Ep. 2075 - Uno Reverse: Cornell Seven Accuser Gets Accused

Okay, fellas. Since Hollywood can't do anything right anymore, we did their job for them. The Daily Wires 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 Good Ranchers. Good Ranchers partners with American Farms and Ranches to deliver the meat directly to your door. Go to GoodRanchers.com/noles Canada VLS. Get 50 bucks off plus free meat with every order when you start a plan. Good ranchers, American meat delivered. We are 28 days out from the midterm elections and the polls are looking bloody. I'm not going to sugar code it. Early voting is currently underway in 13 states. Mail in voting is open in 37 states. Have you voted yet? Have you voted yet? If you haven't voted yet, vote now. Vote early. Some say to vote often, at least vote early. Even say for public in states are looking like they could fall to the Democrats. Then the plot thickens in the case of the Cornell 7 as one of the boys accused of raping has turned around and now accused his accuser of raping him. We will examine who, if anybody raped whom, then a trans identifying New York Times executive gets murdered by her in laws, but she identifies as a he and she got murdered by her in laws. The whole episode teaches us all a political lesson about what happens when we take things a little too far. I'm Michael Noel, assistant Michael Noel show. Welcome back to the show. One of the big issues in the midterm elections, AI data centers. The Dems have totally glombed on to this issue. Speaker of the house, Mike Johnson wants you to know exactly what that issue is about. It might surprise you. It might be about more than just the apocalypse and high energy prices. First though, I want to start off briefly. I don't want to be the dead horse, but the Cornell 7 case every single day, the plot thickens more and more. We find out that this girl Jane Doe, the accuser, she says she was raped at a Cornell flat house. Then when the text messages and the testimony comes out, it turns out that she very explicitly consented to just about everything. Then we find out that she says, well, she was too drunk to consent. But, according to the law, she was not too drunk to consent. Maybe the guys who she says raped her were drunker than she was now. We get the reverse Uno card from one of the accused rapists who says actually he did not do the raping, but he was raped himself by the girl. What is the story? I'm still not going to use their names. I feel it's too salacious. It's too gossipy. I think the plain facts of this case reveal that everybody did basically everything wrong, but nobody violated the law other than all the ketamine that they did. I don't want to further get into the tablet. The real issue here, I mean, I guess their names are all public now because this is a criminal case. It's a civil suit. But the main guy, you know, the first guy who the girl came over to see because she wanted to hook up with him at the flat house and then the guy very weirdly invited another guy in and the girl was apparently cool with it before, during and after the incident. Then the other guys invited more guys and, okay, so the first guy, one of the seven Kai-Fi frat brothers told Cornell University police that not only did he not rape Jane Doe, he in fact was too intoxicated from booze and the aforementioned ketamine to consent on that night in 2024. And therefore, according to ABC news, he says that she raped him. He says that the victim, the alleged victim who might now be the alleged perpetrator was 20-year-old student, this girl. She was the one who assaulted him, not the other way around. This is a very extreme version of you can't fire me, I quit. This is a really extreme version of sometimes the best defense is a good offense. This reminds me of a nor Mcdonald bit in Nor Mcdonald's excellent memoir, which is really a novel based on a true story. Norm has this whole bit about prison rape. You know, it's a little dark norm is known for dark humor and he has this whole bit about reverse raping in prison. It's a pretty, it's a pretty funny bit. Anyway, now this is the real life version of that. You know, Norm had that bit about how his greatest fear is that there'd be a massive Muslim terror attack because the backlash on peaceful Muslims would be so bad and then we joke about this because now news organizations very earnestly do that bit. Well, he had this other bit about prison rape and now the Cornell frat brothers are doing that bit. This is a very, very potent weapon against feminism. Feminism is basically the cause of this whole incident in Cornell. If you have to identify any ideological cause, it is feminism. We conservatives love to play this game. We say, when did everything go awry? Was it the new left in the 1960s? Was it Marxism in the 19th century? Was it the Protestant revolution? Was it the French revolution? Was it nominalism from William of Ackham? We always play this game. What was the chief cause of all of our else? In this case, in this very specific case, it's feminism because feminism says that men and women are exactly the same. They relate to sex in exactly the same way. They have the exact same kinds of sexual desires. You can put them at a university together through co-education. Heck, you can put them in the same dorm room because they're all basically the same. Nothing could go wrong. And things go wrong as men and women are not the same. So here, what happened? I think the planist reading of this is, boys are kind of dogs sometimes, especially when they're pretty drunk. And even if they get enthusiastic, verbal consent from the woman, this is not a chivalrous thing to do. This is, guys should not be doing this stuff with girls, whether they're sober, especially if they're inebriated. And so they did the same thing to each other. Jane Doe might have been drunker than the guys. The guys might have been drunker than Jane Doe. We don't know. Regardless, they did the same thing to each other. And yet, we all kind of know the guys bear more responsibility because guys have a greater desire for sex and women are the weaker sex and guys are supposed to protect women. And you're not supposed to take advantage of a girl if she's drunk, even if she's enthusiastically consenting. We all kind of know that, but feminism won't let us say that. I remember this even in elementary school. I realized that feminism is wrong in about third grade because we were being taught in school that boys and girls are exactly the same, identical other than a few cosmetic differences. We can all do the same jobs. We should all pursue the same things. We're exactly the same. Also, boys should never hit girls. That was another lesson we were taught. And I knew at the age of eight that that didn't make any sense. I guess you're never supposed to hit anybody, but we were taught, no, it's especially bad for boys to hit girls. Also, boys and girls are exactly the same. Well, those two sentences cannot be simultaneously true. And so if you apply that to, you know, given someone a little punch on the playground, all the more should we apply that when it comes to sex, but the feminism will not allow us to do that. So then you have that absurdity. The men and women are the same. On top of that, we have this new absurdity that's about to be enshrined in New York State law, which is that whenever two people have had a few drinks and then engage in sexual Congress, that they are raping each other, which means that statistically, maybe not all sexual activity, but maybe the majority of it is rape. Does anybody really believe that? No. This brings us back to, you know, Andrea Dworkin or something radical feminists saying that essentially all heterosexual sexual intercourse is rape, which is, look, if you're some crazy lunatic fringe feminist, maybe you believe that, but no normal person believes that. So according to what Kathy Hokello is going to make the New York State law, and we'll get to some of the other Democrat governors in a second as it pertains to the midterms, but according to what is about to become the New York State law, all sexual activity is technically rape, but people are still going to do it. They're still going to bum bugglies. It just means that people will now be liable. They'll be vulnerable to accusations of rape and they will not have the law to protect them. So you say, okay, well, maybe you have this mutually assured destruction. You know, maybe there's some game theory working out here. If two people are always at risk of being accused of rape and being prosecuted for it, then maybe they won't accuse each other. But the thing is, we all know that the men are more legally vulnerable than the women. And at a deep level, we all know that probably they should be because men are stronger than women, and men, some would say, are a little more calculating, maybe even more reasonable in these situations, and women are a little more emotional. And you start saying these things. The feminists are going to try to bite your head off, but what else are we supposed to say? On the surface level, the idea that any two even slightly buzzed people getting it on is rape. On the surface level, that's kind of crazy. But there is a deeper reading of that, which tells me that in a weird way, we're kind of reinventing freedom from first principles. You know, we have the modern liberal view of freedom, which is just just do whatever you want. do a bunch of ketamine off of people's naked bodies and engage in menazia wheat and do all sorts of freaky stuff. It's freedom, you know, it's your choice, freedom's just neutrality and choosing. And yet we all suspected a deep level that's not really what freedom is because the older and sturdier classical conception of freedom is no, no, no, those people aren't free. Drug addicts aren't free. Degenerates aren't free. Freedom is willing, predicated on knowledge. So you have to have a disciplined will and you have to have some knowledge in order to be free. This is why we have age of consent laws, which is at least tangential to this conversation about Cornell. We have age of consent laws because kids don't have disciplined wills. They're famously undisciplined and kids don't know that much. That's why they go to school. That's why these kids are at school in the first place. So they're not really free and that's why we limit the kinds of rights that they can exercise. It's not to oppress the kids. It's because they are not capable of exercising their freedom. And so in a weird way, this case, I know everyone's focused on all the salacious details and the identity of the alleged perpetrators. I guess everyone now is an alleged perpetrator. But what's more interesting about the case is that it's just revealing all of these inconsistencies, all of these contradictions within liberalism, the liberal view of sex, within feminism, the feminist view of men and women. It's revealing all of these inconsistencies all the way down to what freedom even means. It's like the IQ bell curve meme. The dummy says drunk sex is non-consensual, you know? And then it's kind of like the midwit in the middle says, no, no, no, as long as people give their verbal consent, then it's totally consensual. And then there's this really traditional, deeply conservative view, which is, no, if you're out of your wits, if you're out of your minds, if you're out of your inhibitions, in a way it isn't consensual. But what that means is we need to reimpose standards and norms around sexual behavior. And if the old feminist liberal ones that we tried out from the 1960s, beginning of co-education, free love, sexual revolution, feminism, if those are leading to this, then something is wrong with those ideas. If your principles have gotten you to this point, what good are your principles? You know, maybe some of your principles are wrong. And maybe, I don't know, look, maybe I'm a little glass half full kind of guy. I look on the bright side a little too much. There is a chance though that looking at this just universally condemned disgusting orgy at Cornell, maybe we can say, okay, look, the guys probably didn't violate the letter of the law in any way. And the girl might be hoisted with her own petard because the things that she's accusing the boys of, she, by her own logic, committed to a greater degree. But if we all acknowledge that this is wrong, I have an idea. Maybe boys and girls should be kept a little more separate at the universities. Maybe the school should clamp down on alcohol or at least ketamine. Maybe the teachers and the culture makers should stop encouraging promiscuous sex. Maybe we should stop leading women into these dangerous situations. Maybe, look, people say that one in four women on a college campus is going to be raped, which would make the Cornell campus or Harvard yard more dangerous for women than the back alleys of Botswana. I don't think anybody actually thinks that. But if you are perceiving that there is something wrong with the hook-up culture, if you're even going so far as to call it a rape culture, then look, that culture is wrong. And guess what, that culture is entirely the product of liberalism and feminism. It is entirely the product of that. So if you want to fix that culture, you can call it rape culture, it isn't really rape, but okay, you want to call it that. If you think that culture is wrong, great. Then let's rip out the root of that, which is liberalism and feminism. And let's go back to a more traditional Christian morality and ethic when it comes to sex. Be very, very funny. It would be delightful in many ways. If it were the leftists and the feminists on campus who got us to re-implement Christian sexual ethic. It probably won't happen. They'll just live within the consistencies and just unfairly go after men. But if we could get that, I'm in. Sign me up. Let's go sister. It's the feminists, the liberals and me. We can all unite in making everybody more conservative and Christian. Okay. I mentioned Governor Kathy Hoekle in New York. We got to get to some of these governor and Senate races. We conservatives have had our heads in the sand long enough. We've been trying to deny the reality that we're seeing increasingly in the polls. We said, oh, you know what? The polls are just kind of bad in August. But you know, they're going to tighten up. And well, it's go time, guys. The elections are already taking place right now in a lot of states. And things are not getting better for Republicans. Things, according to the polls, are getting worse, including in deeply red states. Before we get to that, I want to tell you about good ranchers. Go to goodranchors.com/noles. There comes a weekend every fall when you got side to grill and you realize this might have been a mistake. But right now it is prime fall, whether dark at six o'clock and you're standing outside tending a stake in the jacket. So consider this your reminder. Grilling season is not over yet. And if you're going to fire up the grill, put something good on it, that would be good ranchers. Frankly, I would say that meat almost always tastes better, cooked in a pan than on a grill. I know that's a very, that's a very controversial statement. Good ranchers though, is the kind of meat that will taste better than all the other meat anywhere you cook it. I mean, you could throw it in a microwave. It would still taste better than all the, it's so, so good. I strongly recommend, if you want the cuts that I lean into the most, the bone in New York strip, the wagyu burgers. If you get the filet mignon, the newer filet mignon, they're phenomenal. The sausages, the everything, the everything. And the chicken, the chicken is the best chicken you're going to get. October's a great month to start right now. Go to goodranges.com/noles. Get $50 off plus free meat with every order when you start a plan. You can even build your own box, starting as low as $129. Again, that is goodranges.com/noles. Get it at VLAS. $50 off plus free meat with every order. Goodranges.com American meat delivered. Down in Texas, deep in the heart of Texas. Red Republican Texas. Things are looking bad. You have this hot Senate race, one of the most hotly contested in the whole country. This is James Talleriko versus Ken Paxton. James Talleriko says God is non-binary. James Talleriko says the thing he loves most is trans kids. James Talleriko invokes the Blessed Virgin Mary to defend slaughtering babies in the womb. James Talleriko should be laughed out of any town hall in Texas. He's winning. He's winning right now. We have the polls. Let's get to Texas governor in a second. Let's get to Texas Senate right now. This is from Real Clear polling, which has pretty reliable averages. Right now, Talleriko is at 48.2. Paxton is at 45.4. And some of the polls that constitute the RCP average are much worse than that. The latest polls to come at a New York Times, Sienna puts Talleriko at 51 Paxton at 45. It's a six point gap for the Democrat, an egregiously bad Democrat in Texas. Now you say, "Oh, I don't believe the New York Times." Okay, here's the Fox News poll, 51 to 49, Talleriko. What are our friends over at CalShi say? CalShi says James Talleriko is a 66% chance of winning. That's the latest CalShi average you got, you got Paxton right here in the prediction markets at 34%. Moving in the wrong direction. Talleriko is up to points according to CalShi. Paxton is down to points. So you say, okay, New York Times poll, whatever, I don't believe New York Times. You say Fox News, they can get a little squishy. Sometimes I don't believe Fox News. How about Rasmussen? Rasmussen is a very reliable right wing conservative leaning pollster. Rasmussen, 46 to 45, Talleriko, Democrat in Texas, okay. Bad enough. Let's get to Florida. Florida is now used to be a swing state when I was a kid. Florida is a reliable Republican state now. Or it was, it was a reliable Republican state. Here we have the Florida governor polls. This is from 270 to win the average of three polls here, puts a Democrat, David Jolly, 43.3, Byron Donalds at 47, okay, great, okay. So Donalds is looking good, right? In the average of the polls, he's up. The problem is some of the polls are looking worse. So there's a change research poll. Is it, that's a Democrat poll firm? Change research has Jolly up, two points. Some of those counties in Northwest Florida and the Panhandle that Republicans could count on, not looking so hot, looking like turnout is a little bit more depressed. So okay, you say Stetson University poll, much bigger swing. Byron's at 51% to 39%, okay, good. I feel pretty good about that. St. Pete poll though, it's essentially a tie, 43 to 44, Donalds has it by one point. And some of the polls are older. So in the older polls, Byron's looking really, really good. The polls seem to be tightening up here. I still think Byron pulls it out. I think Byron's got a very strong war chest. He's got the enthusiastic support of President Trump. There was a little bit of a brutal primary there on the Republican side, probably still some sore feelings. I'm hoping that Governor Desantis counted his name. Governor Desantis was one of the greatest governors in the country. How did his name escape my memory? Governor Desantis has come out into his Byron. So I think he pulls it out. I think, I hope, we'll see. Let's go back to Texas. Texas for a second because you say, all right, the Texas Senate race, that's been tight last few times. There was a worry that Beto or Ror could be Ted Cruz that didn't happen. There was a worry that Colin Allred would be Ted Cruz, then Ted came in at the last minute with this great ad about men and women's sports, totally destroyed Colin Allred. What about what about the governor's race, though? Senate races are often up for it, but the governor's race, that should be solid, right? Not so much. We got right now, the Democrat, Gina, he knows I, I'm sure probably mispronouncing your name. Right now, Hino Hoza is neck and neck with governor Abbott, and in the latest poll, she's leading him. The Democrat is currently leading the Republican for governor of Texas. So the average of the polls is 48.6 Abbott, 47.2, Hino Hoza. This is Sianna College, poll 49 to 46, Democrat. Not a good sign. Not a good sign here, okay. What about Ohio? When we could go through all of these races, Ohio right now, Ohio, which like Florida was a swing state, then in recent years, it's become a reliable Republican state. Right now, the Democrat is leading the Republican in the Senate race and in the governor race. So you're talking about Shared Brown versus John Hustead in the Senate race. Brown is leading right now. In the governor race, it's Vivek versus Amy Acton, Amy Acton is leading right now. And people want to blame it. They say, well, it's because of this candidate or that candidate. It's because of Vivek is the most prominent Republican candidate running there, obviously. Say, oh, it's Vivek isn't running a good campaign. It's not about Vivek. Sure. Yes, every politician has ups and downs and selling points and negatives and whatever. It's both of the races. I'm seeing here a national trend. I hope I'm totally proven wrong, but the numbers are bad and they are getting worse. So what you have to do, this is my message to you. You beautiful Republicans, you many people listening right now are Republicans. You need to go vote right now. I don't want to be a doomer. I don't want to be blackpilling you. I don't want to make you despair and say, oh, well, it's all lost. We're going to give it the government to the Dems. I want to show you how close things are going to be even in red states to hopefully encourage you. Okay, you don't like this policy. You don't like that policy. You don't like there are so many wins that we've gotten. But just not having the Democrats win, just not having Kamala Harris win, is itself one of the greatest gifts. Normal people in America have been given in a very, very long time. It represents a net swing of like seven million illegal aliens. It represents a stopping of the rampant political persecution of conservatives, of Christians spying on parishes and prisoning pro-lifers under Joe Biden. It represents all sorts of stuff. Then on top of that, you have a lot of great stuff that came out of the Trump administration, a lot of good economic stuff. Obviously, the Iran War is complicated that a little bit, a lot of good economic stuff, a lot of deportations, totally closed border, a lot of reinvestment in America upwards of $20 trillion, nice tax cuts for everybody across the board. There's been a lot of good stuff, but this is very, very close. You need to get there and vote now. There are some people who are saying, well, there's a silver lining in the polling. Because weirdly, we could be losing these red states, but we might take back California. Very interesting poll about this. We'll see. Is Steve Hilton going to pull an upset and turn blue California red? Is he going to, after years of mismanagement by Gavin Newsom who burned the state down? Are we going to get a red wave against the other political tides in California? We'll get to those numbers in a second. First, I want to tell you about Bollum Branch. Go to bollumbranch.com/noles. Canada view LAS. Improving your sleep has now become a full-time hobby. People were in trackers on their wrist. You got the ring, sound machines, diffusers, powders, sends, supplements, blackout curtains, cooling gadgets, special lamps. They're going to help. Don't get me wrong. But at some point, perhaps you should start with the thing, touching you for eight hours. And that is your bedding. Bollum Branch makes it very easy to upgrade. I've slept on Bollum Branch sheets for the better part of a decade now. Multiple U.S. presidents have slept on Bollum Branch sheets. More importantly, your favorite podcaster has their phenomenal. I've gone out. I'm such a cheapskate. I've gone out and spent my own money to go buy Bollum Branch sheets for my family members. That's how much I love them and it's how much I love at least the Bollum Branch sheets. And maybe how much I love my family members. The bedding is just phenomenal. I love the sheets, but I also just got a comforter from Bollum Branch. A new one. It's excellent. Upgradiously, right now, at Bollum Branch. Get 15% off your first order. Plus free shipping of Bollum Branch.com/noles, Canada view LAS with code Noles. That is Bollum Branch, B-O-L-L-A-N-D branch.com/noles, code Noles to unlock 15% off, exclusions apply. Okay. So this is the other headline. You're seeing this from a lot of people. This okay, yeah. Florida's looking bad. Ohio's looking bad. Texas looking really bad. Yeah. Okay. Republicans probably going to get greened in the midterms, but there's this hope. At the same time, a Republican might win Governor of California. Okay. What do we have here? It's from 270 to win. Right now, there is really no evidence that the Republicans are going to win in California. I don't. I don't know. You're seeing these headlines everywhere. You're saying, the race is tightening. And look, there was this poll from independent voter news. It says, "Basera's at 48. Hilton is at 38. So that's a 10-point swing. There's another poll coming out. Well, I don't know how reliable the survey is. It shows that it's something like a six-point swing. He's coming. Yeah. And yeah, that's way better than what we were getting earlier in this race. Previously, it was 58 to 33 Democrats, 55 to 33 Democrats, 60 to 38 Democrats. Yeah. Okay. So it may be they're tightening a little bit. I don't see it. Please, California Republicans go out there and prove me wrong if your votes will count. I have experienced and other Republican friends have experienced some shenanigans at the polls when I was living in California. But sure, go out there. Try to do it. Turn your midterm hopes on California, guys. Do not allow the copium to lull you into a sense of complacency. It's a very fine line that Republican organizers have to walk right now, which is you can't totally despair. You can't tell people, look, it's all over, forget about it, go hide your money, hide your guns and just wait out the Democrat wave. You can't do that. I mean, that will become a self-fulfilling prophecy. But likewise, we cannot cope too much here and say, no, everything's great. And nobody's upset about anything. And the Democrats lines about affordability, they're not working. And the Democrats lines about healthcare, they're not working. And the Democrats stoking discontentment over the Iran War, that's not working. No, no, it is. It is working. It's playing out in the polls. On top of the historic trend, which is that Republicans generally lose in the, well, any party that's in power in the White House generally loses the first midterm. That's just kind of what happens. Get out there and vote right now. Do not, do not be, don't be an optimist or a pessimist. This is a spiritual takeaway from these political facts. Optimism and pessimism are two sides of the same coin. They're both feelings that are divorced from reality. I hate it. People say, are you more of an optimist or a pessimist? I'm neither an optimist nor a pessimist. I have hope. Hope is a theological virtue, hope is something we're command to have, hope is good, it's grounded in some facts. You know, there is this ultimate hope because no matter what happens, we can hope to have eternal life because our God comes and saves the world. So it's really grounded in something real, but hope is not optimism. Hope says, hey, you will have troubles in this world. Hope says the rain falls on the just and the unjust alike. But don't worry, if you're not, I have overcome the world. That's hope, okay? Hope is realistic and grounded. And so at the terrestrial level, at the political level, we can have hope. We can stem the tide a little bit. We might be able even to pull a few upset victories here, but you got to lock in, you got it. You cannot be divorced from reality. You can't fall into a political quietism that tells you to stay home. You can't fall into a political cope that says that the Democrats are so crazy that voters will never vote for them. They're voting for them. The voters are expressing a preference to the guy who says he loves trans kids, wants to chop off their genitals and says God himself is non-binary in Texas. Do not, do not fool yourself. Okay. So what are these issues? We talked a little bit about the Rand War, a little bit about affordability, whatever. Another big issue in the campaign is the AI data centers, AI generally is a big issue. People are concerned about AI. After the House, Mike Johnson, a very, very grounded and wise politician. Mike Johnson comes out and he says, you know, a lot of the anti-AI data center stuff that you're seeing online, that you're hearing from the podcasters, for instance, a lot of that is Chinese propaganda. I mean, do you think that with regards to China, I mean, I've had several tech executives and lawmakers to be clear, say that the information against data centers, that push back against data centers. This is coming from China. They believe that the Democrats are seizing on this, though. They're making this, they're messaging. They've been very clear. They're going to take this into the midterms. How do you fight that? This is what Democrats do. Every election cycle, they find something to, you know, go on to and say that this is doom and gloom and everyone will die if we don't win. Don't buy it. It is a Chinese side up. I really believe that. It's not a conspiracy theory. I think they're pushing those ideas. Mike Johnson is totally right about that. The Chinese are definitely pushing the anti-AI messaging in the United States. And they're doing that because we're in a war with China to see who will develop AI, the fastest and in the most effective way, this is a kind of arms race like we had with the Soviet Union in the Cold War. That's all true. We are in another Cold War with China. We've been in that Cold War with China for quite a while now and it could turn hot. It might be violent like the Cold War with the Soviet Union was. That's all real. But it isn't the whole story. And this is a point that I've made a number of times in the show and it's a point that pertains to the original Cold War with the Soviet Union, which is that the Soviets were bombarding the US with propaganda for decades. But just because it's propaganda doesn't mean that it doesn't contain a lot of truth. That's the key actually to good propaganda. The way that the Soviet Union was able to manipulate the American political system in the Cold War was by identifying real tensions, real anxieties and then playing them up. They did this probably most famously with the civil rights movement. They went in there and a lot of these civil rights groups were just fronts for communism. But the way that they were able to do that is that there were tensions over race revisions. They didn't just make it up. If they had gone in there and just made up some issue to worry Americans, it wouldn't have worked. That's what China is doing here. So Republicans need to be sensitive to this. Yes, the Chinese are stoking these fears because they want us to stop developing AI because they want to be this in the Cold War. That's true. But people really are concerned that they're going to lose their jobs. We actually have not seen a lot of job displacement yet from AI, but it could happen. Voters are not stupid. They're not idiots. They're not just ignorant ribs for worrying that AI will take their jobs. That could happen. Even if it hasn't quite happened yet, that could happen. Voters are not just ignorant stupid ribs for worrying that AI is going to drive up their energy costs. The increase in energy costs from the data centers has been relatively modest thus far, but there are certain markets, depending on their energy and electricity dynamics, there are certain markets that have seen prices go up considerably more. That has already happened, and it is not unreasonable to think that that could happen at a large scale. Voters are not just stupid ignorant ribs for worrying about a surveillance state. Now, we live in a surveillance state world, and voters are largely responsible for it. Okay, this is the HL-Mankin theory of democracy, which is democracy is the theory that the common man knows what he wants and deserves to get it good and hard. But we live in a surveillance state, and the call is coming from inside the house. We're the ones who do it. If you walk around with a cell phone, you are spying on yourself. You're allowing people to spy on you. Your phone is always listening to you. It's not that hard for foreign governments and for unethical people and hackers and things to get in and get your stuff to get your data. They can just buy your data. They don't even have to break the law a lot of the time. Okay, so we do that. We live in a world with mass surveillance everywhere. People behave differently than they did 20 years ago, because they know the cameras are everywhere and they're being filmed at all times. That's happening. So what is very important, I think, for Republican politicians, is we need to tell the truth and get the hard, important truths out there and say the Democrats are being cynical here, and they're being used or maybe allowing themselves to be used by the Chinese Communist Party, and this is bad for America, and this threatens our long-term security, and our financial prosperity, and this, that, and the other thing. But to quote Bill Clinton, "I feel your pain." I understand your concerns, and Republicans need to offer some kinds of guardrails and Republicans need to offer just some consolation and some evidence that they are taking those concerns seriously and will not just sell out the Main Street voter to increase GDP a little better to increase their own power a little bit. That's what they have to do. That's, you know, there are populist Republican politicians who do this very well. I think JD Vance does this very well. I think Trump obviously does this very, very well. A lot of figures within the Trump administration who have led this kind of populist streak in the Republican Party. But even that word is so funny. When the Democrats come out and say, "These Republicans are just playing to populism." What does populism mean? What does populism mean? It means you are appealing to the things that most people want. Do you know another name for that? Democracy. This is one of those terms. When the Democrats do it, when the liberals do it, and they appeal to these very popular issues, that's democracy. When Republicans do it, that's populism. The only difference between the two is democracy has a good connotation in our culture and populism has a bad connotation. We have to lean into a little bit of that. In a democracy, you need to work within the political confines of democracy. That is a truism that we have to acknowledge. And we have to treat the voters with respect because their concerns are legitimate. Okay. I think some Republicans get that. I think, you know, the Mike Johnson's get that. The Donald Trump's get that. The J.D. Vance's, you know, the people in the administration get that. But some of the more elite, built way type of Republicans, they don't totally get that. And if you go out there and you just say, "Hey, it's all just a bunch of nonsense. Don't worry about it. Stop being a dummy. It's AI is going to work out fine. You have nothing to worry about." You're going to be looking at a Democrat Senate, Democrat House, and a lot of Democrat governors. Now, speaking of the conservative movement, before I get to the Trans-New York Times executive who was murdered by her Asian in-laws, I want to tell you about Yaf. Go to Yaf.org/national-journalism-hiphon-center. If you are young and you know that you want to make an impact in media or politics, please do not spend the next five years waiting for someone to give you a permission slip to start. You can do it right now, okay? Having been in this world of political media for a long time, there's certain groups that just know how to do it and been doing it for a long time. One of those is the national journalism center since 1977. NJC has been helping launch young journalists into political media through a 12-week paid full-time internship in Washington, DC. This is not an internship where you spend three months getting coffee. You're working Monday through Thursday inside real political newsrooms, including the Daily Wire, with opportunities to contribute, published work. Then every Friday, you learn directly from prominent conservative journalists. Plus, you receive one-on-one investigative training from reporters who know how to dig deeper, uncover stories, and hold powerful people accountable. Here is a huge deal for anyone trying to afford DC at the beginning of their career. Housing Uncapital Hill is free. Can I get that? Can I stay at the National Journalism Center? It's expensive to be in Washington, DC. If you are serious about journalism, stop wondering how you're going to break in and go get the experience. Get off the sidelines and get into the game. Apply to the National Journalism Center today at yaf.org/national-journalism-center. Okay, my favorite coming yesterday. I did not pick this. This is from the producers. We'll see if they picked the right one. It's from Avroomi. It says, "Amazing how Christopher Pike is no longer eligible for execution." But this very fact makes her the perfect candidate for made medical assistance and dying so true. People were making this macabre joke early on, which is, okay, if the United States can't carry out executions anymore and they keep botching them whatever, the most efficient cost-effective way to execute criminals is to send them to Canada for medical care. We're going to send you the best doctors in Canada. That will lead to their executions much faster than the American justice system. But this point that Avroomi is making is not even a joke. There's no joke at all. Christopher Pike was being executed. They botched it. Now she reportedly has brain damage. And because she has brain damage, they say we can't execute her. Now of course, there comes a point in every execution between the judgment and before the death, at which the condemned person gets brain damage. In fact, that is an intrinsic part of execution, is your brain gets damaged. But because this is a slow motion execution, we somehow say, okay, we've paused it here and now we can't execute you anymore because you have brain damage. But if we sent this person to Canada, or I don't know, Oregon, or to any of these liberal states in America, the doctors would very earnestly say we should kill this person. Because if you have brain damage, you don't have a good quality of life and if you're suffering in any way, you should be killed by the state. There's no judge. You think it's a joke. It's really not a joke. If you sent Christopher Pike to one of these very left-wing states that has assisted suicide. And you didn't tell the people who she was or the circumstances of a brain injury. They would kill her faster than you can snap your finger. Okay. Speaking of death, a lot of death today, and just I guess in the culture. I mentioned this show yet, the story yesterday and I have to get to it. A trans identifying executive at the New York Times was just murdered by her Asian in-laws. Now it's confusing because if you look at a picture of the person who was murdered, it looks like a he. You can't quite tell the stature or the height. So maybe that would give it away. But apparently the guy with the beard is actually not a guy. He's a chick. He's a lady and he was murdered by his in-laws because it's not a he. Her wife, I guess is a lesbian ish. Her wife was being threatened by the person who was murdered. So before the The Asian in-laws murdered the trans-New York Times executive. The trans-New York Times executive threatened to kill her wife and her wife's parents, namely the in-laws who murdered the executive, which means there is some at least tenuous case to be made that the in-laws were acting not only to protect their daughter, but also acting in self-defense. Now it's unclear how immediate the threat was, it's pretty spooky. The story coming about out of this trans-New York Times executive is pretty disturbing stuff. A bunch of threats to kill the wife, quote unquote, and the family, apparently there was a history of abuse before that. You can read about this in The New York Post, the lesbians with the complicated lesbians were reportedly going through some kind of divorce. And then the murdered executive apparently gave the couple's kids a book about a child who has to deal with her mother being killed or dying. So that in itself kind of seems to constitute a threat, but then you have another fact of this case that crops up that doesn't make any sense, namely that these two ladies have kids. Oh, I had the two ladies get kids. I know that one of the ladies looks kind of like a man, but that's not enough to make a kid. So the two ladies got kids somehow. They either adopted the kids or they purchased the sperm of some man. I don't know. They went up to Cornell or something, apparently there's a lot to go around up there. Wherever they went, they went, they acquired sperm. They created children with the intent to deprive the kids of their natural father. And then they decided to go through a lesbian divorce because lesbians can't get divorced because they can't get married. But if they could get divorced because we pretend that they can get married, they do get divorced at the highest rates of any kind of people in any form of marriage. And now the kids are missing their father who's really one of their mothers who might not even be related to them because we don't know who the father is. So okay, it's sad for this guy. We should pray for the guy. I guess pray for the whole family. Sorry, not a guy, a girl. My political takeaway here is. How many things had to go wrong to get to that headline? How many bad decisions had to be made to get to that headline? This is a perfect example of, it's in the little things that the right begins. This is the perfect example of why you just can't sin. We take sin very lightly, even Christians take sin very lightly. We say, oh, you know, it's a venial sin. I'll say the naughty word, I'll lose my temper a little bit, I'll look at the naughty pictures, I'll do this, I'll do, I'll be a little lazy, I'll have the extra piece of pie, whatever, what they think is a minor sin. But sin gets control of you. And eventually, you're so deep, it feels very, very hard to get out. If the lesbians had not pretended to be married, all of this would be avoided. The pain to the children, the murder, the abuse, all of that would be avoided. If one of the ladies had not decided to stick herself all of a bunch of cross-sex hormones, maybe that lady would not have been so threatening and threatening the children that she was going to kill the other mother or threatening the mother or abusing the mother or threatening the parents or if, if, if, if, if, wouldn't it be nice if we, if we took sin a little more seriously with a little more gravity as politically important to even, because the way, if we think about sin at all, we just think of it as a personal level because over the last, not just even 60 years, over the last several hundred years of Western history, we have more and more thought of religion as some private thing that has no place in public life or we can't, you know, we can't force our religion on to other people or whatever. That really accelerated after the 1960s and 70s, but the seeds of that were there in the Treaty of Westphalia and the Peace of Augsburg and the settlements of the religious wars after the crack up of the political unity of Western Christendom. It was all there. So we think of it as a private thing, but it's not a private thing. The private sins of these people, where you say, look, you think that's a sin and I don't think that's a sin and, you know, we'll never be able to agree on this. The fact that we don't take religion seriously is an objective field of study. The fact that theology is basically missing in any serious way out of most universities. The fact that the Bible is at a schools. Their private sin of these two women is now a very public matter. It's hurting a lot of other people. It's hurting the in-laws who are now going to go to jail. It's hurting the kids who have been deprived of a parent or a pseudo parent. It's scandalizing society. In a sense, there's no such thing as a private sin. And there's no such thing as an amoral, irreligious polity because all policies, all governments have recourse to morality. So the question for us, I mean, it kind of brings us back to the thing we were talking about at the top with the Cornell 7, which is, at a certain point, conversations about legal and illegal have to go a little deeper to conversations about sin and grace, to conversations about vice and virtue. We can't just stay at the level of legal positivism. We can't just stay at the level of, well, you know, if it's legal, according to some legislator and some state, then you can't object to it. We can't just stay at the level of sophomore and high school libertarianism who read a Wikipedia page about Ein Rand and thinks he understands politics. We have to go a little deeper than that. A society does not flourish because of how happy it feels to have the abstract right to commit a lot of license and degeneracy. No society, no society flourishes when they're having ketamine-fueled orgies or when they're chopping off each other's body parts and purchasing children on the open market, even if it's legal, even if you can make some, in my view, basically idiotic political philosophical argument, ideological argument for it, no society flourishes with those substantive things. Do we have the guts? Do we have the cajonas? Do we have the mental faculties and the discipline of will to say, no, no, no, you know what? These things are wrong. We know they're wrong and no more of this. No more lesbian marriage, no more trans stuff, no more, no more men and women being treated exactly the same at universities because it doesn't work out well, no more, no more none of that. Do we have the discipline to do it? Judging by the poll numbers in the midterms, no, we don't, but I hope, I hope in the long run we do. Today's the Tuesday. The rest of the show continues. Now you do not want to miss it. Become a member. Kelly, as a check out for two months, free on All-I-Nual Plans. Every significant movement in history has started with protesting. No, of course. Uncle Todd. This is our generation civil rights. I have no idea what the protest is about. Bingo. Given the current climate, should have figured as polarizing as place sounders, even be allowed on campus. Can you hear me okay? Todd, this is a close personal friend of Chancellor Freeman. This is a decision I cannot find. Islam will conquer the West. Some more than you can. 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 vessel beings into a fond red mist. You need a course in safe weapons handling.