All Episodes
Previous Next
June 29, 2019 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
01:12:41
The Ugly Truth About the Democratic Debates!
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hi everybody, it's Stefan Molyneux from Free Domain.
Hope you're doing well.
So, just wanted to say thanks first and foremost to everybody who gave me their kind wishes yesterday on Twitter as I posted the results of my annual physical checkup.
I weigh a little bit less than last year and heart and lungs are great, cholesterol and blood pressure are perfect, so everything's going tickety-boo.
Thank you so much everyone for your kind words.
Plus, hey, six years cancer-free.
Always a plus.
Now, In the grand tradition, I guess, of putting a clothespin on your nose and doing the job that Americans just don't want to do, I sat down and gritted my teeth through the two layers of sandwich-like, fiery, kryptonite hell known as the two rounds of the first round of the Democrat presidential contenders debate and I'm gonna go through this in some detail so get patient if you like.
There's gonna be a huge amount to unpack.
I'm gonna give you the satellite view of not just the political system in the West but what's going on around the world because it's very very clear what is going on to those with eyes to see and I'm going to take the blindness off yours and so prepare to be scolded with a face blast of truth.
Now The setup was interesting.
So of course one of the things that made 2016 so electrifying was seeing Trump not just fight with the sort of 16 other contenders for the nomination but also with the moderators.
Now here in this debate, the moderators were lobbing softballs so squishy it was like rolled up newspaper dunked in hand washing liquid thrown to a two-year-old.
And that's a shame.
That's a real shame because I don't know if people see this.
It probably just occurs at an unconscious level.
But if you give really, really easy questions to people, you actually diminish people's sense of their power.
So one of the things that made Trump seem so very powerful was he was battling Megyn Kelly, he was battling all of the others and coming out even-tempered and on top.
So you don't look like a top boxer if you take on a girl guide, right?
You have to take on someone, you know, they walk into the ring and the shadow is cast by their Viper-backed musculature and so on.
So they give all of these easy questions which makes people look kind of weak.
It makes them look like they can't take a solid shot.
And you could see this also when it came time to questions from the audience.
They had to be vetted, right?
They had to... and that's a... like they didn't let the audience have an open mic, which would have been cool.
They instead picked and chose from the audience what they wanted the candidates to answer.
And they were all silly.
And I think that's a real shame.
Like when I go and do, did a book tour last year in, or did a speaking tour with Lauren Southern last year in Australia, we had open mics.
And, you know, people could get up and ask the tough questions.
And I, you know, stared down the interviewers like Dave Rubin and other people who've got tough questions and Joe Rogan and so on.
You want to put yourself in that kind of situation so people can see how you handle pressure.
If everyone's giving you softballs, People are going to really doubt your swing, and that weakening is something that probably goes on at an unconscious level.
Now this would be as true of the Republicans as it is for the Democrats, but no one gets asked any really tough questions, right?
So you don't need to be a leader to tell people that their dessert is ready.
You don't need to be a leader to say to someone, hey, you've got the day off of work if you don't like your job.
You've got the day off work, you can sit on the couch and watch Spanish soap operas and eat bonbon dust out of your belly button.
You don't need to be a leader to tell people fun, cool, excellent things that they're going to love.
What you need to Do, if you're a leader, is, well, you very much need to tell people things they don't want to hear.
There's no point being a leader if you're just telling people what they want to hear.
That's not leadership.
That's pandering, right?
A nutritionist doesn't say, hey, just, you know, eat whatever feels good in your mouth, whatever tastes good in your mouth, whatever you feel like eating, just eat that, it's great, you know?
The nutritionist has to tell you to do things that you don't instinctively or automatically or according to your taste and preferences want to do.
They tell you to eat the stuff that you don't like as much, not the stuff you do like as much.
It's the same thing where the doctor is going to tell you, you know, like, what was it, ten years or so, a doctor told me to lose weight, so I dropped like 25 pounds, kept it off ever since, because the doctor had to tell me things I didn't want to Here, right?
Like, dude, you're chunking out a bit.
You're man-muffing, muffling up the middle age too much.
So, the leader, and I do this on my show all the time, in the call-in shows, people call in and I tell them stuff that they don't want to hear.
And so when it comes to being a leader, the challenge is getting people to take the medicine rather than the sugar, right?
Getting people to eat sugar is not hard.
Getting people to stop eating sugar is tough.
So that's something that again shows up over and over again that no one's demanding that any of the quote leaders on the stage actually tell the American people something that the American people don't want to hear.
Like again I'm talking about their sort of constituency.
So America has you know twenty trillion dollars plus of national debt, it has a hundred and eighty trillion dollars or so of unfunded liabilities.
Now a real leader, a real leader We'll talk about that and say, we've been riding the gravy train for too long, you know, we've pillaged the unborn, we've sold off the futures of our children, we've been way too greedy, we're gonna have to muscle up, right?
Like a real leader, like a wartime leader, so to speak, a wartime leader who wants to go to war, but the real wartime leader helps people to win the war by telling them Things they don't want to hear, but need to hear.
And there are no leaders.
There are no leaders.
Now, with Donald Trump, he's kind of halfway there, like he at least took on the Iraq war and talked about the over-regulation of the economy and so on.
But given that the majority of spending in America is untouchable, largely untouchable social spending, automatically funded social spending.
It's tough, right?
I mean, how are you going to get people to make sacrifices, right?
To save the West, we need to sacrifice the welfare state, because that's what's drawing people in to pillage the economy, which is going to kill the economy, right?
So, how are we going?
No one's talking about that.
So, unfortunately, that Overton window has moved to the point where we've become so, you know, weebles wobble but they don't fall down, passengers in the Wally spaceship, rotund, bottomed, lazy people, That anyone who brings the closest shred of fiscal reality to us is considered to be a monster!
And so...
No, nothing about the national debt, 180 trillion dollars in unfunded liabilities, and that's a real shame, because that is a conversation that needs to be had, and avoiding that conversation is, well, it's beyond dangerous, right?
I mean, it's beyond, it's making disaster a, not a virtual certainty, an absolute certainty.
So let's just, I'm going to just sort of run through some of my notes here, and again, you can follow me on Twitter, that's Stefan Molyneux.
Oh, and by the way, by the way, by the by, If you could do me a favor.
Very, very important these days.
My YouTube channel is being crushed by staying out of recommendations.
It's tough to get new people.
If you could share the video, it would be fantastic.
If you could share the podcast, I'd really, really appreciate it.
If you're watching this on YouTube, you can go to FDRpodcasts.com.
You can subscribe to the podcast and just on the off chance you don't get a YouTube notification, you can get the show.
At least to know that there will be a show there.
And most importantly, my friends, if you could please, please help out.
It is hitting donations hard.
If you could go to freedomainradio.com forward slash donate, freedomainradio.com forward slash donate.
I would hugely appreciate it.
Just help a brother out.
It's a hard and cold road to hoe these days.
So, of course, you start off with the typical leftist talking points about large corporations, the big problem with large corporations and so on.
Now they did name some industries pharmaceuticals and others, but of course they didn't talk about the problems with the big social media tech monopolies, right?
The big tech monopolies.
And that's because, and James O'Keefe of Project Veritas has done incredible Prometheus bringing the light to mankind work recently, and please go and help out his work as well at Project Veritas.
Just how much bias is floating around these tech companies.
So no one is going to talk about all these corporations are getting too big and too powerful, but none of the people on the left are going to talk about that with regards to social media because they need those social media companies to redirect.
people and to suppress certain search terms and all shadow ban people so that they have a better chance of winning the election.
So yeah, they talked about all of that, but the tech monopolies, which they like and need to help them win the election, they're fine with.
And then of course, you have the wage gap, the wage gap, the wage gap.
And, you know, this mythical beast, which is cited by everyone with the intense visual spectromatic fantasy land of those who regularly poke themselves in the eye and see Bigfoot.
Well, the tech, sorry, the wage gap is everywhere.
And it's really sad.
You know, the government, of course, on the left, are always talking about the need to force people to pay women what women are worth and equal pay for work of equal value, whatever that means.
There is no such thing as objective value.
So, saying that there's equal work for work of equal value, equal pay for work of equal value makes no sense.
Now, of course, if I were a feminist, what I would say is, I hugely resent the implication, oh, Democratic candidates, I hugely resent the implication that the government needs to step in and negotiate on behalf of women for their wages.
Women are strong, powerful, independent, empowered.
and uh... don't need no man, don't need no guy, you should be able to negotiate on your own but of course one of the reasons why there may be a wage gap, well there is a wage gap so to speak but one of the reasons why there might be a wage gap is that women don't negotiate as hard as men in which case uh... running to the government is not is not solving the problem you know and so the implication that the government needs to Negotiate on behalf of women because women are so weak and fragile.
It's very very sad.
But of course feminists don't want that, right?
The purpose of artificially raising wages for women is to draw women out of the home into the workforce so they can be taxed and the children can be traumatized by mother absence and therefore will cling to the government because they will feel insecure in their lives as a whole.
Now, I don't have everyone's name here.
I was going to go by looking everything up and it's kind of like a Hydra.
It's like one socialist, muscle-bound, empty, predatory heartbeat with a whole bunch of heads sitting on top.
So one of them said, there's plenty of money in this world.
It's just in the wrong hands.
Right?
There's plenty of money in this world.
It's just in the wrong hands.
Well, you could hear that from a bank robber and it would sound exactly the same.
There's plenty of money in this world.
It's just in the wrong hands.
Now this is part of the fixed pie fantasy that goes on in the left, you know, that there's a certain amount, there's a certain pie, the pie is this big and if you have more it means that I have less, right?
If you take half the pie it means I only get some portion of half the pie.
Rather than everybody gets the pies they make, everybody gets the pies they create.
Money is not made, so to speak, in the world.
It is created.
Wealth and value is Create it.
Like if you go and buy some land and you grow some soybeans and you get a bunch of soybeans, have you stolen my soybeans?
Well, no.
Of course, you've created soybeans that weren't there before.
If you go down and chop some wood and you make a cabin, have you stolen my cabin?
You make things.
Transferring matter from non-usable to usable You can't live in a forest in shelter, but if you cut down some trees and make a cabin, you can.
You can't eat a fish at the bottom of a lake, but if you catch it and bring it to the surface, you can.
So transferring matter from unusable to usable, or from non-valuable to valuable, well, you're creating value.
You're not stealing value.
But of course, because there are gaps between different ethnicities in terms of income, because there are gaps between males and females, As I've said a million times, the standard answer from the left is that the only reason there are gaps between any groups is because of exploitation, sexism, racism, you name it, right?
But it's not true.
I mean, it's not true.
And it's not true because the market seeks profit.
And no one is going to put skin color or gender above profit.
Or at least if they do, they're gonna go out of business, right?
So if you can imagine that some business owner, some entrepreneur is prejudiced against redheads, right?
So he's prejudiced against redheads.
And he's in Ireland, let's say.
If he doesn't hire any redheads, and let's say redheads are 25% of the population, then he's lost access to the talents of 25% of the population.
And anybody who will hire redheads has 25% more talent to draw from, which means that you will have a higher talent pool.
Of course, right?
I mean, if you can only choose your basketball team from 20 guys, You're not going to have a very good basketball team, most likely, but if you can choose from 200 million guys, well, then you're going to have a very good basketball team, right?
So the wider the pool of talent that you're willing to hire, the more profits you will make.
And the companies that do discriminate against their own economic interests go out of business.
And the companies that don't discriminate, right?
Everybody prefers green to whatever prejudice they may be harboring.
So in a free market you are punished for prejudice extraordinarily high, highly.
And so the answer that all disparities between groups are explainable by prejudice is false.
It's just false.
It doesn't work even according to the logic that the left puts on the profit motive of the free market.
No, the answer is IQ.
And there's some environmental and cultural aspects as well, but the answer is IQ, which is why you can't talk about it, because it's the one theory that puts this whole paranoia of bigotry and racism and everything, it puts it out the window, right?
So that's why they hate it the most, right?
Everybody talking about minimum wage, raise the minimum wage, we have raised the minimum wage, minimum wage $15, right?
Well first of all, the minimum wage back in the sixties was of course way less, but the quarters had silver content and if If the value of those silver content quarters back in the 60s, in today's dollars, the minimum wage would be like, what, $26, $27, $28.
So the problem is not wages, the problem is the currency, right?
If you keep flooding the market with more and more money, then you're going to drive down the value of each individual dollar, which means you've got to raise minimum wage, blah, blah, blah.
But of course, The very idea that you need a minimum wage is a criticism or a condemnation, really, of government schools, right?
Because after 12 years of government education, if you're only worth $10 an hour, your government education has really, really sucked.
It's really hard to reform the government educational system so it's just easier to force employers to pretend that there's value in government educated youths or people when there isn't, right?
So it's just a way of subsidizing the disaster of government schools, right?
And of course my daughter who was watching for a while pointed out that raising wages puts people in higher tax brackets which the left likes but which isn't so great for that.
Now of course every debate goes full-on Incredible Hulk, right?
Mild-mannered people turn into these big green monsters because green energy is this magic unicorn that solves all problems and of course my daughter also wanted to know how much energy it took for all the candidates to fly in and whether they flew coach or what but this green energy is it's just a magic wand that is pulled out to imagine that you're solving problems Elizabeth Warren says so you know we need to spend ten times more on green energy Why?
Why?
For anybody who's ever been an entrepreneur, if somebody says, well, we need to spend ten times more on green energy, all they're doing is saying, well, the existing money that's been spent on green energy has completely failed.
And of course it has.
It's just been a political handout to people who pretend that they're producing green stuff and then end up just wasting the money, pissing it away, stealing it, or whatever.
We need to spend way more on green energy.
Well, why?
Why hasn't the multi-decade, hundreds of billions of dollars investment produced what's needed?
Well, it hasn't, so let's spend more.
Now, health care, my gosh!
Health care and illegal aliens are two of the most foundational aspects of what was being talked about in these damn debates, and they're highly correlated, highly related, right?
So, first of all, my daughter pointed out that if people in America lost weight, health care costs would go down.
And that's true.
That's true, because people say, well, why can't we have the same socialized health care as in Japan, right?
Well, the difference is, of course, that in Japan there are very few blacks and Hispanics.
Blacks and Hispanics have enormous rates of Diabetes, for instance.
Diabetes is very, very expensive.
Whites have a higher rate of diabetes relative to East Asians, the Japanese and Chinese and so on.
So demographics and healthcare costs are intensely correlated and so it's really comparing apples to oranges.
Healthcare is a basic human right.
That is, I mean, that's a tragic and dangerous and destructive statement.
Health care is a basic human right.
But that means that doctors are slaves, right?
Doctors have to be slaves in order for health care to be a basic human right.
And that is, I mean, it's tragic and it's monstrous and so on.
Someone on Twitter posted, Amy Klobuchar said that Big Pharma doesn't own her.
In 2016, Big Pharma donated $240,000 to her campaign, seventh biggest industry.
Now, of course, no one talks about the massive overhead of rampant bureaucracy in American health care, which is truly mad.
And the fact that doctors spend a massive portion of their day just filling out government forms, which means, of course, that they're unavailable to actually treat patients.
So it is brutal.
Now, immigrants to America, particularly, of course, those who are not legal or illegal aliens in America, can't afford health care, which is why they often will show up to emergency, thus being the most expensive health care that could possibly be imagined.
And so if you want people to come flooding into the country, you need to give them, quote, free health care, right?
If you want people coming in from low-skilled cultures, let's say, low-skilled environments, you need to give them free health care, otherwise they're really not going to come because they can't make enough
on the black market to cover their health care costs and they have trouble accessing health care and so on so you understand that the left's plan to flood america with uh... hispanics and other groups that reliably vote on the left and a significant majority of hispanics vote for democrats which is why you have hispanics coming into the country and not say persecuted farmers in south africa because they're more likely to vote conservative Well, white males as a whole support free speech, white males as a whole support small government, and other groups in general don't.
Well, married white women as well do, but... So, the focus on free healthcare is very important, and it really was an amazing moment, right?
So, ten years ago, What was it, Barack Obama addressed a session of Congress to answer the accusation that Obamacare was going to provide free health care for illegal aliens and he said that it wasn't and remember that guy shouted, you lie, and it was this big controversy.
Well then, you know, you ask, the moderators are asking the nominees, right, or the contenders for the presidential race on the Democrat side, they're saying, do you support the provision of free health care to Illegal aliens and all their hands, I think, all their hands went up.
Ten years from no, no, no, no to yes, yes, yes, yes.
I mean they really have been radicalized.
And this like open borders thing, open borders and free health care to everyone who makes it across, is a radical minority extremist position.
Now, of course, I'm sure that CNN and the New York Times are going to look into who exactly has radicalized the Democrat Party, right?
Well, they won't, of course, because they agree with all that stuff.
It's a very extreme position, and certainly not one held by American taxpayers as a whole, because it's going to be hundreds of billions of dollars of additional costs.
And of course, the Democrats talk about giving people free health care, like there are 20 million plus illegal aliens in America, and giving them free health care.
I mean there's 20 million people plus that you're going to be throwing, I mean there's some of whom are getting it already because of a variety of reasons, but let's just say 15 million new people being thrown into the American health care system.
There's no plan for more doctors, there's no plan for more hospitals or more nurses or anything like that.
So what that means, and then they're also saying, oh we've got to send doctors and nurses to the border, you see, to take care of the illegal aliens down there.
But that means that doctors and nurses are going to be leaving someplace and the people where they're leaving from have less access to health care.
But again, none of this is talked about because everybody wants to talk sugar and nobody wants to talk medicine, right?
With regards to people pouring across the border, there was talk about decriminalizing it, right?
Making it, I guess, like a speeding ticket or something like that, which is really a remarkable thing in terms of history and countries and so on.
The fact that a lot of... if you say, well, illegal aliens get access to free American health care, then you're just gonna get a lot of sick people come pouring across the border.
Like it or not, people respond to incentives.
That's the reality.
That's going to happen.
Now, Under Section 212A4 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, or INA, an individual seeking admission to the United States is inadmissible if the individual, quote, at the time of application for admission or adjustment of status is likely at any time To become a public charge.
Right?
So, you can't come into America, according to the law, if you're likely, not certain, but likely at any time to become a public charge.
So people who are sick who are coming across the border can't come in.
Because you're immediately going to become a public charge.
I mean, gosh!
I tweeted about this too, like when my mother pulled me from England to Canada in 1977.
My gosh!
The hoops we had to jump through prove proficiency in English.
This is off my memory.
I remember for sure we had to go for x-rays and to make sure we were healthy, get doctor's notes and so on.
We had to prove that there was a place where we could live.
We ended up living with an uncle of mine in Whitby for some time and We had to have savings, I mean like the amount of checks to make sure that it wasn't going to turn out badly for Canada were absolutely enormous and that's, it's wild to just see how much that changes when the left is desperate for votes, right?
Because the left has lost the economic argument, they've lost the moral argument.
There are so many giant craters of societies both contemporaneously and in history Where socialism and communism were adopted, but you just can't win the argument anymore on any moral or economic or intellectual or philosophical merits.
And so they're not going to give up power.
So all they're doing is just importing people who are going to vote for them.
Because, well, in general, there is this There's this massive transfer from high skilled people to low skilled people, from high productivity people to lower negative productivity people.
It's just the way it works.
Low productivity people want the stuff that high productivity people have.
They just want it.
Now they can either go to work or up their skills or make sacrifices or they can just run to the government and say the only reason that we're doing poor is because of racism, bigotry, intolerance, whatever, right?
And therefore in order to fix it you gotta take money from these people and give it to us.
And this is the battle between low productivity and high productivity people is what's constant throughout history.
Now Tulsi Gabbard is interesting too because my daughter said after watching the first two people like these these guys have crazy eyes and I'm like yeah yeah be patient you're gonna be ringed with a whole series of crazy eyes like somebody having some LSD flashback in a mental institution in the middle of the night but
Tulsi is interesting because she does have the sort of solidity and she has the strength of eye contact and the precision and perception of, you know, somebody who was military service and all of that kind of stuff and all of that discipline.
So, you know, it's hard not to like her but, you know, when she starts again talking about free health care for everyone, I mean, it's funny, you know, there's this I mean, two basic rules of economics.
One, all human desires are infinite.
And two, all resources are limited, right?
All human desires are infinite.
All resources are finite.
Now, to me, that's kind of like a male-female thing.
So, for females, I want it all.
And for males, I'm like, you know, we can, we can't, right?
I mean, somebody posted the other day on Twitter This kind of conversation about men and women like husbands and wives shopping for a house and the wife of course wants the most beautiful house in the world and the husband is like, I don't know if we can afford that and she's like, well don't you want me to be happy?
And you can see the same thing in jewelry stores, right?
Where the woman wants something and the guy's like, eh, you know?
So, and if nothing against women, I think it's fantastic that women want more and more.
It's kind of one of the reasons we're out of the caves, right?
So, this idea that we want it all and then men say, you know, we gotta balance or we don't have infinite resources, you know, you're gonna have to temper things.
Women drive.
Women's hunger for more and more does drive a lot of male ambition.
It does drive a lot of male achievement.
So, again, I have no problem with it.
Again, once the state gets involved, it gets kind of crazy because women can use the power of the state to strip resources for men and in particular from kids and from the future through debt and all that.
So, it's a huge problem now.
But just this idea that health care is kind of like oxygen.
I used this analogy before.
Health care is kind of like oxygen, you know?
And if you want to deny someone health care, well, it's because you want to deny someone oxygen.
It's like wanting to deny someone oxygen.
Oxygen is free.
It's everywhere.
Why would you want to... You don't want to deny people free stuff that's everywhere because you hate them, right?
I mean, if you strangle some guy, you're depriving him of oxygen because you hate him and you want him dead, right?
And so if you have this fantasy that There are just infinite resources, then someone saying, you know, if we take doctors and give them 15 million new patients, then there'll be 15 million fewer patients that they can see.
Because doctors aren't going to, especially if you stop paying them government rates for treating people, I mean, the hospitals will go out of business, I mean, in two days, right?
And that's the point.
The point is just to keep burdening the system until it breaks and then say, hey man, we gave the free market a chance, I guess we're going to have to have single payer now, because You know, business is inefficient and blah blah blah, right?
So, if you understand that a doctor that goes to the border is not available to his local community, you say, well, we're giving free health care to illegal aliens, it's like, yes, I guess, it's not free, but you're giving health care to illegal aliens, which means you're taking it away from someone else, because you don't magically get, you know, a million new doctors when you expand patient roles to that degree.
And this understanding that you can't be in two places at once, doctors can't be treating ten patients at once and so on, you know, so if you live in this diluted fantasy land where you can just give out free health care and it's all fine and great and there's no compromises, no sacrifice, no cost, no, well if he's over here he can't be treating this patient here, right?
I mean if you have two doctors in a town and you send one of those doctors to the border, Then you only have one doctor in the town, which means waiting lists are going to double, which means people are going to die on those waiting lists.
It's just the way it is, right?
Resources are finite.
So this, you know, this absolute unreality that occurs in these kinds of debates is really quite wild.
And there was also this complaint about drug prices and so on.
And, yeah, so Mary Ruart, R-U-W-A-R-T, has done fantastic work on this, where, this is from some years ago now, the Federal Drug Administration's barriers to selling drugs are so enormous, it takes a billion dollars plus to get a new drug to market, which is why you get boner pills and government-funded SSRIs for kids before you get other life-saving pills.
But she's done a calculation where she looks at the drugs that are legal in other countries that were banned in the united states because of FDA fears of restrictions and of course fears of the inevitable lawsuits that can occur uh... five million yeah five million americans have died because the FDA has banned drugs safe and legal in other countries five million americans and the FDA of course was brought in in the sixties over the thalidomide scare.
Thalidomide was a drug that was supposed to help you with morning sickness but it actually contributed to some deformities and you know it's really tragic and so to solve what was statistically a very minor problem you got five million dead Americans which is terrible you know I mean especially if they die prematurely which a lot of them did well if a guy dies at 40 who could have put in another 20 years of work or whatever less taxes less productivity and all this kind of stuff it's just terrible so
access to drugs oh the drugs are too expensive blah blah blah and they say children aren't getting access to drugs well my daughter pointed out the children are getting access to drugs in government schools they're way over drugged for well usually for being boys so now Elizabeth Warren put forward this again remarkably uneducated and insular and bubble archipelago notion that
You know, businesses take X amount of profits out of the industry, right?
So, I can't remember, it was like pharmaceuticals and $60 billion or whatever it was, they take it and that's taken out of the industry.
And again, that's straight-up communism.
That's straight-up communism and I say that not lightly.
It's straight-up communism.
Because the idea that profit is a predatory overhead to an industry?
So communism says that the worker produces $15 worth of value in an hour but the capitalist only pays him $14 and therefore the worker is losing a dollar and that's predatory, right?
I mean, so you've got a thousand workers, you're taking a thousand dollars an hour from them and that makes you super rich but, you know, it makes the workers poor and it's all complete madness.
Complete madness.
Yeah, when I was a waiter...
Guess what?
I was paid less than I produced.
But I didn't have to build a restaurant.
I didn't have to advertise.
I didn't have to do the taxes for the restaurant or pay the property tax on the restaurant or anything like that.
And of course the only reason there is an industry is because there's a profit.
Of course, I mean, the only reason that I got to work as a waiter in a restaurant was because someone had built that restaurant.
And if they couldn't make money off my working at the restaurant, they wouldn't have built the restaurant.
So this idea that the manager of the restaurant is somehow an unnecessary overhead to me and I should get a hundred percent of the value that I produce to the customers.
I mean it's, it's crazy.
It's crazy.
It's crazy.
It's basically saying like you should be able to buy a car for the price of a rental in a day.
Come on.
I mean it's, so the only reason there is a pharmaceutical industry is because there's a profit motive.
So saying that profits is somehow taking away from the industry is crazy.
The only reason there is an industry is because of profit.
I don't know.
I did call her an economically illiterate dodo bird, which is actually a huge insult to dodo birds.
So, and of course the Democrat contenders are not going to talk about the relationship between open borders and the opioid crisis.
A lot of the opioids that come in and have killed more Americans per year than Americans lost in Vietnam, the entire Vietnam War, half a million Americans over the last little while, they're drugged to death because a lot of the drugs come across The border.
And so open borders, yeah, you get an opioid crisis as well.
And yeah, half a million Americans can be drugged to death just because the left wants to get votes.
Now this picture is a picture of a dad supposedly and his daughter lying face down in water on a river and uh... this of course is a mirror of what happened with the uh... the boy on the beach, the little boy on the beach in uh... Europe right where normally they won't show you dead bodies but because they wanted to open the borders I think it was 2015 in Europe uh... they showed you this picture and then all the women had like
You know, hormone old faithful geister likes up their spines and open the borders because fields and dead children and so on.
The fact was, of course, that the father of the boy who drowned was trying to get to Canada for I think dental care, free dental care or whatever.
went in an overloaded boat and and you know the Democrats of course are very keen on legislation that if your kid is out riding on the sidewalk without a helmet riding a bike without a helmet that's terrible and you should be prosecuted or pay fines or whatever but if you drag a child into crime cartel human smuggling corridors to an extraordinarily dangerous
border crossing which is to say basically you are trying to break into a country if you bring a child on the commission of a crime called breaking into a country and the child dies somehow it's the fault of white American taxpayers.
Of course, it's hugely racist.
It's hugely racist to say that, let's say that the picture is true.
I'm sure it is.
But the father who drowned with his child in the river Well, he brought her on a criminal... If you bring a child to a home invasion and the child gets hurt, I mean, that's terrible, right?
You're a terrible parent for doing that.
If you bring a child to the crime of breaking into a country, the child dies.
It's terrible.
You're a terrible human being, a terrible father.
Or you were, I suppose.
And, of course, the only reason that children are dying at the border is because there is no border, right?
If the border was sealed, people wouldn't be coming The women wouldn't be raped on route and Children wouldn't be dying right so you close the border you've solved all of these problems, but that of course is crazy right and Of course, if you are genuinely seeking asylum, and it's only a tiny minority of people who even try to seek asylum.
Seeking asylum is a very complicated thing.
And of course, once you're in your first safe country, you're supposed to stay there.
You can't just go shopping to wherever the welfare state is the highest, right?
Which is why pretty much anyone who ends up in Germany from the Middle East or North Africa is welfare shopping and is not eligible for asylum, right?
Asylum, you've got to stay in your first safe country.
Mexico is considered a safe country.
You can't come into America because you need health care.
That's not a legal reason to come into America.
You can't come into America because Your country is poor.
That is not a reason.
You can't come into America or to the West because your country's at war.
War is not a reason to seek asylum.
You have to be specifically persecuted by the government for some particular characteristic and so on.
And you can't just, generally, you can't just cross the border and then be there, right?
You have to go present yourself to the guards, say, I'm seeking asylum.
You can go to the American embassy.
There's a bunch of them in Mexico, I assume, where it's considerably drier than some river that apparently you can't swim across.
You go to the American embassy and you say, I'm here to seek asylum.
And you take the process from there.
So these people are not doing that process, I assume.
As far as identity politics go, you had this guy Castro.
When the inevitable killing fields of abortion mills come up, they say, well, men who have become women have the right to choose abortions.
You know, no hate, no, you know, everyone's equal under the law and so on, but come on.
Come on.
Now, of course, there was also a lot of talk about the Democrats being the party of the working class, of the working people, and this is just not true.
I mean, it's just, it's not true.
So what they complained about, and rightly so, is wage stagnation among the poor and lower middle classes who basically haven't had a raise Since 1980, right?
Okay, so it's really, really terrible, and the richest 1% or the richest 5% are making tons of money, and the poorest are not getting ahead, and it's like, well, yeah.
That's the result of massive government power and control over the economy, right?
So when the government has the power to move trillions and trillions of dollars around, Well it's going to be susceptible to the pressures and power of the richest and most powerful and best connected people in society.
It's not going to be you, it's not going to be me, right?
But they're going to make a lot of money for their friends and of course the downward gravitational well of the welfare state is horrible and terrible.
Like a woman who's got two kids in america who wants a job is gonna end up having to have a job to pay seventy five thousand dollars a year or more in order to get the same amount of benefits she gets by being on welfare right so welfare pays her the equivalent of seventy four seventy five thousand dollars a year now that's that's a That's a big wage.
That's a lot of money.
And so if she gets a job at $75,000 a year, she's effectively being taxed 100%.
Because she loses the benefits she otherwise would get.
You know, charity is one of the most complicated things in the world.
I've spent most of my life helping people.
And it's really, really hard to help people.
Really hard to help people.
Because you want to You want to help them if they've made bad decisions, but you don't want to enable those bad decisions.
You don't want to subsidize those bad decisions.
So it's really, really tough to help people.
And the idea that government can do it remotely and it won't just turn into rampant vote buying is, I mean, it's crazy, right?
See, the government, it's hard To give a man something that he already has, right?
It's hard to give a man something that he already has.
You know, if you have two healthy kidneys and someone comes along and says, I can give you a kidney, you're like, no, I'm good, I'm good, thanks.
But if you are down to one and it's failing, you're desperate for it, right?
So the government needs a steady supply of failures in order to have a constituency of people who need government, right?
So in the West, after the Second World War in particular, you know, poverty was going down by one percent a year.
The blacks in particular were doing better, hugely better, than they had in the past.
And so the government was in grave danger of running out of people who desperately needed it.
So what did they do?
Well, they brought people in from overseas who desperately need the government.
for low productivity reasons and other reasons I've talked about so that's just the reality that if you don't have people who are failures you don't have much need for government so That reality is foundational to what's going on in the Democrats, right?
They want to tell people that failure is inevitable given the systemic racism and bigotry and sexism of the system.
They can't get ahead, because if people start getting ahead, they don't need the Democrats, they don't need the government.
If people aren't on the receiving end of government benefits, but rather on the paying end, then they want those government benefits to go down, to diminish, right?
That's inevitable.
When they say that they want open borders and they're also the party of the working class, well it's just false.
You can't be both.
You can't be both.
You can be for mass immigration, legal or illegal, or you can be for working people, but you can't be for both.
Because, I mean, the data is pretty clear, north of sixty percent of legal immigrants end up on public assistance, so taking some form of government welfare.
And if you go back to people who came in ten years in the past, well it's seventy percent, seventy percent, almost three quarters of the immigrants are on government assistance.
Which is, of course, reinforces the fear that everyone has that people come to America or come to the West, they get on welfare and then they sit on welfare.
They just don't get off welfare.
Now that's incredibly harmful for working people.
Now there's another thing, too, that goes on with the debate regarding American immigration, which is, oh, you know, America's a nation of immigrants and so on.
That's not true.
You can't take past American immigration experiences and translate them to the 21st century.
I mean, you can, just wrong.
So first of all, America was founded explicitly as a white country for immigration.
It was right there in the founding documents.
It was central to American immigration policy until 1965.
So if you're going to say, well, you want immigration like 19th century America or early to mid 20th century America, then you have to limit it to whites, because that's the way that it was.
See, the original people who came to America were settlers, right?
They were settlers.
And settlers are very different from immigrants, right?
Settlers go in and create the society and carve out the wilderness and build the institutions and the roads.
And immigrants come to an already existing society.
It's a very, very different situation.
It's a very, very different situation.
If somebody says, hey, man, I'd love you to come up and enjoy my cottage for the weekend, that's one thing.
If someone says, hey man, I'd love you to come up and help me build my cottage for the weekend, that's a whole different thing, right?
So, and of course, the American settlers did not come to an existing sophisticated country built by the indigenous population in order to take welfare from the natives, right?
I mean, it's not the way that it worked.
And by the by, it's actually kind of interesting just in terms of challenging the narrative of the white destruction of the indigenous population.
Well, first of all, of course, it was smallpox, not white people, but just about every indigenous tribe in North America has a story or a myth, a verbal tradition handed down of the original people who lived in North America who were tall, red-headed white people who aren't around anymore.
It's just kind of interesting.
So, yeah, this idea that immigrants are the same as settlers and blah blah blah.
Now, they were all talking about how great immigration is.
They say, well, the CEO of big corporations come from other countries.
Now, I've done The Truth About Free Speech.
You can look for it on my channel.
I guess if they'll let you find it.
And only white males, in general, support free speech.
And free speech is also dependent upon IQ, right?
So the lower the IQ, the less you're likely to support free speech.
And it's, you know, straight up like a staircase.
It's very, very clear.
So if you're saying, well, it's great that CEOs from big corporations come from other countries, well, if, you know, tax censorship concerns are huge, and a lot of the tax censorship issues or mandates come out of Human Resources Department, and if you look at the demographics of Human Resources Department, well, you can Pretty much figure that out.
Also this idea that the children at the border are separated from their parents because of evil Trump and so on.
I mean, that's all nonsense.
The reason why kids are separated from parents is A. because they presented themselves illegally, right?
They came across illegally.
And secondly, because many adults lie about the kids being their own children, right?
30% of border kids, the kids coming across the border, actually have gang ties.
So it's, you know, it's sort of like, you know, when you go to Cash a check and the bank says, well, you know, I'm going to need a hold and I'm going to have to verify that the funds are there in order to release it and so on.
Well, sure.
I mean, and you can get mad at that, but it's not the bank's fault.
It's because people try to kite checks all the time.
People try to, right?
I remember when I used to be a radio DJ back in college and there was a guy there.
A guy I knew in college who, the moment they put in ATMs, he was like, oh, so if I open up this many bank accounts and then I can go and take out the maximum, they're never going to catch me.
And like the moment that something exists, a certain class of people are just going to just try and scam it, right?
So if people never lied and everybody who was an asylum applicant was actually Fleeing was a refugee?
Well, then you wouldn't need this, right?
So the fact that people lie is why you have to have these checks and balances.
There's also a weird thing where they try and conflate illegal aliens with legal immigrants, right?
That's just a conflation that happens, right?
So Cory Booker was saying, oh, immigration has been criminalized.
It's like, no, no, it's not been criminalized at all.
You can legally apply to go and live in America and you can go through the process and all of that.
Immigration is perfectly legal.
Somebody else was saying, well, three million immigrants, sorry, three million Americans were deported.
I think it was under Obama.
I think this is one of the months.
Three million Americans were deported.
And it's like, no, you can't be deported if you're an American.
Like, I mean, it's just this weird thing.
Where a squatter is the same as the owner.
I mean, it's just wild.
It's, you know, both a bank robber and somebody who legally withdraws money from his account, they both leave the bank with more money than they came in with, but you wouldn't say that the two are the same, would you?
Anyway.
So gun violence and so on, gun violence in school, and one of my more popular tweets was, if you want to reduce gun violence in school, stop drugging children with fake medications that can make them homicidal.
That seems kind of important.
And of course Democrats will continually talk about the victims of gun violence, just never the victims of illegal immigrants with guns.
The general fear about climate change and so on, like in a hundred years there may be a one degree variation.
Temperatures may be one degree higher.
Therefore it's the end of the world in 12 years.
Well, that's incredibly abusive and destructive to teach to children, of course.
And I've gone into this a whole bunch of times before, but one guy was saying, oh yeah, you know, we're gonna tax carbon and then give the money back to the American people.
It goes out of one pocket and into the other.
I don't know.
I mean, I don't even know.
This idea that, oh, it's not really a tax cusp, we'll give you rebates, it's like, well, what's the point then?
Here, you imagine the doctor, you're bleeding out, and he says, I'm going to give you a blood transfusion from your right arm to your left arm.
Crazy.
Identity politics again in full display.
Somebody said, what have you done for black and Latino voters?
That is very interesting.
That supports a kind of bigotry because you're saying, oh, black voters have their own particular preferences that are not the same or might be in opposition to white voters and Latino voters the same.
It's like, OK, well, you're just saying that people have a reason to be concerned about black and Latino votes then.
And again, can you imagine if somebody said, well, what have you done for white voters?
I mean, I mean, as long as this stuff goes on, none of this multicultural garbage is ever going to work as long as people keep race baiting this way.
de Blasio's father killed himself.
I didn't know that.
It's just kind of a tragic thing.
Plus, I think he's on his third legal name change, which seems somewhat odd to me.
Beto O'Rourke after bursting into Spanish, which is kind of weird.
I mean, it's kind of weird to have the Spanish thing going on, right?
Because if you only speak Spanish, you're not going to watch this debate because it was almost all conducted in English.
If you do speak English, then being spoken to in Spanish doesn't really help you that much.
So anyway, it seemed kind of odd, but that's just handing votes to Trump supporters and making more Trump supporters, in fact.
There was a lot of complaints about, well, some people are above the law, above the law, you know, with regards to Trump and all of that.
But of course, if you want sanctuary cities and opening the borders, then you are saying some people are above the law.
If you don't...
If you have sanctuary cities in particular, yeah, some people are above the law.
They can come into the country illegally and won't be arrested.
Now, the Democrats, I mean, they're kind of lazy, right?
Because they don't need to have a lot of charisma.
They don't need to connect with people.
They can have all these bizarre ideas and these fringe extremist kooky ideas because they've got
the base right they've got the public sector unions they've got academia they've got the media they've got uh... immigration serving their political goals and so on so you know it's just they're just kinda lazy compared to trump right trump worked very hard he had someone study political discourse in america particularly talk radio for a year before he announced and worked very hard and and you know they're just uh... democrats are kinda lazy which doesn't mean they won't win eventually they will demographics is destiny
But a Democrat could have even won the presidency in the first, like just forcefully call out all of the vapid delusions of the other Democrats.
You know, there's no plan to pay for this.
Here's my plan to pay for it.
You know, you, I mean, there's one woman talking about like, I'm going to win by focusing on love.
And I mean, just, you know, it's new age garbage like that.
Just, I mean, Trump beat all the other Republicans by just being brutal with them and pointing out how, what political hacks they were.
And I couldn't just help get the feeling that none of the Democrats were really being themselves.
I want there to be a good fight for 2020.
I want people to have a clear choice and I want there to be a good fight, but it's not going to be a good fight.
Trump beat all the other Republicans by pointing out what vapid political hacks they were and the Democrats aren't doing that.
They're all hands up, all agreeings, no diversity and so on, right?
So there wasn't much talk about student debt forgiveness and all that and that's partly because the Democrats are relying upon lying to all kids about why they need to go to college so that their kids will pay for their own indoctrination and then also end up desperately dependent on government because they've lost a quarter million dollars usually in tuition fees and lost wages and so on
But this idea that, well, you know, we've got to take over, we've got to have free college, free college tuition, and it's all garbage, right?
Because whoever pays the piper calls the tune.
If the government's paying for colleges, colleges will serve the government.
And that would just turn into Public Schools 2.0, right?
So basically they're saying, well, you know, we need higher education because kids are coming out of 12 years of government school completely useless and stupid.
So let's also take over the colleges and continue that plan.
That's crazy, right?
And what was the basic difference?
The basic difference was, well, do you want your socialism slow or fast?
That's the only distinction that really showed up in these debates.
Now here's an interesting point.
I say this like the other ones weren't, but it's an interesting point.
So look at the difference between illegal aliens and people who don't pay their taxes.
You say, well, crossing a border is not an act of violence.
Well, it kind of is an act of fraud and you're using the state to forcefully take money from other people and all that.
But listen, earning your own money is not an act of violence.
So if you look at the difference between amnesty for illegal aliens versus amnesty for tax evaders, well, Nobody's ever suggesting that.
Can you imagine?
Do you support a full amnesty for going, like, in the past and going forward for anyone who doesn't pay their taxes?
Can you imagine all the Democrats or even the Republicans putting their hands up for that?
Well, of course not, right?
Because you need the one to pay for the other, right?
You need more strict and stringent enforcement of the tax code in order to pay for the cost of all the illegal aliens and other immigrants that have come in.
So just look at that.
Every time you see amnesty and DACA and all of this, Just to think how they would be dealing with people who didn't pay their taxes, right?
That's crazy, right?
So, yeah, or they say, well, an undocumented immigrant.
Well, an undocumented immigrant is not an immigrant.
You know, if someone steals a car, the problem is not that they lack documentation.
The problem is that they stole the car.
Right?
So if you're doing something illegal, that's the problem.
You can change the laws, of course, but just saying, well, the only problem is a lack of documentation.
The reason they lack documentation is that if they had documentation, it would prove that they weren't in the country legally.
Right?
So, but apparently not having documentation now is perfectly fine.
So you don't have to worry if the IRS asks you for receipts.
Oh my God.
Again, to use the analogy, saying that the only problem with illegal aliens is they lack documentation is like saying the only problem with a bank robber is he didn't fill out a withdrawal slip.
Well, he just didn't have the documentation.
It's like, not really.
And somebody did a fact check as well regarding this death and border and so on.
During Joe Biden's first two years as Vice President, 785 migrants died attempting to cross the border illegally, 204 more than during President Trump's first two years.
Where was the Democrats' outrage then?
Well, of course, again, it's nothing to do with facts and nothing to do with morality, and they don't care about the kids.
I mean, if the Democrats cared about the kids, They'd stop drugging them in schools.
They'd allow poor parental choice in schools.
They would stop borrowing against the earnings of children in the future.
I mean, they don't care about the kids.
Come on.
I mean, it's all nonsense, right?
And of course, it wasn't a month or two ago when they were saying, well, there's no crisis at the border.
And now there's a huge crisis at the border.
So Andrew Yang, I've been hearing all this stuff about how Yang Gang, how cool Andrew Yang is, and you know, well this thousand a month, you know, there was an old song when I was a kid from some lottery, you know, a thousand a month sure is grand, you're on your way with a helping hand, and a thousand a month, you get a thousand a month for the lottery.
This is back when that was more money than you could possibly need, right?
A thousand a month.
So he wants to give people a thousand dollars a month for free.
I mean, that's insane.
Obviously, I mean, it's completely insane.
But, um, Andrew Yang went full in on the debunked Russiagate conspiracy theory.
The question, who's the biggest geopolitical threat?
Who is the biggest threat to America?
Well, of course, with the Democrats, that's your first step in selling them a giant mirror, but He was like, Russia meddling with the elections and blah blah blah, number one threat to the U.S.
and come on, I mean a couple of Facebook ads is not number one threat to the United States.
So just Andrew Yang was, you know, it was actually kind of nice to see this huge redistributionist handing over all of his time to everyone else, although he did later complain that his mic had been cut off, which actually makes me respect him even more because anyone they want to cut the mic off to probably has something sensible to say.
And, you know, just a general issue around... It's actually illegal to bribe a politician with your own money, but it's totally legal.
In fact, it's de rigueur for politicians to bribe you with your children's money.
It's just kind of a one-way street.
Then of course racism, systemic racism.
There is no systemic racism in American policing.
There is no systemic racism in American policing.
Again this is just one of these any disparities in outcomes must be the result of bigotry.
But it's not.
It's not.
Blacks and Hispanics commit crimes more than East Asians.
So blacks and Hispanics get arrested more than East Asians.
And they do these crime victimization surveys and they find that the crime victimization surveys match the
match the arrest rates by ethnicity so you know it's there's there's really only one basic fact you need to know about the black community at the moment which is that depending on who you ask between 40 and 60 percent of black girls report being raped by black men as children right so they've been raped by black men when they were children if you even now the 40 to 60 percent it's about half of black girls report being raped by black men as children
Like anybody who's not talking about that kind of stuff, anybody who's not dealing with those basic facts is just covering up those basic facts.
What is the great danger in the black community?
Black pedophiles.
And I mean again people can say well there's all these other terrible things going okay but can we can we at least talk about that one?
Can that at least occur?
But that's tough to blame on white people right?
I mean of course you want to have something you can blame on white people because apparently the left just loves stripping certain groups of entire agency but No, that is a reality.
And that creates a huge amount of trauma among black women.
And that trauma then gets transmitted to their children.
And it's just I mean, the idea that it's slavery from 150 years ago, versus, you know, rape as a child from six years ago as I mean, it's crazy, right?
Now, a lot of concern, of course, about climate change, basic facts of climate change.
If you care about the environment, you have to stop mass immigration.
You have to cut government spending.
And you have to commit to no deficits going forward, right?
Because mass immigration is taking people from low environmental consumption environments to high environmental consumption environments, thus using up more of nature's scarce precious resources.
Government spending is a huge issue in the consumption of resources and deficits are when you borrow against the future to fuel and subsidize consumption of nature's scarce resources in the here and now.
So, yeah, government spending, government deficits and mass immigration, all of which are tied together, massively destroy our scarce resources and cause massive amounts of carbon emissions to occur.
So...
You can be for the environment, or you can be for mass immigration and government spending.
You can't be for both.
I mean, it's just ridiculous, right?
Now, Bernie Sanders.
You know, it's nice to see a candidate who combs his hair with a helium balloon, but that guy's crazy.
Like, he is way too angry and unstable to be president.
I mean, he's like the Boo Radley in the row of candidates.
I mean, his campaign doesn't have lawn signs, he has Get off my lawn!" signs.
I mean, he's the kind of, you know, crazy neighbor, like, your ball goes over the fence.
It's like, yeah, you can keep the ball, man.
I'm not going to go talk to that guy.
That's not good.
This is not a guy who has even remotely the stability of character, let alone all of his, like, honeymoon in Russia and flirting with all the communists and stuff.
Just is one angry Ferocious guy, unstable and no charisma and, man, nasty.
Oh, yeah, so Andrew Yang believed that if you give $1,000 a month to everyone to consume stuff, that's going to totally help the environment.
Again, I don't know what to say about any of that.
I mean, it's good to break stereotypes about people from Taiwan or whose ancestry is from Taiwan being good at math.
Come on.
You borrow money, you give a thousand dollars to everyone to consume stuff.
Well, that's a thousand dollars of goods and services they're going to consume.
Well, see, they're going to take that money, they're going to buy a car, they're going to drive around and It's terrible for the environment.
So just this idea is crazy, right?
Bannings, of course, ban guns, ban this, ban the other.
The only thing you need to know when, or just one thing you need to remember when the government's talking about banning things is that the government can't even keep drugs out of prison.
So even if you turn all of society into a prison, there's still going to be drugs there.
They can't control anything like that.
So that's kind of important.
It's also funny seeing these networks, not only do they have endless technical difficulties, just as YouTube did with its streams, but it's fascinating to me to watch networks give all this airtime to nutjobs railing against profits where they have to keep interrupting the debate to sell ad time.
So, profits are terrible, but the only reason there is a television station and broadcasting and live streaming is because there's profits.
So, I don't know, it just seems kind of ridiculous.
Also, so Kamala Harris did this as well, which is, this is railing against Trump.
This is like, this just lets your rage get The better of your potential.
The rage eclipsing your potential is railing against Donald Trump like he's the Antichrist or whatever.
Well, that's just turning half of America completely against you.
And I learned this lesson a long time ago in business.
That you don't take endless shots at your competition.
You just be better and let people decide for themselves.
Taking shots at your competition does not make you look strong.
It makes you look weak.
And that is, you know, Kamala Harris was talking about Prosecuting Trump after he's out of office?
My gosh, can you imagine?
Can you imagine?
I mean, what would happen to America if...
The country was dragged through that kind of disaster.
Yeah, okay.
Prosecute Obama for what seems to be his knowledge of the spying on Trump.
Prosecute Obama for his extrajudicial killings.
Prosecute George W. Bush for the international crime of aggression by invading Iraq, which posed no threat to the United States.
Yeah, you can prosecute Trump.
Come on.
Come on.
The guy's holding back the military-industrial complex by the skin of his damn teeth.
Yeah, that's just, you can just see that rage, right?
That rage that someone might get in between the needy and their drug, which is the fiat currency, right?
I mean, it's terrifying.
Again, I'm sorry I'm jumping around a little bit here, but, you know, one thing I did notice, and I was thinking about, like, why do I dislike these sort of pro choice position so much, and I think it's because they're like, well, it's a reproductive right and it's a woman's right to choose and it's her body, her choice.
Well, first of all, it's never my wallet, my choice as a taxpayer.
And of course, it's not her body.
Her body does not detach itself and go to college later and dye its hair blue and not reproduce.
What I... I think what I dislike about the pro-choice position is just how militantly positive they are about abortion.
Like, abortion is a disaster.
You understand?
But abortion, even if you're pro... um... pro-choice.
Right?
Even if you're pro-choice.
Sorry if I missed that earlier.
But even if you're pro-choice...
You understand it's a disaster, right?
You don't want to be in a situation where you have to get an abortion.
You don't want a doctor going in there and scooping out a viable potential human being and dumping it as medical waste or selling it on the black market or whatever happens to them these days.
So they can see, oh, well, I'm pro-choice, but I'm recognizing that abortion is a huge and terrible issue.
It's a massive waste of medical resources, because those are doctors and nurses and facilities that could be used to treat cancer or whatever else could be going on, heart disease.
So it's a huge disaster, and let's work to minimize the prevalence of abortion as much as possible.
But they're all militant.
It's like, oh, it's a woman's right to choose.
It's feminist.
It's right.
It's good.
That, to me, is the problem.
It is a disaster.
It is a disaster.
But, of course, Irresponsible people, I mean it comes down to sexual market value in a lot of ways, right?
So a woman who's less quality is going to give up sex quicker, right?
A woman of lower quality is going to let you have sex with her more quickly, right?
Because she doesn't have much of personal virtue and value to bring to the table, so she's just going to bring vagina and lube to the table, right?
And of course, the less quality the woman, the more she's going to offer up bareback, right?
Because men don't like condoms and all that, right?
So, in her attempt to gain attention and to provide value, she's not bringing qualities of character or great conversation or her knowledge of 19th century novels or anything like that.
She's just like, oh, sexual access.
And that's going to have consequences, right?
And for a lot of women in particular, I think the idea that they would face more negative consequences for bringing sex to the table rather than qualities of character, that's pretty terrifying.
So, yeah.
Yeah, like it's bad all around, right?
So there's going to be a huge wave of tax censorship that's going to come because the Democrat candidates simply, they can't win.
They can't win where they are now.
And this is before, you know, there's going to be a frontrunner and then people are going to dig all the way through that frontrunner.
If it's Kamala Harris, well, she let a guy sit in jail for two years because apparently he didn't fill out the right paperwork.
You know, she's just got some pretty significant skeletons in her closets, and not to mention the whole nonsense about listening to some rap artist in college when he wasn't even... Tupac, I think, when he wasn't even around, or whatever.
It doesn't really matter.
This stuff doesn't matter, but...
People's attention, and by people I mean 4chan, their attention is split among candidates at the moment, but the moment that someone is the contender, the leader, they're going to start, everyone's going to go over their history with a fine-tooth comb and so on, and that's going to be pretty bad.
So, you know, the tech companies want the left to get in, and given how bad the debates were in general, the tech companies are going to have to prop these guys up with search engine manipulations and suppression of views of critics and so on.
That's kind of inevitable.
And so it's different.
So Trump had to woo and win over Americans, right?
So, I mean, Trump didn't go the full hog of saying we've got to tighten our belts and we can't afford all this stuff and, you know, it's time for everyone to grow up and stop living in this fantasy land of infinite resources and so on.
But he did have to woo and win over Americans.
And he didn't just do it by saying, I'm going to give you all this free stuff.
I mean, he set a wall and put her in jail and so on.
And that's not exactly working out.
But you know, there's a, there is a certain section of people above the law and they tend to be Democrats who are powerful and not male or not white male.
So Trump actually had to woo and win over Americans.
You can just see the Democrats just bribe them.
Just here's, here's free stuff.
Here's free stuff.
And that's the difference between asking a woman out and then just paying her to sleep with you, right?
Go ask a woman out, you've got to woo her, you've got to bring some flowers, you've got to be charming, you've got to whatever, right?
You've got to do some sit-ups.
But if you just pay a woman to sleep with you, you're just bribing her to like you, right?
It's the same thing with the Democrats.
They're just bribing, just bribing, bribing, bribing.
And that's... I mean, that's wretched.
But again, they're going to...
I mean, they're going to win eventually, right?
Because demographics is destiny.
They're just bringing in more and more people who are low-skilled, low-value to the economy, and they're just bribing them with usually the incomes generated by the, you know, the biggest demographic source of government revenue is white males, right?
So this is why white males aren't allowed to organize, they're not allowed to have any in-group preferences.
The racist, white nationalist, white supremacist, Nazi, KKK, if you're trying to say, well, you know, everyone else is organizing, I guess this is the new game, we've got to start organizing, well, the moment you try and say, well, you've got to organize if you're a white male, you're just a Nazi, right?
And that's because exploitation is the name of the game.
And white males, you know, are the tax livestock and can't be allowed to have any in-group preferences because Then they're harder to control and exploit, right?
It's natural, right?
I mean, because the left got really angry at corporations for union busting, right?
For breaking up workers who wanted to organize.
Well, if whites want to organize, well, of course.
I mean, it's just going to be immediate Nazi blah, blah, blah, right?
It's really tragic.
And so, you know, Trump's going to win in 2020 because he's not facing any opposition.
But that's about it.
I mean, after that, they've just got such a lock through demographics on the electoral college that, I mean, that's it.
It's going to be the last victory.
And, you know, the Republican Party will limp along.
They'll try and appeal to groups that they just won't be able to appeal to for a variety of reasons I've gone into before.
So, yeah, I mean, Trump's probably going to get 2020.
I'm pretty sure he will.
But the Democrats just have to be patient.
That's all.
They just have to be patient, because the immigration is just stuffing the ballot with people who are going to inevitably vote for the left, because if you are a certain low-skilled kind of person, you get more resources voting for the left than you could by participating in the free market.
And there's this whole horrible thing that's happened, right?
There's this big picture thing that's happened, which is, you know, foreign aid and the exportation or exporting of, you know, Western technology and Western medicine and Western money.
Foreign aid is huge, right?
So a country that takes in... Let me look at the countries where there's this mass migration impulse and there isn't, right?
So countries that reform themselves according to the free market that produced all of the goods and technology that they're importing from the West, those countries that allow for free markets to operate don't tend to end up with this big an outflux or outflow of smart people, right?
Whereas countries that take Western aid and Western technology, Western medicine and all of that Well, they end up with a big population, right?
Population growth, right?
And then what happens is they can't sustain that population.
If you look at what's happening in Venezuela, you can see this process unfolding right away.
So if you just import the fruits of the free market without actually importing the principles of the free market, you end up with a significant overpopulation.
Now what used to happen was it used to be that overpopulation was dealt with either by nature in terms of starvation or disease or something like that.
Or there'd be a war and then the excess population would be killed off.
It's nothing I'm recommending, I'm just sort of pointing out what happens in history.
That doesn't really happen as much anymore for a variety of reasons and so now it's just migration.
Right?
If you can't, for whatever reason, import the free market, you just run to the vestigial free market in the West and try and consume those resources uh... and the politicians love it when people need them so they love it when people come in and need stuff so it is uh... it's a terrible situation uh... there's no easy way out of it i mean as far as answers go the answer is always more freedom but the problem is of course when you're importing people into your country who want bigger and bigger government
Well, you can't get rid of government programs if more and more people are dependent on them and you get more and more people voting for them, so I don't know, but the solution is definitely we need to talk about it more, which is kind of why I do what I do.
And I guess I'll leave you with my most popular tweet of the night, which is this.
And thanks, everyone, so much for watching.
Please help out at freedomainradio.com forward slash donate.
I really, really appreciate that and need it now, probably more than ever in the history of the show.
freedomainradio.com forward slash donate.
But yeah, this is one of the foundational contradictions in the Democrat position.
A child in the river must be saved.
▲
Export Selection