Ep. 2070 - Republican Campaign Ad Brutalizes Lazy White Men

Okay, fellas, since Hollywood can't do anything right anymore, we did their job for them. The Daily Wire's newest movie is an ode to the great funny action films of the 80s and 90s. Good guys win, bad guys lose. No one apologizes for it. Check out Run, Hide, Fight Infidels, now streaming only on The Daily Wire. This episode is brought to you by Cardiff, America's favorite small business lender, with over $12 billion funded since 2004, applying under three minutes for same-day funding, up to $500,000 at cardiff.co slash knolls. A Republican campaign ad portrays young white men as lazy welfare queens. That should bring back the disaffected fellas, huh? The ones that the party is hemorrhaging. Then, speaking of young people, queer and trans identity is plummeting among young adults, which is pretty strange for a supposedly innate and immutable characteristic. And then, just days after the Pope's warning to Europe against assisted suicide, the Netherlands euthanizes, quote-unquote, a two-year-old boy, boy, this is just the beginning. I'm Michael Knowles, this is The Michael Knowles Show. Welcome back to the show. Are you the only person on the internet who has not yet seen Run, Hide, Fight Infidels? Don't be that guy. Don't be the last one who's out of the loop, who's not doing the memes, who hasn't had the joy and entertainment of watching Run, Hide, Fight Infidels, and who doesn't know the stakes, despite the semi-farsical nature of the movie, doesn't know the very real stakes of this election. You gotta go to dailywire.com slash subscribe and watch Run, Hide, Fight Infidels today. Speaking of things that you watch on screens, I don't know, that was kind of a weak transition. I don't know, I'll work, I'll do better next time. There is a Republican. There is a Republican campaign ad that has taken over the internet, not necessarily for the right reasons. It's a campaign ad coming out of Arkansas. It's from Sarah Sanders, the governor there, whom I like very, very much. And I feel that she is personally being dragged a little bit unfairly for this. But the campaign ad, as such, is driving people crazy. It's an ad against people abusing the welfare system, which is all good. Republicans, centrists, independents, disillusioned liberals should all agree with that. They should all agree with that. They should all agree with the message. The issue with the ad that is driving people crazy is that the supposed welfare abuser here is a young white man. Yeah, you want some of this? Take that. Come on. Meet Brad. Brad has turned relaxing into a full-time profession. But you, you actually work hard. You pay taxes to cover welfare for guys like Brad who just choose not to work. Whoa. That's why I launched a welfare. Work requirement. Almost there. Now, more Arkansans are working than ever before. Even Brad. Okay. All right. So it's the problem is the Brad's, according to the campaign ad. However, we all know that the problem with welfare abuse is not the Brad's. It's the Abdullah's. If you look in places like Minnesota and Ohio, it's the Shaniqua's. I don't think you can get away with doing an ad about the Shaniqua's. But it's not generally the Brad's. We have the numbers to back this up. The population of Arkansas is 68% to 70% white. The black population is about 15%. Latino population, 8% or 9%. Then you have Asian, American Indian, Pacific Islander. They make up the very small number of the rest of the people. So that's the just demographic of Arkansas. Compare that to welfare use. Let's just look at. Snap benefits, because that's the biggest one, other than Medicaid. But the Medicaid numbers are almost exactly the same. You got 70% of the population is white, but only 57.8% of the welfare users are white. You've got 15% of the population is black. A little under 21% of the welfare users are black. So black people are disproportionately likely to use the welfare programs. You've got 8% or 9% of the population is Hispanic. Almost 11% of the welfare users are Hispanic. So disproportionately, the welfare users are Hispanic. Then multiple races, Asian, so on and so forth. When you look at Medicaid, the numbers are basically the same. Fewer black people use Medicaid. More Hispanic people use Medicaid. But the white percentage is roughly the same. Okay, so why, if you have this one. Oh, by the way, we didn't even get into sex. Women are more likely to use the welfare programs than men are. So why, in this ad, you are identifying as the great culprit of welfare abuse, the single demographic least likely to abuse welfare. Why would you do that? What's interesting about this to me is not that Sarah Sanders made this choice. She's being dragged for this personally. I don't think that's fair because I think Sarah Sanders is looking at the reality of language and signs and symbols. The reality of signs and symbols and language in our democracy is the most interesting thing about this ad. Because everybody looking at the Brad ad knows that Brad is not the guy who abuses welfare. Everybody. The white people, the black people, the Hispanic people, the men, the women, the Republicans, the Democrats. Literally every group knows that the presentation of welfare abuse in this ad is dishonest. People who want more welfare, people who want less welfare. Everybody knows it is not young white guys who are abusing the welfare system. And yet, everybody also agrees that the only way in mainstream politics that you can make an ad going after welfare is by targeting young white men. Why is that? Because it is simply a fact of our politics that the only group that you are allowed to, legally allowed to, and culturally encouraged to discriminate against is young white men. That's the group. You are not allowed to do it. Culturally speaking, you are not allowed to criticize anyone other than white men. Even white women. A little bit, you can call them Karens every now and again. But generally, it's the white men. And then as a matter of the law, you're allowed to legally discriminate against men. You're allowed to legally discriminate against white people. You're allowed to some degree to legally discriminate against Asian people. The Supreme Court undermined this a little bit in the Students for Fair Admissions decision at the Supreme Court, but the schools got around it anyway. Otherwise, you're allowed to discriminate in favor of black people, in favor of Hispanic people, in favor of women when it comes to school admissions and jobs. But you're not allowed to discriminate against them. So to me, the most interesting thing about the ad is the fact that it is dishonest. We all know it is dishonest. And yet, we all know that the Republicans, in order to run an ad on welfare, had to do this. The purpose of a sign, getting into semiotics and getting into how language works, the purpose of a sign is to point to something that is signified. That's how meaning works. And what's so interesting here is this sign is pointing, pointing to something that is signified. And what's so interesting here is this sign is pointing to something that is signified. be ostracized from your community if you state your opinion, even if the opinion happens to be true if that opinion contradicts wokeness and the politically correct. The indictment here is the ad is intended to communicate a truth that resonates with voters, and the ad is doing it. But in order for the ad to do it in our oppressive totalitarian republic, it has to do so in dishonest ways that we all know are dishonest. But is anybody really shocked or surprised by this? Some people are saying this is outrageous, and politically it's a bad idea for the Sanders campaign to go after their base. And okay, maybe that's true. I don't think she's going to lose a lot of votes for this. But whatever you want to say about that, we all acknowledge that that is the political reality. So if you don't like that political reality, you're going to have to change a few more things than Republican campaigns, than a few TV ads. You're going to have to change the system that you're in. You're going to have to change the system of legal discrimination that we have against white men. You're going to have to change the cultural standards and norms and mores, which say that there's this one group that you can vilify and that you're encouraged to vilify, and you have to blame every problem in the world on this one group. But you can never hold any other groups accountable for any of their actions. Those are deep structural changes in our culture, enacted and embodied by our elite institutions, and even enshrined in our law. The Sanders campaign is just acknowledging that reality. That's a deeper problem. And it's a problem, by the way, that's going on a lot longer than Sarah Sanders has been governor or running for office, been around a lot longer than she's been alive. It's a reminder that we are living in a fundamentally dishonest culture. And the left wants to encourage that because the left believes that the way that you get to a happy society is by lying all the time. You lie and you pretend that the man who thinks that he's a woman is really a woman. You lie. You say, oh, there are certain problems and pathologies, especially in minority and immigrant communities. Well, let's just deny that. If we just deny that, the problems will get better. Now, of course, that doesn't work. Denying a problem doesn't make a problem better. It makes the problem fester. Affirming the delusions of a man who thinks that he's a woman, it doesn't make the problem better. It makes the problem a lot worse. And anxiety goes up and depression goes up and suicidality goes up. But that's what the left is telling you. And the left, the Democratic Party in particular, is the establishment party and has been for a very, very long time. The Republicans are the junior partner in the American polity. They're a little more the anti-establishment party. It's true we have basically unified government right now, and yet the culture is still so predominantly left-wing and liberal. What does that tell you? It tells you that the politics is about more than just who happens to control the House of Representatives. That's the reality of it. You can be angry. You can tell Sarah Sanders to fire her campaign consultants. Maybe she should, maybe not. But that's the reality we're living in. And if you want to change those circumstances, you better get to work. Okay. Speaking of young men, an actress at the Human Rights Campaign has just come out and expressed her disappointment that her son, who she tried to make gay, turned out straight. Every mother's nightmare. We'll get to that in a moment. First, I want to tell you about Lean. There's a lot more to say. First, though, go to takelean.com. Code Knowles. January you would like to have a word with September you. Because January you is the person who is eventually going to have to deal with everything September, October, November, and December you decided did not count. Now, there's nothing wrong with enjoying a little pumpkin pie. Nothing wrong with some nice little cookies at Christmas. The trick is not completely abandoning the habits that were working before the holidays showed up. That is where something like Lean from BrickHouse.com. Nutrition can be useful. Lean was developed by doctors for people who are seriously trying to lose weight. Its studied ingredients are designed to support healthy blood sugar, fat metabolism, and appetite and craving control. Think of this less as waiting until you've fallen completely off the wagon and more as trying not to fall off the wagon in the first place. Your New Year's resolution will be considerably less dramatic if you just take my advice right now. Go to www.learn.com and click the link in the description to get your free copy. Plus, free rush shipping. That is takelean.com. Promo code Knowles. Actress Cameron Nanheim. I don't know her. She's been in a lot of TV shows and movies and things, I guess. Wikipedia tells me. I'm a little out of the culture and I certainly don't make a habit of watching the Human Rights Campaign Awards. This is another, oh, what a great example of lies in our language. The Human Rights Campaign. Do you know what that is? It's the one that expresses itself. It uses the sign, the symbol of the equal. You might have seen little bumper stickers with the equal sign. And the Human Rights Campaign is not about, I don't know, you know, freeing political prisoners in China. The Human Rights Campaign is not about stopping the Christian genocide in Nigeria. The Human Rights Campaign isn't even about feeding starving people in Africa. The Human Rights Campaign was created to redefine marriage. That's what, that's all it did. And then when the Supreme Court came in and fundamentally redefined marriage, or at least attempted to, the Human Rights Campaign pivoted overnight. And now the Human Rights Campaign exists for the sole purpose of castrating confused people and making them look a little more like the opposite sex. Human rights, that's human rights. Is that, when, when 30, 40 years ago, when people showed up to the United Nations to give speeches on human rights, were they talking about castrating little kids? I don't think so. They may have been talking about it, but only to stop it. So we need to stop female genital mutilation in Africa or the Middle East. No, no, no, no. Human Rights Campaign doing the exact opposite of what the name would suggest that it does. So this lady shows up and here is her disappointment in her straight child. I always wanted a gay son. I did. I love that relationship between gay sons and their mothers. I want to be the picket sign holding mom who would beat the shit out of somebody for her kid. I mean, let's just admit it. Gay sons, are the best, right? I have photographs of my son in high heels, in full drag. He knows every word to every musical ever written. His fairy godfather, Aaron Walton, is here with us tonight. I mean, truly, I thought I had this locked up, but no, no, he's the only straight guy in his entire musical theater company. So when Marsha called me about 10 years ago from her closet, I kid you not, she was in her closet to tell me that her son had come out to her as gay. All I said was, oh, my God, you are so fucking lucky. So first takeaway, actresses really are always crazy. They're always basically, without exception, totally crazy. That's the first takeaway. The second takeaway, though, politically, is that the left always has to go too far because the left rejects moderation and prudence just right off the bat. So moderation can be a virtue, not in the sense of some squishy rhino Republican, but moderation is the true via media between two extremes. That has been understood since antiquity as one of the characteristics of virtue, that it establishes a balance between two vicious extremes. And the left rejects that right off the bat. Liberalism tends to reject that right off the bat. You even see this on the libertarian right. When Barry Goldwater comes out, he says, you know, extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And it's a very famous speech. But that's not exactly true. One, we have to properly understand what liberty is. We want to defend liberty, but we don't want to become terrorists about it. We don't want to be a nation of John Browns murdering innocent families because of your own conception of liberty. But this is just part of liberalism. This is just part of leftism is it always has to go too far. I listen to this lady speak and I think, OK, let's see two extremes here. One extreme, which you can see in Run, Hide, Fight Infidels at DailyWire.com slash subscribe, is when the jihadis show up and some guy looks a little fruity and they kick him off a rooftop. That's probably a little extreme, I would have to say. Right. I don't think even your most right wing, extremist, revanchist, reactionary. I don't I don't think that guy really wants jihadis just walking around kicking homosexuals off the rooftop. Right. So that's one extreme. But then I think the other extreme is you put your little son in drag and just pray to the God you don't believe in that he turns into a queer. Right. I don't. That's a little much, too. Can't there be some kind of via media here where we say, well, look, there the human person has a final cause, has has a final cause. There are things we're supposed to do and things we're not supposed to do. And human sexuality is for procreation. And so men are made for women in some way. Women are made for men. This desire that men have for women is is best understood as for the institution of marriage, not just going around and going a whoring, but, you know, for monogamy, for this partnership. And then the sexual act is ordered toward it is for. the procreation, and the education of children, which means means that the marriage is for life. It's supposed to be a lifelong union to provide that stability to raise the child. And we can know these things using our reason, understanding how human nature works. And sometimes people deviate from that a little bit. And sometimes not everybody gets married. And sometimes, you know, couples are infertile. And sometimes people are a little bit weird on their sexuality. And sometimes they can correct it a little bit. Sometimes they really struggle with it. And so maybe they're going to live in a celibate way, or they're going to try to be chaste. And sometimes they're going to screw up. And maybe we don't kick them off the roof for it. Maybe we just kind of, you know, go along and we understand the norms and the standards of society. And we also recognize, to borrow an image from Jonathan Pegeau, that medieval manuscripts have weird stuff along the edges. And there are weird little gargoyles and things along the edges of those manuscripts. But at the very least, we're not going to put them at the center of the manuscript. We're not going to put the gargoyles, which line up in the middle of the manuscript, and the outside edges of the cathedral. We're not going to put them in the center at the altar. And how about that? Can we just be normal? That's what you want to say listening to someone like this. And the conclusion you must draw is that the left says, no, no. This is why all of their radical activism on every front, but especially on sexuality, because sexuality is very, very important to human nature, especially on this, they will never just let you be cool. They'll never just let you be a little bit tolerant. They'll never just let you be kind of normal and sometimes look the other way and not, you know, sometimes go a little, they'll never let you do that. They have to go to the extreme. There is no via media. There is no moderation. There is no prudence. They're going to trans your kid. They're going to try to turn their own children gay. They're going to put them in drag. They're going to put them in a position where they're going to be a little bit more they're going to, they're going to demand, not just that we have a norm and, you know, allow for exceptions. They're going to try to invert the norm. It's, it's not just that, you know, look, it's good to be normal when it comes to sexuality, but whatever, we'll let a few things slide. They're going to say, no, no, it is good to be gay and trans and lesbian and pansexual and whatever, all the other sexualities. It is good to be that. It is bad to be straight. It is bad. You shouldn't want, that's the thing that we'll just have to maybe tolerate, maybe, but they have to do that. And the kind of moderate liberals on the right and the left who say, well, can't we just be neutral? That's the other alternative. They'll say, this was like nineties liberalism, basically. They'll say, can't we just be neutral? You know, if you're, if you're straight or if you're gay, there's no difference between those things. You social conservatives, you're too harsh. You can't, you can't say that it's normal to be straight and to get married and to have kids. No, no, no, don't say nothing's normal. You do whatever you want. Let's just all be totally neutral. There certainly is no neutrality because all political communities are ordered towards some conception of the good. So it's either going to be the good version of the good, or it's going to be bad. It's going to be the bad that the left mistakenly tells us is good, but that's it. And if you want that via media thing, to have a firm standard, a firm understanding of what is good and in your mercy and magnanimity, perhaps you can allow for certain exceptions, but that's it. Otherwise you get in human rights campaign, actress, lady, all the way down and they're coming for your kids. You don't have to take my word for it. They've just spent the last, the better part of a decade trying to do it. Okay. Speaking of, speaking of the sexual functions, speaking of your testosterone, I want to tell you about Mars men. First, they'll go to men, go to mars.com. There's a peculiar lie that you were told about your thirties. You're still young technically, maybe kind of, but suddenly you sleep slightly wrong and your neck hurts for three days. You do the same workout you've done for years, or in my case have never done. And recovery takes longer. You stay up late once and apparently require the remainder of the week to recover. So true. So true. That'd be me for real, for real. There is actually something happening here that men should pay attention to. Testosterone levels generally begin declining around age 30, roughly 1% per year. The main factor is involved as a protein called S H B G, which binds to testosterone in the body. The simplest analogy is you can have money in the bank, but that doesn't do you much good. If you can't access it, that's where Mars men comes in. Mars men is designed to support healthy testosterone levels, energy, and stamina using eight naturally derived, clinically dosed ingredients, no needles or synthetic testosterone. If you're a guy who's noticed that energy workouts, recovery or drive are not quite what they used to be. This is something worth looking into rather than simply assuming feeling lousy is the inevitable. Getting older. It is made in America. Third-party tested now available at GNC nationwide 90 day money back guarantee. I'm not telling you what you're going to experience. I'm telling you, take a look at it for yourself for a limited time. Our listeners get 50% off for life plus free shipping and three free gifts at men. Go to mars.com. That's men. Go to mars.com. 50% off three free gifts at checkout. After you purchase, they will ask you where you heard about them. Please support our show. Tell them that we sent you and look like a giga chat like me. Now, the most charitable read of the actress's speech at the human rights campaign is that, which is the, we should just call it what it is, which is the radical trans lobby. The most charitable read is that what she's saying is sexual orientation is immutable. That, that could be the punchline of her joke. That could be the thesis of her joke, I should say, which is she tried so hard to turn her kid gay, but she couldn't. Because straightness and gayness and transness and pansness and this ism and that ism, they're just innate. They're immutable. You are born this way and there's no changing it. Okay, fair enough. And she's being hyperbolic in her language to prove that point. The issue is there's a new study out showing that that is not exactly true. Trans and queer identity are reportedly way, way down among young people. Do you remember two years ago, three years ago, you had NBC News, all of these other outlets reporting that LGBT identity was at 20% among Gen Z. Not the historic 2% or less. No, no, no. It was an order of magnitude up. It was 20%. Then a year later, they come out, they say, actually, it's 30%. 30% of Gen Z identifies as LGBT, L-M-N-O-P. That poses a big problem for the people who say that LGBT, L-M-N-O-P identity is innate and immutable because it mutated. It changed. It grew. So either something is in the water and the pregnant women were drinking the water and in the womb, it turned their kids LGBT, L-M-N-O-P, or there's a social contagion aspect. Or it is possible to develop these LGBT identities through whatever means, because their teacher was doing it to them, because their crazy actress mother was putting them in drag because of signs from the popular culture and advertising, whatever, whatever it is. There must be some change. What did the study find? The transgender share among university students peaked in 2023. No surprise there. And it's gone down since then. But it hasn't just gone down by a little bit. It's cut in half. 2023, that's a really interesting year to look at because I think that was the year that I gave my CPAC speech that I caught a lot of flack for. For saying that transgenderism must be eradicated from public life entirely, the whole preposterous ideology at every level. So that was peak trans. And then after that, in just three years since then, it's gone down by a lot. It's cut in half. It was. 7% of university students in 2023 called themselves transgender. Today, it's less than 4%. So you're approaching almost half. The share of students identifying as not heterosexual fell by around 10 points in that same period. So on the LGBTQ plus acronym, put aside the L and the G for a second. The decline in BTQ plus identification, one, is pretty manifest. You can see it's really collapsed. And according to the researchers, it does not appear to be connected to lower social media use. That's one of the points. Okay, well, you know what? Get off TikTok. It's going to go down. It does not appear to be connected to religious activity. There is a religious revival going on, especially among young people. You saw that in France when the Pope was visiting. You've seen this in the United States. 38% increase in baptisms year over year, massive increase in church attendance and all the rest. It doesn't appear to be connected to that. It does not appear to be connected to a shift to the political right or the political left. A lot of young people came over to the right in 2024. You had a shift in about 10 percentage points. Susie Wiles credits that to Charlie Kirk. Now, some of those young people are shifting way back to the left. It doesn't matter, though. It doesn't. Correlate. There is evidence, however, that improved mental health has reduced the BTQ plus identification. So put the L and the G aside, which have declined by much more modest rates than the BTQ plus. What does this tell us? It tells us what normal people have suspected for a long time, which is that there seems to be a more solid basis for gay, same-sex attraction, whether that is genetic. There's no evidence that it's genetic, but who knows? I guess it's possible. whether that's because of exposure to hormones in the womb as has been theorized whether that's because of early childhood experiences whether that's whatever it is that appears to be more persistent than the the trans identity which seems a lot more socially contagious and and socially influenced and then the q what is the q is questioning that what is that and the b for that matter bisexuality seems to be a little little dubious so this last line here to me is the one that really hammers at home especially on the trans issue there is evidence that improved mental health has reduced btq plus identification it really was as simple fixing the transgender issue really was as simple as people in authority just telling the confused people that they're not trans that was it that's it when i was four years old i wore a batman cape all around and i asked people to call me batman i remember i went to my best friend's birthday party and i wanted everybody to call me batman and it was a lot of fun and but at a certain point it went a little too far i said hey stop telling people to call you batman you're not batman and then i stopped thinking i was batman and it is the according to the study at least the exact same mechanism worked here it turns out if you have a confused young person who goes to a shrink and says hey i think i'm a hi i'm john but i think that i'm a woman and the shrink says well you are it turns out that john is much more likely to think that he's a woman and if that same kid shows up to the shrink and says hey uh my name is john and i think i'm a woman and the shrink says oh well you're obviously not because that's not possible it turns out john is much much less likely to think that he's a woman and then everything improves it really was that simple and i don't want to single out the shrinks even though you know they're an easy whipping boy for for a lot of bad ideology because psychology is is a very dubious field especially today with the replication crisis it's it's all of the authorities it's the guidance counselors in the schools it's the teachers in the classroom it's a lot of parents like that wacko actress who was dressing her son in drag it's it's popular culture it's hollywood it's the government and so the biden administration was actively pushing transgenderism on kids and the findings of this study show that if you if the authorities push trans on kids you'll get more trans kids and if the authorities stop pushing trans on kids you'll get fewer trans kids and when people identify as trans they're more likely to be miserable and when people stop identifying as trans they're more likely to be happy that's the conclusion it really was that simple and the libs especially but a lot of people they want to complicate everything oh it's just so much more nuanced man and it's so much more detailed and you can't just eradicate an identity and an ideology and you don't understand how complex but you know you know what sometimes things are really simple just i remember i was on that jubilee show and i was talking to a guy who thought he was a woman and he was you can go watch the episode and he said well how are you going to eradicate transgenderism i said well probably we'll just start telling the guys that they're not women and this guy looks at me like i had three heads he's you're oh you're just going to tell them that they're not women i said yeah pretty much yeah i think that i think that'll do it that was before the study came out totally vindicated am i a scientist now do i i have an honorary doctorate i don't have a real doctorate this can i get a can i get a an earned doctorate for this this is really simple and it doesn't it doesn't take a phd or an md to know that okay speaking of young people absolutely horrifying story and totally predictable coming out of the netherlands the latest consequence the latest advance of assisted suicide called medical assistance in dying or euthanasia which was pushed on us because we were told very elderly people in immense pain were just going to be able to choose to end their lives a became slightly younger people then it became slightly less sick people then it became just depressed or poor adults now they are euthanizing that is medically murdering murdering with the sanction of the medical community in the state a two-year-old because the two-year-old had a disability we'll get to that in a second first i want to tell you about pure talk there's a lot more to say first i'll go to pure talk.com slash knolls k-n-w-l-e-s 34.99 that's what you're talking about when you get pure talk i love my pure talk phone depending on where you live 34.99 that's lunch maybe lunch and a coffee it is also an entire month of unlimited high-speed data with pure talk this is the best service a lot of people are going to hear that i'm going to say that number is so great this must be some bargain service where you're making a lot of compromises no that is not true i have had my pure talk phone in service for six years now the coverage is phenomenal in a recent industry survey of more than a hundred thousand people who have been wireless customers pure talk was the only wireless company to get five out of five stars across the board coverage support value data so if you're paying 70 80 90 dollars or more per month for an unlimited plan perhaps the problem is not wireless service the problem is your wireless company right now you go to pure talk.com slash knolls you get 50 off your first month after that unlimited high speed data is just 34.99 a month pure talk.com slash knolls k-n-w-l-e-s 34.99 per month how are you going to argue with that go to puretalk.com slash knolls my favorite comment yesterday uh certainly apropos of our topic today is from ian bob who says just finished the speechless audiobook thank you michael quotes a lot of obscenities in that book and let me tell you listening to michael spout cuss words is actually hilarious i highly recommend it 10 out of 10 yeah i knew when i was recording it i knew if i ever run for office this is going to be like obama doing the audiobook of his memoir where he talks about eating dog then we would go to go around eat some dog we do a couple lines of cocaine and we and i i knew now this the book is not autobiographical mine but in it i i'm writing about language and the changing of language and euphemisms and specifically about obscenity so yeah a lot of naughty words that i say i try not to do it too often but in a clinical environment i felt i had to okay really horrifying story coming out of the netherlands here's a story a two-year-old child has been euthanized euthanized which is a euphemism that means the good death but it's the opposite of a good death it's the worst death it usually means suicide but increasingly it means murder we we heard that story last week of a woman who was euthanized against her will it's not possible to commit suicide against your will she was murdered well now you have a two-year-old toddler who was just murdered by the medical establishment by the state this is the first known case of a non-infant under the age of 12 undergoing assisted death again assisted death what do you mean that doesn't make any sense at all every murder is an assisted death every every manslaughter is an assisted death what are you talking about it's not the first case this isn't the first time a toddler was murdered what what they're trying to say is assisted suicide but a two-year-old can't commit suicide a two-year-old is below the age of reason so it's not possible for you to consent to that action you can't they just by definition a two-year-old can't commit suicide and a two-year-old is not even a five-year-old or a six-year-old or a seven-year-old a two-year-old is really really little and this two-year-old had a disability that's why they murdered him and they're trying to say it was an assisted death it's not the first case it this is the first time in recent memory that a european state has murdered a two-year-old because he had a disability not to not to get to the reductio ad hitlerum but i can think of another time when european states were murdering two-year-olds because of disability and we we got rid of that for a while now it's back in the netherlands under the guise of compassion so this is a child who was born a little bit early child was born prematurely at 26 weeks but the child survived child made it through the NICU but the the toddler had had problems you know had some brain damage had cerebral palsy had some visual impairment and some epileptic seizures so the docs and the parents decided they were going to murder the kid now you can live with brain damage have friends who have brain damage whether from a traumatic brain injury a car accident whatever you can live with cerebral palsy i think a lot of us know people who have cerebral palsy who knows now that people now that abortion is so high and people abort those with disabilities in the womb maybe younger people today don't know that many people cerebral palsy but i certainly know people like that i know people who have visual impairment who are partially blind i know i think you can live with that i know people who've had seizures buddy of mine has a daughter who's who's very very seriously suffering from seizures much more seriously than this two-year-old and they had a procedure done that dramatically reduced the number of seizures and the girl is like 18 now the the sometimes the the baby or the toddler suffered from breathing issues you know plenty of people who suffer from breathing issues they can live good lives one of the conclusions here is that there were reasonable alternatives to murdering the toddler yeah of course any alternative is more reasonable than murdering a toddler because he has a disability but this was always going to happen and it was always going to happen in the netherlands first the netherlands was the first country to legalize euthanasia for people with supposedly terminal illnesses in 2002 well that toddler didn't have a terminal illness per se in any sense other than the way in which we all have a terminal illness called life which is that we're all going to die someday the timing is amazing because an internet friend of mine i didn't know that i was going to die someday i didn't know that i was going to die someday I didn't know him very, very well but we communicated a fair bit. I was hoping I'd grab a drink with him at some point when I was in New York, and I never had the chance, but we corresponded a fair bit. This is Dovey Eisner, and he just died. He had very, very serious injuries, sorry, very, very serious disabilities. He was confined to an electric wheelchair. He used a breathing tube. His breathing tube became disconnected. He fell into a coma. A year later, he died. And the timing is quite providential because Dovey fell into this coma and then died just after he published an article on assisted suicide. Published in the New York Post and said, assisted suicide, a dark moral path. This guy was really, really smart, wonderful, friendly guy, very serious, very serious thinker. And he publishes this piece. Dovey would have been the perfect candidate for euthanasia at a very young age for that, or as an adult. He was 35 years older and he died. He would have been the perfect candidate according to all these liberal governments. But he said, no, don't, don't kill me. I don't, you shouldn't kill me just because I have disabilities. I have something to contribute even more than that. He did have a lot to contribute, but even if he didn't have something to contribute to politics, my life is worth living. I have dignity. You can't just murder me. Don't do this. Don't, don't stigmatize disabilities any more than they already are. Don't, don't make people who suffer from disabilities feel as though we ought to kill ourselves. Don't make people who suffer generally do that because that's what's happening too. The euthanasia so-called is now targeting people who are just a little bit depressed. There is no limiting principle to it. Same point I was making about that crazy actress who wanted to turn her kid gay. There's just, there's no limiting principle to leftism or to liberalism. They will always take it too far. They have to take it too far. The nature of liberalism and leftism. I don't think there is any argument for suicide or doctors killing people. I think that violates the Hippocratic oath, the nature of the medical profession. I think it is contrary to natural law. I think it is the very worst kind of death and most serious people who have ever lived anywhere in the world agree with me. But even if you're open to the idea of letting granny kill herself because she, she's told she only has a month to live or because she's in the hospital, she's told she only has a month to live. I mean, she's in supposedly immense pain and for some reason can't access palliative care. Can you answer what the limiting principle is? How do you stop the docs from killing the two-year-old toddler? How do you stop the docs from killing Dovey? You can't, you can't do it. Speaking of death, very, very important issue that is now cropping up in the midterm campaigns. This is a very hot race in Texas. You got James Tallarico, the ostensibly straight white man who is the Democrat running. He says he's a Christian. He makes it a big part of his campaign running against Ken Paxton, the Republican and team Tallarico is seizing on something Ken Paxton said and going, going after him hard. And right now our pals over at Cal, she say that Tallarico has a 60% chance of becoming the next Senator. This is horrifying. We've heard this for years now about Beto O'Rourke. Remember Beto was going to turn Texas blue. Remember Colin Allred was going to beat Ted Cruz, go turn Texas blue. And Ted beat both of those guys, both, both times. But now we're looking at, a 60% chance according to Cal, she, what did Ken Paxton say that, that Tallarico seizing on? They said, Ken Paxton said the Uvalde shooting. I remember that school shooting some years ago was part of a plan, quote, plan by quote, God, 21 elementary school children and teachers were murdered in the shooting. Ken Paxton says, Tallarico said the Uvalde shooting is part of a plan by God. Aren't you? Isn't your whole campaign that you're the Christian, you're the Christian white guy in the Democrat party. Now you're putting God in quotes. Like it's ridiculous even to mention God. Okay. What did Paxton actually say? It's very important what he said. He said, he was asked, what would you say to a parent who lost a kid in the Uvalde shooting? He said, if I lost one of my children, I'd be pretty devastated, especially in a way that is so senseless. If I had the opportunity to talk to the people, I'd be pretty devastated. I'd be pretty devastated. I'd have to say, look, there is always a plan. I believe God always has a plan. That is the most basic thing that any Christian believes about history. That is not, that is not advanced Christianity. That is not the high level senior seminar on Christianity. That's Christianity 101. And it's not even exclusive to Christians. Plenty of other people with plenty of religious views believe in what we call providence. And if you ask Tallarico, whatever, he's not going to give an answer on this. But if you ask Tallarico, say, hey, you don't believe in providence? You don't believe that God has a hand in the unfolding of history? He would say, no, no, I believe in that. You say, so what's your issue here? And I guess maybe the most charitable read I can think is he would say, well, some things are part of God's providence, but other things are not. And how dare you suggest that bad things fall under God's providence? Providence. C.S. Lewis took on this issue very well, much better than James Tallarico did. C.S. Lewis made the point, I think it was in Miracles, that either everything falls under providence or nothing does. The people who want to say, no, only the good stuff falls under providence. One, I'd suggest they read the book of Job or, I don't know, any of the rest of the Bible. But two, what they're saying is that God is not really God. The idea of providence is that God is God. And that's the idea of providence. And that's the idea of God. He is sovereign. He is omnipotent. He is the God of all of history. He creates everything out of nothing. Not a sparrow falls without your father's knowing it. Not a hair on your head is uncounted. But God doesn't control this or that or this or that. So what ultimately, when you deny God's total control over providence, what you're doing is you're creating this kind of view of religion where there's like the good God and there's the evil Demiurge and they're just kind of duking it out forever. And sometimes God has the upper hand and sometimes the evil Demiurge has the upper hand, but they're just kind of duking it up. That's not what Christians believe. We believe that God controls history. Now, it doesn't mean that bad things can't happen. It's the problem of theodicy. Tallarico is not the first person to consider it. It also doesn't even exactly mean that there's no such thing as chance occurrences. St. Thomas Aquinas takes this on. St. Thomas Aquinas says, you know, from the human perspective, there is still chance. There's still fortuitous events because we are secondary causes. So God gives us free will and we can do things. I really have free will. I can take the leftist year's tumbler. I can move it over here onto my note cards. Then I can move it back here onto the coaster. I can smoke a Mayflower cigar if I want, and I do want, and maybe I will, but I'm restraining myself for now because we're approaching the end of the show. Maybe I'll light it up after the show. Whatever. That's my free will. I am a God. Ultimately has sovereignty over everything. God ultimately controls providence. God takes bad things and turns them to good. But whatever you think about God, it is necessarily the case that if God exists, he has a plan. If God is God, God has a plan. And Christians appreciate this in a ridiculous point by James Tallarico, who is once again revealing he is much closer to an antichrist figure than he is to a Christian. The thing I would ask these people, though, who mock this idea of thoughts and prayers as people are grieving, who mock the idea of providence as a consolation, what's your alternative? What's your alternative? Is your alternative, James Tallarico, that you're going to tell the Uvalde parents there's no is your is your alternative that you're going to tell them you're going to pass some new gun control law pretty soon, not going to bring their kids back. Whatever, whatever laws you think you're going to pass as a senator, guess what? People are still going to suffer. Bad things are still going to happen. You're not going to eliminate bad things. You're not going to eliminate suffering. You're not going to eliminate school shootings, actually, because none of the gun control laws proposed in the last 20 years would have stopped a single one of them. But just let's say you actually could. So what are you going to tell people? How are they to make sense of their suffering? You don't have any answer. And it's not just that you don't have any answer because you're a hard-nosed realist willing to tell people the truth. You won't tell people the truth about anything. You won't tell people the truth about a man not becoming a woman. You don't know the truth. Maybe you know the truth and you're just lying, or maybe you just don't know the truth. But your inability to console people, I think, stems from your ignorance and your pride. Tallarico's answer? Absolutely right. Happens to be true and happens to be very, very compassionate. Okay. And happens to be the only consolation in a broader scope that we have, at least at this terrestrial level. Okay. Now, I got so much more to say about Tallarico because this guy, man, he is slick as all get out. And right now, he looks like he's going to win that race. I want to get to that. I want to get to data centers. It's going to be a huge issue in the campaign. Mike Johnson, the Speaker of the House, weighing in on it. But I don't have time. I'm already late. I'm already running over the clock. I don't care. But this is my tease for tomorrow. Today is TEE Tuesday. The rest of the show. continues now. You don't want to miss it. Become a member. Use code NOLS, Canada, W-L-E-S at checkout for two months free on all annual plans. I'm out on campus. Can you hear me okay? Saunders is a close personal friend of Chancellor Friedman. This is a decision I cannot fight. Islam will conquer the West. As-salamu alaykum. Are we paying attention? They've taken over the building. They're downstairs and they've blocked the doors. I seek forgiveness from Allah the Almighty. We cannot run and hide. Muhammad is the messenger of God. There is no God. But Allah. What do you say we turn those SOBs into a fine red mist? As we move, one man will cover while the other guys go. They call that leap project. Stretch them out and listen. You need a course in safe weapons handling.