong type of propaganda minister gets into their ear.
So, folks, be involved in your child's education, for God's sakes.
Schools are just terrible.
I mean, let's say you find out that some of this stuff's been put into your kids' heads.
I mean, what choice do you have other than pull your kids out of the school?
You're going to go in there and lecture them, counter-lecture them and so on?
Yeah, good luck with all of that.
To me, this is all just about making men as unattractive to women as possible and making women as unattractive to men as possible.
And...
It's not got anything more or less to do than that.
And we can figure out the demographics of what's going on.
I think they're fairly clear.
But this is not going to help men and women grow up, love each other, get married, have kids.
This is just a way of denuding the...
Difference, vive la différence, as I was taught when I was a kid.
The men and women are different, and we should celebrate that.
This is just a way of making the genders unattractive to each other, and I think it's going to have a pretty strong effect of lowering the birth rate.
Maybe that's the point, I don't know, but that's where it comes from for me.
Well, Steph, I mean, look on the bright side, at least.
I think Africa's picking up, at least, when it comes to the birth rate equation, so at least there's that.
That's a big sunny side of this whole equation.
Well, we move on to a student being suspended from school for 10 days.
Why?
Fist fight?
No.
Bomb threat?
No.
Liking an Instagram photo?
Yes.
Yes.
A 7th grader in Ohio was suspended from his middle school for 10 days after liking a photo of a gun on Instagram.
Zachary Bowlin was given the harsh punishment from the staff at Edgewood Middle School in Trenton after he liked the social media post showing an Airsoft gun—that's like a pellet gun—not something you're going to take into a school and do any kind of damage—that shoots pellets with the caption, ready.
Okay.
Zachary commented on the photo his friend posted, I mean, I figured he cleaned his gun and was ready, wanting to play and stuff.
I liked it.
Scrolling down Instagram at about 7, 8 o'clock, I liked it.
The next morning, they called me down to the office, patted me down, and checked me for weapons.
I don't think I did anything wrong.
Then they told me I was getting expelled or suspended.
I liked it.
Or whatever.
7 or 8 o'clock.
I'm going to go out on a limb here, Mike, and say that he did this at home on his home computer using his parents' internet.
So he did not do this at school.
So the teachers, the administration, can punish you for things you do outside of school on your own particular equipment.
Don't post nicely about Donald Trump, kids.
Might hurt your grades.
So the middle school student was sent home with a note to his parents about the cause of his suspension.
The letter said that he was suspended for, quote, liking a post on social media that indicated potential school violence.
Now, I've got to imagine, I'm going to go out on another limb here, and I'm going to assume that the teachers and the administrators probably weren't a big fan of Donald Trump's ban on countries that can't vet people coming into America.
Right?
So this kid liking...
A toy gun, basically, on his own computer at home.
Big, big danger.
But trying to restrict the immigration from people from countries who've got stated hostile intentions towards the United States, at least the governments do, where you can't find any decent information about them.
That's terrible.
But this is how you really, really protect Americans.
Well, we're going to talk about the superintendent in a minute.
And he doesn't seem to be of the typical kind of liberal-ish school teacher variety.
So it's even more interesting in an element.
We'll get to that in a second.
Now, the student's father...
He said he was upset when his son came home.
Quote, His mother took to Facebook to express her frustration.
Quote, this sickens me!
Exclamation point.
Not anywhere on the boy's Instagram did it post anything about taking a gun to school.
This is a bunch of shit, if I've ever seen any.
People wake up and teach your children right from wrong and teach them not to blow shit out of proportion.
End quote.
You know what's good for blowing shit out of proportion?
Toy guns.
So, Russ...
Fuss Necker, the superintendent of the schools, that's an unfortunate name.
Yes, I know.
He released a statement saying that, quote, concerning the recent social media posting of a gun with a caption ready and the liking of the post by another student, the policy at Edgewood City Schools reads as follows, quote, the board has a zero tolerance of violent, disruptive, harassing, intimidating, bullying, or any other inappropriate behavior by its students, end quote.
As the superintendent of Edgewood City Schools, I assure you that any social media threat will be taken seriously, including those who like the post when it potentially endangers the health and safety of students or adversely affects the educational process.
Now, there's no one that doesn't think that he liked this post of something, which was just a photo of his friend's gun that's like a pellet air pistol deal that you can go play with and lots of kids have them.
No one thinks like this is, oh, that's a reasonable response to this threat to suspend the kid.
But I do kind of understand where the superintendent is coming from in the sense of being concerned about these types of postings.
The point you'd suspend someone that liked the photo without additional investigation, that seems completely preposterous.
But if someone did post a photo of a gun and then went to school the next day and did something terrible, everyone would be going, how come you weren't up on this stuff?
So it is a difficult situation.
I just wish the response could, as it happens, be a little more reasonable.
Instead of suspending the kid for 10 days, and then when there's a public outcry, you go, oh wait, no, never mind.
Because administrators at the school agreed to lift his suspension after speaking with the parents, and then he was allowed to go to school this last Monday.
So it all, you know, media covered it, and then immediately the kid's allowed back into school.
It's not going to be on his record.
record.
There's not going to be negatives associated with him due to liking an Instagram post.
But could we maybe rationally look at these threats and deal with them before we get to the point of suspending people and kicking them out of school for liking an Instagram post when it's clearly not any kind of threat?
Can we not be hysterical while at the same time paying attention and using caution to possible threats schools may face?
That would be a nice middle ground, but we didn't see that in this situation.
Now, in 2015, the Fusnacker...
said that he planned to arm himself possibly before the end of the school year.
I will get a concealed carry license, the gun-owning school veteran administrator said.
He will then take the required training from the Butler County Sheriff's Department to earn certification to wield a handgun in a public school building.
Quote, if someone wants to come to a school building and create havoc and cause harm, it's hard to stop them.
Quote, he said, an armed principal will, quote, make, will make the school safer.
So that's why I said he doesn't sound like the typical liberalist superintendent that like a gun and he faints.
This is someone who I have no idea and I looked for follow-up to see if he ever actually did go through to get the concealed carry.
But I certainly would like to see armed guards in schools, especially given the threats that face the world today.
And having the professor, who is a veteran, armed, I don't think is a negative.
And kudos to him for taking that step and coming out at a time where this was looked at like a controversial thing.
But it's interesting that even someone like this, with this mentality, that isn't just like, oh, guns, run!
You run into a situation where they're suspending someone because of an Instagram post before doing the full due diligence.
Like, that's...
That's just kind of a sad snapshot of the world in which we live current day and public schools as a whole, which, again, parents, good God, don't put your kid into public schools, but please pay attention to where your children are being educated, and you may have to look up this homeschooling stuff.
I mean, Dr.
Tom Woods has a very nice curriculum, and Dr.
Duke Pesta has a very nice curriculum.
You might want to look into that instead of sending your children to these schools where they're going to be padded down because they liked something on social media.
I mean, ew.
Well, the question is in the pivot of trying to arrest this mounting hysteria and anti-rationality that's occurring in the West.
The pivot question is, is worse better?
I mean, this kid, what is he going to think of social justice warriors and hysteria and escalation and all of this kind of stuff, and his parents and everyone who viewed this and everyone who reads this article?
It's the Louise Mensch question, you know?
Is it good that she's out there front-facing, talking about various things that, well...
Seemed kind of nutty to me.
Is worse better?
And I think certainly some of the people that we like are of the opinion that, sure, yeah, go for it.
Absolutely.
Try and give as much prominence to crazy as possible because that way people can see it for what it is.
We can start to turn this thing around.
Let's just, this stuff has to happen.
These guys are like minor casualties in a larger war that we get a sense of how crazy society is getting and hopefully people will start to push back.
So I'm no longer convinced that this stuff is entirely negative, difficult.
I mean, I don't want this to happen to any kid, of course.
But seeing where society is and how nutty things have become is not necessarily the end of the world when it comes to provoking the pushback that we need to start to contain some of this crazy.
Yeah, things certainly seem like they need to get worse before they get better to gain the public will to make them better.
So that's where we are.
And, well, there's a lot of things happening, Louise Munch included, that certainly help move things along.
Let's put it that way.
So moving on to the left.
Hey, new topic for us.
This past week, former President Barack Obama Was in Milan, Italy, and he was paid 3 million euros, a little more than 2.5 million US dollars, to deliver remarks at the Global Food Innovation Summit.
Seeds and chips on the impact that technology, innovation and climate change will have on food availability and production worldwide.
Now, is he a scientist?
No.
Is he a climatologist?
No.
Does he understand much about food availability, production and distribution worldwide?
No.
So, what does he get to say?
Well, he gets to assemble a bunch of positive sounding verbiage for which he picks up a couple of million dollars.
Why is he being paid so much?
Is it just because he's a rock star?
Did he perhaps do favors for people?
And the payoff comes sometimes after the fact.
Is he able to provide over $2.5 million worth of value in a fairly short speech?
Well, what did Barack Obama say?
And this is important because I think it tells you where his ideology...
You know, he was a mentor who was a communist, and there have been some concerns that he was a little bit more communist-y than he may have appeared.
So, Obama said, this is a much bigger concern in the economy as a whole, and my guess is that ultimately what is going to happen is that everybody is going to have to work less, and we're going to have to spread work more.
But that is going to require a reorganization of the social compact.
That requires we change our mindset about the link between work, income, and value of people in the teaching profession, or in healthcare, or in certain things that cannot be done by AI, or a robot.
This...
Futuristic, mealy-mouthed stuff.
Things are going to change.
We're going to have to change how we approach things, and there's changes coming, and we're going to have to adapt to those changes.
Thanks, Mr.
Evolution.
You've really added a huge amount of value.
Sometimes the road comes to a T, and what you're going to have to do is change your direction.
Now, you want to change your direction in the direction you want to go, not in the direction you don't want to go.
Oh, my God.
It's like the most annoying and boring GPS ever.
So he goes on to say, how do we prepare for that?
And how do we start creating or at least having a conversation within our society about making sure that work and opportunities are spread and that everybody has a chance to live a good and fulfilling life?
Rhetorical questions.
I can guarantee you he's not going to provide any concrete answer whatsoever.
Who does he think he is?
His friend Dwayne the Rock Johnson?
Yes, well, perhaps.
And so, he says, rather than having a few people who are working 80 to 90 hours a week and making enormous incomes...
This guy is annoyed at people making enormous incomes.
You just got paid two and a half million dollars for a little speech, you son of a...
How many thousand dollars per each word in his speech?
I hope someone actually does the math and figures that out.
I would be entertained by having that information.
You know, the only thing that I can say about Barack Obama as a president is at least he didn't work 80 to 90 hours a week.
Man, that guy knew how to took a vacation or three.
I did some typing.
I better go to Hawaii for 10 days and cost $50 million.
Anyway, so he goes, rather than having a few people who are working 80 to 90 hours a week and making enormous incomes and then a large portion of redundant workers that increasingly have difficult time supporting families...
That's not a sustainable mechanism for democracy and a healthy society.
So, yeah, of course he's talking about massive income redistribution.
So, few people who are working hard and making a lot of money, those are the high IQ people.
Large people who are redundant and who are being easily replaced by AI or a robot, those are the low IQ people.
And you know, this is the frustrating thing for me, Mike.
We almost had it made in the West as far as this went.
We almost had it made.
See, we have this industrialization, and with industrialization came a lower birth rate.
It was going to be so great for the planet, because we were becoming so wealthy, and there were so much fewer of us, right, with the below replacement birth rate levels, that the amount of environmental impact advanced societies were going to have on the planet was going to go down enormously.
We really had it made.
Oh, we're using a lot of nature's resources, but don't worry.
There's fewer and fewer of us.
That's great.
And if we just let smarter people have more babies, if we just let the natural play of the free market occur, which happened before, and it's nothing to do with eugenics.
It's just letting free choices accumulate naturally.
Smarter people have more kids.
Less intelligent people have fewer kids because they can't afford as many.
Well, what happens is then you get fewer and fewer less intelligent people at the same time that smart people are inventing robots that replace the labor of less intelligent people.
It could have been a really, really great transition to a sustainable model of a free society where just about everyone could have ended up with a really, really great life.
But no!
Couldn't do that.
Had to set up a welfare state and pay a lot of less intelligent people to breed.
Then we had to have a huge amount of low IQ immigrants come into the country and sit on welfare.
It's like, ah, well now, now we have a problem.
Because we have smart people inventing and designing machines that are displacing low IQ workers at the same time of bringing in lots of low IQ workers on average.
And that you really couldn't.
Set up a situation to make things worse and worse in society.
So this idea, this Obama quote, it's the leftist fixed mindset.
Well, there's only a certain size pie and if someone has more, someone else has to have less.
It's just the way things are.
The idea that wealth is created.
I mean, how do they even talk about it?
The redistribution.
distributed before.
Incorrectly, of course.
Yeah, big giant ladle in the sky just, you know, randomly put soup into various people's bowls.
And some of those bowls are bigger and smaller.
I guess the bowls were distributed earlier too.
And now we've got the soup and it's not fair.
We got to redistribute.
It doesn't make any, but this is how they generally work.
And this is, of course, is the perspective of those who are representing the interests of people who can't compete with smarter people.
If you can set up a system wherein smart people think it's unjust that they have wealth and less smart people think it's unjust that they have less wealth, then of course, you know, big, big giant government that's going to scoop up money from the smarter people and give it to the less intelligent people.
That's just how it works.
Now, that's a big role for the government and it's very positive for the less intelligent people, but it destroys all of the productivity that keeps people alive.
We just did a couple of interviews about South Africa regarding this.
So it is a very, very difficult situation.
The The march of technology goes forward and forward and forward.
And jobs, I mean, we've seen the studies.
You know, 30, 40, 50 percent, it's anyone's guess, but it's a hell of a lot more than zero.
30, 40, 50 percent of jobs are going to be replaced by machines just over the next couple of decades.
And what's going to happen to all those people?
And Barack Obama is like, well, we've got to start redistributing wealth.
Now, I understand that, and I sympathize with that, and I actually have a good deal of sympathy for less intelligent people, which is why I do this show.
I mean, I want to spread the mechanism of clear thinking and cogent thinking to everyone, and a smart person unarmed with philosophy is going to lose out in the long run to a less intelligent person armed with philosophy, in my humble opinion.
It's sort of like you can do as many weights as you want, and you can become as strong as you want, But the 98 pound woman with a forklift truck is going to be able to outlift you because she's got the right technology.
And philosophy is the kind of technology which I want to spread in the world.
So I don't know what the solution is to all of this, the fact that technology is putting lower IQ people out of work.
It may have something to do with charity and so on, but we do need a long-term solution that isn't just, well, let's just keep making more and more less intelligent people, and that's somehow going to make paradise.
That is not a mindset that's going to work, but I can completely understand where people are coming from when they talk about that.
Well, Barack Obama also had some interesting comments unearthed this week.
An essay co-written by Barack Obama in 1991 stated that the American dream is to be Donald Trump.
Pened while the former president was a graduate at Harvard Law with the help of fellow classmate Robert Fisher, quote, race and rights rhetoric, end quote, summed up the American mindset as, quote, a continuing normative commitment to the ideals of individual freedom and mobility, values that extend far beyond a continuing normative commitment to the ideals of individual freedom and mobility, values that extend far beyond the issue of race in the Shock of all shocks.
He closes off by saying the depth of this commitment may be summarily dismissed as the unfounded optimism of the average American.
I may not be Donald Trump now, but just you wait.
If I don't make it, my children will.
The ideal is to become like Donald Trump!
Oh, the ironies!
They fussle and feather and congregate like crows over the rotting bodies of youthful aspirations.
Oh, that's an old song, John Mellencamp, right?
There's a greasy guy with a greasy smile says, man, I'm going to be president, but just like everything else, those...
Crazy dreams just kind of came and went.
So yeah, Obama found the ideal of becoming Donald Trump to be the fulfillment of the American dream.
Oh, it's nice when these planets line up.
I know Donald Trump.
I've seen Donald Trump.
Barack Obama, you are no Donald Trump.
And that's it for today, everybody.
That's it for today.
Thanks everyone so much for listening.
You know, one day we'll get to at least half the stories we want to do, but this is not that day.
But thanks everyone so much for listening.
Please give us your continued feedback on this, our fifth or sixth one of these.
Please help us out at freedomandradio.com slash donate.
And don't forget to use the affiliate link, fdrurl.com slash Amazon.
And you can follow me on...
For Mike and Steph, thank you, thank you, thank you so much for your continued support, your listening, your feedback.
