The Michael Knowles Show - BAR FIGHT | 2 Liberals vs. Michael Knowles | Leftist Blondie & Brian Allen

Episode Date: September 26, 2026

Michael Knowles steps back into the ring for another explosive Bar Fight, this time squaring off against sharp leftist voices Leftist Blondie and Brian Allen in front of a raucous live crowd in Nashville. The stakes are sky-high as they dive headfirst into explosive debates: claims that the majority of immigrants are more American than MAGA, arguments that to be happy in a relationship you must reject feminism entirely, and fiery takes on how the economy only helps the wealthy class.  It’s Knowles vs. the Left in a raw, high-energy rhetorical brawl at John Rich's Redneck Riviera. Expect heated exchanges, crowd reactions, and zero holds barred.Watch the fireworks erupt. Subscribe to Leftist Blondie here: https://youtube.com/@LeftistBlondie X — https://twitter.com/LeftistBlondie Follow Brian Allen on X: X — https://twitter.com/allenanalysis https://brianlallen.com - - - DailyWire: Become a Daily Wire Member and watch all of our content ad-free: https://get.dailywire.com/infidels 40% off annual plans with code FIGHT 🍿 Watch our new movie Run Hide Fight: Infidels https://www.dailywire.com/videos/run-hide-fight-infidels 📲 Download the free Daily Wire app today on iPhone, Android, Roku, Apple TV, Samsung, and more. 📘 My book "Speechless: Controlling Words, Controlling Minds" is available here: https://dwplus.shop/Speechless 📗 My book "Reasons to Vote for Democrats: A Comprehensive Guide" is available here: https://dwplus.shop/ReasonsToVoteForDemocrats 🕯️ Get your Michael Knowles candles: https://thecandleclub.com/collections/michael-knowles 👕 Don’t dress like a squish. Shop my merch here: https://dwplus.shop/MichaelKnowlesMerch - - - Socials: YouTube — https://youtube.com/@MichaelKnowles Facebook — https://www.facebook.com/michaelknowlesshow Instagram — https://www.instagram.com/michaeljknowles TikTok — https://www.tiktok.com/@notmichaelknowles X — https://twitter.com/michaeljknowles - - - Privacy Policy: https://www.dailywire.com/privacy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

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. We've all heard radio advertisements about owing the IRS money. They lean on fear and try to frighten you into calling.

Tax relief advocates does things differently. Whether you owe 5,000, 50,000, or 500,000, TRA offers an actual solution. Do not lose hope. TRA could reduce or even eliminate what you owe the IRS. Their passion is taxes in helping individuals and businesses settle their IRS problems. They've earned over 1,000 five-star Google reviews and an A-plus from the Better Business Bureau. There is no need to fear the IRS any longer. Substantial relief programs are available that can give you a fresh start. So do not delay.

Visit TRA.com. That is TRA.com or call 800-575-49-08. That is, once more, 800, 575 4908, tax relief advocates, real solutions for real people. Well, polls tell you what voters said at one moment. Calci gives you another way to follow a race, a live market that moves as traders respond to new information. In Michigan, Abdul Al-Sayed and Mike Rogers are competing in one of Cali's most traded midterm matchups. You can visit Cali's midterms hub to track how the market views the race and then trade an event contract on the outcome you think is going to happen. If you're right at settlement, each winning contract is worth

$1. See the market, make your call, trade what happens next on CalShe. Use code daily, DAI-L-Y to get up to $25 when you trade $25. That's CalShe, K-A-L-S-H-I-C-T Trade on anything. 18-plus only restrictions and eligibility requirements apply. Event contracts, trading involves risk and may not be suitable for all investors. Cal-Shee products are not available in all jurisdictions, prices, values, and available markets may differ from those mentioned. For more information, you can go see calshy.com slash regulatory. Tired of your car insurance rate going up even with a clean driving record, you're not alone. That's why there's Jerry, your proactive insurance assistant.

Jerry compares rates side by side from over 50 top insurers and helps you switch with ease. Jerry even tracks market rates and alerts you when it's best to shop. No spam calls, no hidden fees. drivers who save with Jerry could save over $1,300 a year. Switch with confidence. Download the Jerry app or visit jerry.ai slash wire. You break law, GtFO. You people are crazy.

Hold on, you opposed to the death of a child molester? I, for one, am not opposed to the death of child molester. Why are men committing suicide of more than women? Because of you. Okay, all right. Damn. Let's go. Let's go.

That's the end of the round. Welcome to Bar Fight. I'm Michael Knowles. I'm joined tonight by two guests. Our first guest dedicates most of her time to combating the patriarchy online. Please welcome, leftist blondie. I think we need to all realize, like, we're in a room of crazy people. And now our next guest, he's the founder of Allen Analysis, where he takes on government overreach, corruption, and media bias, a noble pursuit. It's Brian Allen.

Now here's how it works. We will be debating three of the most controversial topic. of our day. The bell rings. We duke it out for that round, and then our friends in the crowd can come up to the microphones to change the topic. If you think the topic's boring and you hate it and you want to talk about something else, that's fine. Or you can pick a fight with any of us. Do not wait. There is a time limit for each round. Anyone who comes up to the mic can win special prizes and a seat at our VIP section sponsored by Redneck Riviera Whiskey. Look at that. Lady, gentlemen, are you ready?

Ready? It's time for round one. Leftist Blondie, also known as Ann, kick us off. What is your topic? All right, my topic is the majority of undocumented immigrants are more American than MAGA. What's your argument? You guys don't agree? What?

I thought it was a friendly company here. So I think that one, not only do undocumented or undocumented immigrants contribute to our economy greatly, but they also are notably not as privy to crime as Americans are. Large statistics show that undocumented immigrants are far less likely to commit violent crime, murders, and other types of crime than American citizens are. I think they're less likely to support crime than MAGA, who supports a president who has 34 convicted felonies and got off scotch-free, by the way, and didn't have to deal with any of the consequences and got to vote for himself in both elections.

He sure is lucky, isn't he? For the worst criminal in the world, he's pretty lucky. He didn't have to go to jail. He got to be president. Okay, so you say that they contribute to the economy. I disagree with that, but let's let it be. You say they commit violent crime at lower rates. It's sort of disputable, but I'll let you have that one. You say they commit crime at lower rates, that's not true because they're illegal aliens. But let's put that aside even for a second. In what way does any of that make them more American than American citizens who voted for Trump, who are MAGA? In other words, by what definition of American are the illegal aliens, these foreign criminals, more American than American citizens? Sure. Well, I think one thing that constitutes being American is being pro-democracy and being pro the rule of law as it stands.

And I think supporting a violent criminal and a felon as the leader of our country is far less American than somebody who comes in here is seeking asylum and just looking for a better life and a democratic society to live in for their family and for the future of the country. Now, okay, you mentioned rule of law. Would you say that someone whose very distinction in the country is having broken one of the basic laws of the country? Would you say that that person respects the rule of law? If the law is something similar to jaywalking, then absolutely. Do you think national borders are similar to jaywalking rules? Do you think national borders are similar to jaywalking rules? Yeah, absolutely.

Okay, all right. Legally they are. But we don't have federal jaywalking laws, right? We don't have federal ticket givers to go around on the sidewalks of America. We don't have massive police forces that have been defended by both political parties for many decades to enforce jaywalking law, do we? Yeah, but there's an underlying, there's an underlying assumption that that's the way it should be, that we should be hunting people down on our streets and deporting them in the most cruel ways and deporting people who were here illegally. You're talking about the jaywalkers are the immigrants.

We should not hunt down the jaywalkers. I jaywalk myself. I'm a New York originally. But obviously, the majority of Americans... So we shouldn't deport people just for crimes. We should deport them for deportable crimes, namely entering the country illegally. Is there another deportable crime? They...

Or is this like a special case? It's just like a one-off thing. No, there are additional crimes that you can commit that will get you more expeditiously deported. But no, entering the country illegally, not having a right to be there. That's the sort of thing that gets you deported. And what's the benefit there? What's the benefit in deporting them? What, so they can try to come back illegally again?

I thought you said that in a matter... American is one who supports democracy and the rule of law. Well, the democracy elected members to Congress who passed a law saying that there's a way to get into this country, certain people have a right, certain people don't. You tell me that that's the definition of an American, and then you throw democracy in the rule of law right out the window when it suits you better. Are you throwing democracy in the rule of law right out the window when you jaywalk? Are you throwing democracy out the window when you speed a little bit over the speed limit? Well, I think we should also still have speeding tickets. There's obviously tears to this. I suppose that's true, but

you're the one arguing that we should only enforce some laws and not others. I'm saying we should enforce all of the laws. You're the one that's arguing that we should only enforce some laws and not others because for some reason Donald Trump got to get off on 34 felony count charges of falsifying business records. What's the criminal punishment for the crime that you're alleging? For the third, wait, alleging? Yeah. Alleging?

Yes. Do you believe that he got a conviction for this? It's not alleged. You're saying that president. It's not alleged. What is the criminal punishment for the crime you're saying Trump is guilty of? There's things like fines. He could have gotten jail time, but he got none of it.

He didn't even get probation. And who determined that? The judge. Well, I think that's how our justice system works, so I feel pretty good about it. In the interest of not infearing with him becoming the next president of the United States. Hold on. Where was the judge? Was the judge in some really red conservative state?

You tell me? The judge was in New York. Does that matter? Which is a pretty blue state. Well, I guess the point that you're making is... So biased judges, Republicans don't exist in blue states, guys. You heard it here from Michael Knowles. Republicans don't exist in blue states.

Do you think the judge in the Trump case was a Republican and not appointed by a Democrat? I didn't say that. Okay. I'm just saying you made the point. You made the point that he's in a blue state. I think you're spinning in circles on Trump, and I think you're getting off topic. But I think we should, before we move on,

we should get to the point of the main question, which is, are these illegal aliens, more American than American citizens? And look, they're just not, right? By definition, they're not Americans. I know we live in this world where we have to pretend, like, we don't know the meaning of basic words.

We don't know what a woman is. We don't know what a man is. But we do know what a woman is. We do know what an American is. and it's an American citizen. So as people literally are not Americans. But let's say we stretch the definition of American into some woo-woo wonderland.

Let's say that an American is... Nothing's woo-woo about it. Well, we're redefining something as other than it is. Can someone tell me if I've said anything woo-woo? I think it's woo-wooing as much as they are defined in this context by not being American. But let's say, okay, an American is one who contributes to the economy. We know with certainty that about 61% of illegal alien households

receive some major form of welfare. that's compared to 37% of Native-born Americans. So they take more than Native-born Americans. Is it that they speak the same language that we do? They're not eligible to receive certain social welfare programs. And yet they do anyway. How? How?

Well, I didn't say they receive all of the social welfare programs. I said they receive at least one. Where's that from? The status from the Center for Immigration Studies. What social welfare? Well, it varies by the immigrant household. Do you really have a question about the statistics? Or are you just upset that I've come with a case with that number?

I do wonder what social welfare they're receiving. Is it Social Security? Is it... It can be... No, not Social Security. Though they also steal that. But it can be... I don't think you have a separate about it.

It can be food. Regardless, let's move on to the next criterion. Is it that they speak the same language that we do? They don't. Less than 60% of illegal aliens speaking with proficiency. I never came up with this criteria. I know. I'm trying to be generous.

I'm trying to be generous to your argument by seeing if there's any way that we can stretch the definition of being an American to include these people. Is it that they've served in the military? They don't. None of them have served in the military. Is that they contribute to their neighborhoods. They volunteer. No, if you look at all immigrant households, including legal immigrants, they volunteered about half the rate of native-born Americans.

Any way you slice it, these people are literally not American, just by the definition. Volunteer for what? Volunteer to help in their communities. They're not civically engaged at half the rate as Americans are. Are these registered social welfare organizations? Are these... Yeah, nonprofit organizations, non-governmental organizations, volunteering for...

It's 15% for immigrant households, 28% for... households 28% for native born. Okay and did you know that okay damn it sorry I don't think I'm supposed to go ahead of any questions over there that's it's a bar you can get a little loose you know yeah for the panel uh first of all uh blessed lent mr. Knowles good to see you thank you thank you so you said that illegal aliens and I'm sorry they're not undocumented because they never had documents to begin with that's what it means to be undocumented as they don't have documents they are illegal aliens they're not documented the point is you said that they don't commit nearly as many crimes as Americans.

If they commit any crimes while they are here illegally, that's one more crime than there should have been in this country. You understand? So then should we start deporting people who commit other crimes here? Why would we make that explicit as a citizen? Somebody say yes. Wait, wait, wait, someone said yes. Can we get the confirmation on that?

We should deport criminals? So when you go over 10 miles over the speed limit, we should deport you? Get this guy out of here. He said, he said, based if we deport the criminals. Yeah, I'm kind of open to it. It depends on the criminals. Well, then we should deport the president of the United States. I'm down for that. I'm so glad we agree. You heard the distinction that he made. The distinction was, look, we got to deal with the criminals who are already here who are citizens, but any single crime that an illegal alien commits is gratuitous. And I think that we should lock those people up. Why would we send them back to their own countries to commit crime there and then to try to come back? Well, hold on. I'm answering. Wait your turn. It's okay. Look, why wouldn't we lock those?

people up and put them through the same due process that we do for American citizens. Why wouldn't we deport them before they commit the crimes? One sec. Why would we send them back to their own countries to go commit the crimes there or to come back again and commit the crimes again here? Well, they got in illegally the first time, why wouldn't you think they go? Right, we should enforce the border. Isn't this the same argument that you guys give for gun laws? Like, oh, well, we can't take away guns because people will get guns anyway.

We can take away the open border and we did under President Trump. If we incarcerate them without and not deport them, we are now paid. We are now paying for their upkeep. We are paying for their bed, their food, their shelter. We are not supposed to be doing that with illegal aliens. You cross illegally? You break the law? GTFO.

So breaking the law is a sufficient criteria for deportation. Is that correct? So then we should deport the President of the United States. I'm so glad we agree. Thank you, sir. What's your name? The President of the United States cross the border illegally? I don't think so.

No, but he committed 34 felonies and was found guilty of defamation of what. woman that he raped. He didn't want to anybody. Excuse me. Oh, yeah. Absolutely. That is slimmer right there. You know, CBS, ABC News had to pay $15 million to President Trump for that exact defamation.

So I would be very, very careful of accusing him of a . . . . . for what specifically? For what specifically? For what specifically? They had to pay $15 million. George Stephanopoulos and ABC News. For specifically the accusation of him? Yes. then why is he paying for denying that

occurred? How do you reconcile those two things? It didn't happen. Trump was not convicted of he was charged and had to pay out money for losing the case for defaming her,

for denying that the rape happens. There was a civil suit pertaining to various claims of sexual assault and George Stephanopoulos went on ABC News the hatchet man for Bill Clinton went on ABC News as a journalist and he said Donald Trump is guilty of

and was found guilty of and they had to pay $15 million because that's a lie and that's defamation. And you might have to pay it too, so I'm trying to save you money. Well, he can come from me. I don't have that much. But the problem is my question is still not being answered. And the intelligent people in the crowd will understand this. The question was, how do you reconcile those two things where he was forced to pay up after denying the claim about RIP? But also somehow he had to be paid for someone saying that he someone. How do you reconcile those two things in the justice system unless one of those things

that's corrupt and then how do you prove that? Because, I mean, the actual short answer of this, though it's somewhat more nuanced, is that there were civil claims regarding sexual assault, but there was no criminal conviction ever of anything like . And so the journalists got sloppy, kind of like you're getting sloppy with your language, and they had to pay a lot of money because that's a very serious claim and it minimizes the claims of real victims. So, all right, next question. All right. So first I just want to express support for the long-standing Western legal tradition of exile for crimes. But the question to the panel, the question to the panel today is who's more American,

the illegal immigrant who's been here 20 years or the H-1B who's been here three? That's a good question. Do we want, Brian, we haven't heard from you yet. Well, I think there's a distinction, right, between a person who crossed the border illegally as opposed to someone who did cross the border illegally, but then. and maybe overstayed their time. Because you guys didn't really dive into the distinction there, right? You said illegal immigrants are people who cross the border illegally,

but there are many people who cross the border legally, but then end up being undocumented along the way. So there's a distinction there. As opposed to address this question whether or not a person is an H-1B and they're more American than a person has been in for 20 years, I would say the person who's been here 20 years is more American than a person has been in for three years. You know, you have been here for long enough to understand the culture, the language, the nuances, you could relate more with the people.

Sure, you know, you're not documented, but you understand enough. It's just a minor point. Sure, you're not, like, technically American at all, but... So what makes an American, Michael? Well, it's a great question. I'm so glad you asked me, because in answer to your question, neither of them are American, the illegal alien who's been here for 20 years or the H-1B who shows up so that corporations can get slave labor from India. neither of them are actually American. And so what makes it...

I agree with you. I agree with you. Wait, do you think that somebody... Because I have a question, because we're getting into this whole thing where American equals legal citizenship status. That's what you believe. I think there's more to it than that, but that's at least a minimal aspect. Yeah. Okay, because I think that somebody who has lived here their whole life

has worked to support the American dream and the American economy and cares about this country, cares about building a family here, which, by the way, more undocumented immigrants and more immigrants omarole live in traditional household with two parents in the home, not just one parent, like a lot of Americans tend to do. They're also more Catholic, if you didn't know that, from the southern border specifically. They are overwhelmingly more Catholic.

We're still fixing the Protestant problem in this country. Don't worry. We're fixing it. Don't worry. Hey, now I grew up Protestant. Well, I want to win this round, so I'll cut it out with the Protestant jokes. Sorry, go on. Yeah, but look, the problem is,

I think somebody who has lived here, who's worked here to support the American dream, who has a family and builds upon this idea that we have, of becoming a melting pot and becoming a place where you can literally come from anything is far more American than somebody who sits here and supports what happened on January 6th where they were yelling to hang Mike Pence. Do you support that? I like Mike Pence, so I don't want to hang him.

No. Okay, so you condemn the J-6ers for yelling to hang Mike Pence? No, I think the J-6ers are basically fine. And I think there was a political witch-hunt, and I think they rigged the election. Can we get like a- Yes, sir. Yes, sir. And I think the only person who died in political violence that day,

was a pro-Trump J-Sixer who was killed by a trigger-happy cop on Capitol Hill. Look, and I think that's unfortunate. Wait, so do you think that that's a trigger-happy moment, but with Alex Freddie or Renee Good, that's not a trigger-happy moment? Yeah, that's exactly what I think. Okay, so people sorting the Capitol, okay, someone driving away from ice, not okay. We'll drive into ice. You're kind of getting the direction a little bit off there. Yeah, I think that running around the Capitol in a horn hat, you know, with a police escort is not great, but it's not a crime. President, but driving an SUV into a cop, he's not a good idea.

Six hours while they called for his death, by the way. The thing you guys accused leftist of doing. We keep getting off the topic of, okay, maybe we'll get back onto the topic. But we have to answer a more important question, which is, who won that round? Who gets to go sit at the Redneck Riviera VIP table? Was it the first questioner? Raise your hand. Raise your hand.

It was Metz-Mets-Mets-Mets. Was it the second questioner? I think it was number two, sir. Enjoy your Redneck Riviera whiskey with your Mayflower cigars, with your beautiful Daily Wire merch. Go pick out one of those cool hats. It's time for round two. Brian, what is your topic?

All right. So my topic is that America practices strict capitalism for the country's poorest, yet open socialism for the country's wealthiest. Let's get started. What's your argument? And the reason I say that we could go back as soon as the COVID pandemic, right, during a PPP scam. We had multiple rich corporations, including publicly traded corporations who were told not to apply, but they still did apply, who raked in millions of dollars from the government. Can I just start out and say, I agree with you.

The COVID lockdowns are one of the largest transfers of wealth from the poorer classes to the wealthier classes in human history. I blame the Democrats because they're the ones who shut it down in the States. But on that point, I totally agree with you. So you could agree that the corporations get in $700 billion, right? People like the Kushner family, Yeezy, who are billionaires, walking away with millions of dollars. I think Yeezy got a little bit hit, you know, in recent years. He might be 100 millionaires still, but anyway. He was a billionaire.

At the time, he was a billionaire, right? But ultimately, he walked away with millions of dollars from... the federal government, but they're rich, right? But you have the future of our country, the students, right, asking for subsidies for health, for education, and they're told, well, kick rocks, figure out yourself, it's capitalism, you took the loan, paid off yourself, right? It's only $113 billion we're talking about here, whereas the corporations walked away with three quarters of a trillion dollars. Now, hold on. Are college students, the poorest Americans? That was your prompt, right?

The richest versus the poorest? Correct. They are amongst the poorest, but that leads into my broader... Because I thought they had a higher-than-average earnings potential and expected income than the average American. Earning potential if they finish college, right? A lot of them don't finish college because... But then they have less student debt if they don't finish. Well, in a sense, right?

They have less student debt, but they still have all those years of debts, right? But that's not the point. The point is these are the future of our country. You know, these are the people. We need to teach the next generation, right, to be smarter so we can compete with China, right? So we can compete with Russia, right? So we can compete with all our adversaries. Education is a key factor in that.

But we're telling these kids, well, go do it yourself. Go figure it out, kick rocks. Whereas the corporations, you know, they live God-free. A lot of them barely pay in the taxes. Okay, I want to see that card. Let me see that card. Thank you. So the claim is, America practices strict capitalism for the country's poorest, yet open socialism

for the country's wealthiest. Correct. So the very wealthiest benefit from socialist policies and the very poorest or forced to just fight for themselves. Strict capitalism. Okay. Now, then we have to ask a question. For every dollar that the poorest Americans pay in taxes, local, state, and federal,

how much do they get back in government programs? What's that number? It's $6.17. For the highest earning quintile of Americans, for every dollar that they pay in taxes to the government, what do they get back in government programs? What's the number? 11 cents. They can afford it.

They could afford it. They can afford it. They're billionaires. They have a lot of money. That's just a right off for them. That's a trip to South of France. That's nothing to them. I didn't know Elon Musk needed Social Security checks.

I don't think he does. But the claim was... that the poorest are left to fend for themselves, while the richest are getting all these nice handouts. And so my question then is, what is the effective income tax rate for the richest quintile of Americans? If they pay taxes, that is, right?

Sure, it seems... They do. Here's the effective median income tax. Sure, it seems high, right? There are certain states that have state taxes and we'll pay federal. Nationwide. 31%. What is the effective rate applies

if they actually pay their taxes and they don't tax evade? That's effective tax rate. That includes tax evasion. 31%. What is the effective tax rate for the poorest quintile? Something in the 20s?

No, it's actually less than zero because they're net takers. So they effectively don't pay any... Well, it depends. It depends on a household, right? It depends on... It doesn't. It literally is just the bottom quintile versus the top quintile,

which totally disproves your claim. So then I think you might ask, you bring up the corporations. This is a very good point. Because there is corporate welfare in America. Now, corporate welfare is promoted by the right, in some cases, but it's promoted by the left too for various favored businesses and industries. So both sides do it.

It's about $180 billion per year in corporate welfare paid out by the government. Then the question becomes, in terms of means-tested welfare programs, what is the total annual spend? I'm not talking Medicare, I'm not talking Social Security. Means-tested welfare, what's the spent? $1.7 trillion, almost 10 times the so-called corporate welfare. So any way you slice it, look, we give a lot of money to the poor, I'm for giving money the poor. A lot of these government programs don't work because they're full of fraud and they're

ineffective. They violate subsidiarity, but whatever. In principle, I'm for it. My only point is your claim is totally bunk because in this country, the rich pay for basically everything, and the poor get a ton of free stuff. No, well, I'm not referring to welfare and Section 8, so on and so forth. That's not what we were talking about here. I'm talking about the fact that we all pay taxes, right? Well, some of us pay taxes. A lot of us would not, right? But we We still do pay our taxes, right? We're Biden's citizens, or we go to prison, right? But, you know, our taxes aren't going to better infrastructure, road systems, high-speed rail.

Our taxes are going to the Middle East to fight never-ended wars, three, four trillion dollars in Afghanistan. Well, I thought Joe Biden had a big infrastructure bill, didn't he? But the Republicans actually fought very hard to block that. And now they're all taking credit for Joe Biden's hard work. No, I don't want credit. You can take credit for that. I don't want the credit. Well, I see a lot of him like Nancy Mace, she takes a lot of credit for the money that went to her district.

Yeah. But I remember her voting against it, right? So a lot of Republicans, they'll vote against it and say it's bad when it's happening because it's topical and they can get some points, some political capital. But ultimately, we need to spend money in our country instead of spending on endless wars in the Middle East, regime changing, and fight in wars that has nothing to do with us and killing Americans. We need to spend money here. Ryan, as I just mentioned, you say we need to spend money here for the poor. So $1.7 trillion a year in means-tested welfare, how much do you want to spend? 1.8? 1.9? How much more do you want to spend?

I don't want welfare. We don't need more welfare. We need investments, not just random investments, right? Education, right? High-speed rail. So we, hold on, we need to give money to people who are disproportionately wealthier than the poorest Americans, namely college students? Well, college students aren't wealthier than Americans. They are. No, no, no, no, they're not. Because I know people who are in college right now who are working two jobs to pay for college, right, to pay for their loans that they took. I mean, they're co-sign. But now because you're going to college means you're wealthy.

So that's not a fact. Why do they go to college? Because they want to have better prospects when they graduate. Do they have better prospects when they graduate college? It depends on what they... Actually, there's my point. It depends on what they go to college for, right? If you go for a vacation, right?

Not just a vacation. If you go for something technical, right? All right, fine. You know, I studied history and Italian literature at college. It was the least practical major I could possibly have. But the Daily Wire promises they're going to pay me any day now. The first time in 10 years, they're going to pay me. Do we have any questions?

Hey, Michael, can I interest you in a rogue, 6 million? Don't even do this to me, Satan. Get behind me. Because I, truly, like... I have been led to the desert like our lord. It is Ash Wednesday when we are filming this, and I said I am giving up those delicious lip pillies, those poisonous nicotine bouches. And then you show up,

you say, Michael, all the kingdoms of the world can be yours. If you only bow down to my robe. No. I was going to open with boring, because, okay, this last segment, the taxes, it's important. This question's for Blondie. Okay, so what's your first? favorite part of illegal immigration? Is it...

My favorite part of illegal immigration is all the crime they commit. I love it. I love the crime that they bring in and love that it's less than the average American citizens. Wait, hold on, wait, wait. I'm not... I was going to give you multiple choice. Okay, okay. Let's go. Is it... Can we do that back, though? Can I give you, like, a pop quiz afterwards? Yes, please. All right, let's go. Okay, can you... Is it the fact that brown people serve you food? That's delicious? No, I love it. actually the most of white people do it. Wait, wait, wait, wait. Or is it the fact that you don't know any and you can love them from a distance and annoy everyone at Thanksgiving?

No, unlike Harry Sisson who was on here, I let all of the illegal immigrants into my home. I house them all. Based. Every single one of them is in my home back in Florida. Nice. All of them. Okay. Can we do a pop quiz now? Yeah, please quiz me. Pop quiz now. Okay, just simple answer. Trump slash MAGA versus an illegal immigrant. In the Epstein files 38,000 times. Trump are, Trump are, immigrants? What? Amigrants? Hold on. Okay. Wait, I guess he's right because...

Hold on his name over here. He's also an immigrant himself. You know, he's a new generation. He's from Germany, right? So I guess he's technically correct. Oh, Drump. Okay. Hey, wait, what was your, what was your question? Yeah, in the Epstein files 38, 38,000 times.

Immigrants or Trump? Probably Trump. Probably Trump. That's what I was thinking. Has 34 felony convictions? Can I ask you a question? Average immigrant or Trump? or Trump?

Out of how many illegal board crossings? We're doing pop quiz. What happened to our pop quiz? Come on. Real it back in. Focus. That's what the coyotes do. We're in class right now.

Lock in. Okay. We've all heard radio advertisements about owing the IRS money that lean on fear and try to frighten you into calling. Tax relief advocates does things differently. Whether you owe $5,000,

$50,000 or $500,000. TRA offers an actual solution. Do not lose hope. TRA could reduce or even eliminate what you owe the IRS. Their passion is, taxes and helping individuals and businesses settle their IRS problems. They've earned over a thousand five-star Google reviews and an A-plus from the Better Business Bureau. There is no need

to fear the IRS any longer. Substantial relief programs are available that can give you a fresh start. So do not delay. Visit t-r-a.com. That is t-ra.com or call 800-575-4908. That is, once more, 800, 575 4908. Tax relief advocates, real solutions for real people. What, Trump's in the Epstein Piles more than illegal immigrants. Ooh. Yes. Hey, buddy, that is the first question.

We're on question number two of the pop-quins. Hey, hey, we can ask them a question. Question number two. Do you remember what question two was? I can ask it again. No, please do. Question number two was has 34 felony convictions of falsifying business records. Trump or illegal immigrants?

It says illegal immigrants. illegal immigrants. Who cares? Sorry, I don't know if that's PC. Their entire existence in this country is falsified. Wait, answer the question. This is a simple yes or no, 34 felony counts of falsifying business records.

Does the average illegal immigrant have 34 felony counts of falsifying business records? Yes, but they're not. Most illegals don't on Mar-a-Lago. Wait, I have a question for that guy. Yeah, yeah. Do you agree that being in the Epstein-Files is bad? No.

Do you agree that pedoph-fif? Certainly not. Yes. Certainly not. Okay, okay, okay. Let me phrase. You live hard. We're pro-petitaphili.

Generally speaking, yeah. Yeah. So do you, generally speaking? Oh, so he does agree. He does. He's a smart guy. So we could all agree that what the Department of Justice is doing right now is bonkers, right? You mean the largest declassification of any documents in American history?

I disagree. They were all redempting. I agree. That is kind of bonkers. I wouldn't have done it, but... I disagree. There's over six million. $1.5 million heavily redacted.

Matter of fact, they didn't want them released, but Rokana, who I've interviewed multiple times on the topic. I'm sorry. I'm sorry that you've had to deal with. Rockana and Thomas Massey. Guys, guys, guys. Rockana and Thomas Massey forced Donald Trump's hand to release the files, which he did sign because you realized that he couldn't escape it.

But then you have Pam Bondi, right? Releasing half the files. Okay, fine. Release them all. What are you talking about? The illegals in America, it's a big problem. Epstein is a big problem, too, because there's a lot of string pulling happening and a lot of chomos everywhere,

touching kids and shit. Wait, can I get another pop question in? Yeah. Higher rates of violent crime. American citizens or illegal immigrants? Percentage-wise. We're just going to go over with saying chomo. We're just going to paper over that.

Immigrants are the average American citizen. Again. These people are more American than you people. We're crazy. Oh, we can talk about black families. Look, hey, I'm willing to condemn that black families don't have fathers in their households. Now, are you willing to condemn Donald Trump for raping a woman having 34 malady counts? None of them.

And being in the Epstein files 38,000 times. Isn't this crazy? I think we need to all realize like, hey, this is it. We're in a room of crazy people. You people are crazy. If you're not willing to condemn one single thing that Donald Trump has done, but the left is why you can. I condemn the first step act. I didn't like that law.

There was the one law I didn't like. I'm not a big failure. I'm sorry. What did you condemn? I missed that. What did you condemn? The first step act. I didn't like that.

When he let the criminals out of prison the first term. Now, he gets like 99% of things right, but that was one law I didn't like. So there you go. I condemn one thing he did. But not being in Epstein files, 38,000 times?

Not really. I mean, like, g-mails in it millions of times. Do you think like child rape is bad? So the thing is, there are very few things that CNN... Boo! Child rape. There are very few things that CNN and the left wing website, factcheck.org, and I all agree on.

The one thing we all agree on is that there is not a single substantiated serious allegation of wrongdoing against Trump in the entirety of the millions of episodes of. But how do we know that? How do we know that? They haven't to this day. Because the left and the right agree on this weirdly enough. CNN, fact check.org, Michael Knowles. There you go. You got the left and the right. They haven't till this day created a special prosecutor. or a task force to go through the files,

just as France is doing, to figure out, are there any crimes here? Did they commit any crimes that could be prosecuted? We don't know this, because the trained eye haven't combed through the files. They are doing it in France. They started this last week, but our Department of Justice is like,

nothing to see here, folks, case closed, have a good day. And that's why this became such a big topical issue, because Pam Bondi said, well, it's on my desk. Then a week, maybe three weeks later, she was like, well, case closed, we didn't find anything incredible here. Without actually creating a task force to determine if there were anything viable for them to go after. She just...

But they did disclose over 3 million documents, right? Hold on, hold on. How many documents... How many documents did Joe Biden declassify under his presidency? Well, I could agree. When they had all the same documents? I could agree. How many?

Was it a single one? Not a single one. You could also agree that he was arrested under Donald Trump, right? But he won't... Okay, all right, next question. He was also killed under Donald Trump. He was murdered while he was president. I thought he killed himself.

Conveniently. Oh, yeah. Hold on. You opposed to the death of a child molester? No, no, no, no, no. I don't oppose. I don't know. To the death of child molesters.

I do not oppose. I don't know. I'm not opposed. Okay, next question. Michael, I have a question for you. Yes. Okay, you have been led off the hook this whole time. No one has asked you a question.

And this segment was supposed to be about the economy. And I got to tell you, I am sick. I am sick and tired of billionaires because they could be doing so much to help the world, but instead they keep trying to go to the moon. Okay? Every billionaire is trying to go to the moon, and you keep saying that the moon landing was real. You eat that tasty, tasty government slop, okay?

You keep saying that the moon landing is real, and you are not man enough to admit that the moon is not real, Michael. Okay? The moon is not real. it's an optical illusion of the firmament and you, and I know why you won't say it because you are bought and sold by Israel. And I am sick of it, Michael.

I am sick of it, Michael. Why'd you call Benjamin Netanyahu and get the rest of your lines for this show? I'm sick of it, Michael. The moon is not real. Look, I have two words to say to that. Oe they, they got me. You got me.

You totally got me. You're right. Benjamin Netanyahu invented the moon. and I'm glad you went all the way and you didn't just talk about some people believe like we landed on the moon like multiple times in the 60s and 70s and really blah but you went much further

and observed that there is no such thing as the moon so I can demand your bravery and I'm sorry that Mossad and the CIA and MI6 and the KGB are going to take us all out right now and you know who that single agent is going to be you guessed it Jeffrey Epstein that's right okay

do we have another question all right what's up guys things have been getting kind of out of hand I want to rein it back in okay so how do we feel about clavicular getting frame-mogged by the ASU frat leader base

absolutely no unironically look I want to speak to you about this I think clavicular is severely mentally ill I think something is fucking wrong with him he's on so much truck I don't know if you guys

know who this is. This is like some not so niche internet personality. If I hear that word again, I'm going to jump over cliff. Clavicular. Okay. Okay. I don't know this. I don't can down this. So look, I sat down with clavicular for like

two hours and the guy he's got to get on the right path. He's a little he's young but he's a little on the wrong path. He's got on the right path. But he is the greatest reality TV star of the last 15 years. He ran over a person with his Tesla.

They don't care about crime. And now he's walking around with a loaded gun. What do you... They don't care about crime. Or is it all just like reality TV? Like, did you just get completely reality TV mocked? Well, just like with Renee Good, I heard the car hit him. I heard the car hit him.

Yeah, I don't know. Entertainment Max and that's a new... I heard it. It must be real. It did. I know. Actually, that's a fair point. That's a fair point.

It's all kind of contrived. I agree. All right, I just got completely bell-mugged. Do we have any more? No, we don't. Okay, who won that round? Was it like all those other guys? Or was it wit? Was it the second guy?

It was wet. All right, there we go. It's time for round three. Okay, round three is my topic. And my topic is that the secret to a successful marriage is to reject feminism entirely. Let's begin. This is advice that I got from a... good friend of mine, Andrew Claven, when I got married. I've now been married for seven and a half

years, and I've found it to be entirely correct. He said two pieces of advice. One, don't sleep with other people. Two, reject feminism entirely, because feminism is intrinsically opposed to marriage. I think there's a million examples of this. I don't think I really need to prove it, but just one good example. Simone de Beauvoir, one of the architects of modern feminism in the second sex, says that marriage is obscene in principle. She's totally opposed to marriage. Why is this? Well, because marriage posits a view of human nature that changes things up. We used to think that men and women were complimentary, you know, yin and yang, we each and eat each other. Feminism says, no, we're basically the same. We're identical, indiscernible, and therefore rivals. And this has led to a lot of downstream

social effects. 70% of divorces we know are initiated by women. When you look at college-educated women who are much more likely to old feminist views, that number jumps to 90%. We now have a study came out, I think it was in 2018, showed that 55% of single women think that single women are happier than married women, which isn't true. They are not happier, but for our purposes, it doesn't matter. The fact that they think they are is actually sufficient. For the first time ever, boys in high school want to get married at a higher rate than girls in high school do.

This is a great shocking turn of events. people have turned against marriage. This was easily predictable. There was another survey that came out that showed that where egalitarian gender norms were introduced, marriage declines and divorce spikes. Also to be expected because of mismatched expectations. In any case, the data are clear where feminism grows,

marriage collapses. And so if you want to have a good marriage, reject feminism. All right. Well, I'm as liberal as they come, but I tend to agree in that regard. Let's go, baby. Let's go! Yes! Well, primarily because, you know, it takes two people to make a home, right? And a child needs the energy of both parents, you know, men, women, yin and yang, and I believe that feminism is bias in a way where it promotes just one of those energies.

and you can't raise a child in a home where it's only two guys or it's only two girls. And it's not to take a job. Here, let's go, baby. Oh! I relinquish the microphone. I just want to, please, please. And it's not to take a job at the LGBTQ. I respect them.

I respect what they're doing. But nature, right? Nature is something that is sacred and something that should be respected. Awesome. Love it. Agree 100%. Left is blind. All right, all right. Okay, I figured this one was picked for me because I, we had talked about

it wasn't picked for him. Although now, if I had known, I would have picked it for him. So, uh, we actually find in studies, multiple studies back this up, that when partners share ideas about egalitarianism and traditionalism, then they have happier marriages. So it's not necessarily that somebody, you know, is happy if they're just both traditionalism. It's actually what we find is that when both partners share the same ideas about egalitarianism and about traditionalism, then they're the most happy. Sure, I grant you that to some degree. Does one group get married and stay married at a higher rate than the other?

One group meaning which groups are we comparing? The traditional conservatives and the liberal feminist types? The answer is yes. So it is true that when partners, we used to apply that to accounting firms and homosexuals. Now we say men and wives. Yeah, now we say it's husbands and wives. But when spouses agree, they are more likely to have a thriving marriage. Nevertheless, if you are a conservative, you are much more likely to get married.

You're much more likely to get married earlier. You're much more likely to stay married than if you're a liberal or feminist. Okay, so there's an underlying presupposition that staying married is a good thing. Overall, yes, on face value. If you know what the word prima facie is, then you'll know what I mean by this. I'm a prima facie, yes. I'm a prima facie, actually.

Oh, we know. I'll get in jokes, but prima facie, yes. Staying married is a good thing. There is an asterisk, however, to that. Staying married in an abusive relationship is not a good thing. Staying married in a situation where you no longer have love for your partner is not a good thing. Staying married. Hold on the first part, I'm opposed to divorce just generally,

But there could be an argument for a civil separation. However, there was a study that examined this, I think, in Virginia, after the liberalization of divorce laws, which is one of the triumphs of feminism, supposedly. So in the cases of the liberalization of divorce laws, within five years, divorce rates increase between 8 to 16 percent. What percentage of those cases involve domestic violence? The answer is 6 percent. Domestic violence are reported domestic violence.

That's the problem that we run into. A lot of people are afraid to report. cite domestic violence. Okay. And those cases are the cases where women felt comfortable enough or the partner who was being abused felt comfortable enough to report that violence. Now, we know in the real world, because we all exist in the real world, women don't always report violence. Even in the case of a divorce? What incentive would they have to hide it in the case of a divorce? I grant you that in a marriage... For retaliation. For retaliation purposes. You can't think of a reason. You can't think of a reason why a woman might not want to hide the fact that her partner was abusive.

So that way he suffers consequences. No, I can't in a marriage, but not in a divorce case. You don't think that abusers ever come back for their victims after they're divorced? Does anyone think that that's the case that abusers just never come back after they've been divorced? In the case of leaving the home, taking the kids, and taking half his money, I'm pretty sure the abuser is already angry. So actually, in that case, the woman would have every incentive to cite the domestic violence in order to incur even greater legal protections against him. Just because a woman cites domestic violence doesn't mean that something comes out of that.

that woman gets protection for that. There's a reason why women don't report this is because they're not being believed that are being protected by police officers and law enforcement. So yes, of course they're not reporting. And they're scared of the repercussions. Your argument is, well, look, divorce

is justified in the case of domestic violence. And I say, well, here's the percentages of domestic violence. And you say, well, regardless of that, I believe that it's a much higher percentage based on nothing. And researchers also believe that it's a much higher percentage.

Which one? This isn't just me, Which one? Which one? I cited to study to you. I have my phone on me. You want me to? Hey, we'll fact check. I'm on the spot. You don't know what this study is, but you're confident that it exists. Okay. Do we have questions from the audience? Yeah. This is for LibTard Blondie or Leftist Blondie.

I wanted to know. I'll change my username now. If you are on any SSRIs, and if so, how many? No, thankfully not. Just by Vance. It works wonders. You should try it. Okay. Works wonders? Thank you. Simulance.

Wow. That's it? That's a pretty much, yeah. The central point was just, you thought you were on the depression fields, but you stumped him. Good grief. No, I'm stoked, man. I'm locked in. If feminism is, you know, like supposed to make women happier, more, you know, just, yeah, happier in society.

Why are so many of them, the SSRI rates are sky high? Well, we could ask the same question about cancer medication. Why are more people on cancer medication than they were in the past? Well, that's because we've developed cancer medications, because women now have ways to effectively cope with their anxieties, with their depressions. And that's a good positive thing. I think people getting treatments for the things that they've been struggling with is a wonderful thing. Well, hold on. It's an interesting comparison you make, because the reasons that people might be on cancer drugs today could be one of two things.

Either people are getting more cancer, which they are, or because there are new drugs that are being introduced. Maybe if they would stop smoking cigars. Well, actually, actually, I hate to cite medical studies, but if you were, than four cigars a day has no statistically significant correlation with mortality. But since we're studying science here, regardless, regardless, in the case of depression and the depression pills, the cause could be either more people are depressed because of feminism, as the implication is, because women use these drugs of... I don't agree that the implication is feminism.

Or that there are just newer drugs to take. However, the SSRIs and the depression drugs have been around for decades at this point. So I think it would be hard to say that it's because of the introduction of the drugs. Something seems to have changed. change in the rates of depression, along with the advance of feminism. Sure, there's also an increase in left-handed people. Have you guys noticed that? That's really weird. Is something malicious going on where more people are being encouraged or, like, swayed

into being left-handed? No, of course not. It's just that now that we have, right, I was going to say, who said that? That was funny. But, no, it's not that more people are just being, like, there's not some conspiracy to convince people to be more left-handed these things. No, but I guess the point is left-handedness levels out with changing cultural. moral mores and the depression just keeps growing and at younger and younger ages and specifically

with women. So that's why I think... You know what also keeps growing? What? Wealth inequality. In the countries where wealth inequality is the lowest, in the countries where wealth... No, Michael, don't finish making your point, please. Look at that butterfly over there. The point is already invalid. In the countries where wealth inequality is the highest people report the lowest satisfaction rates. In the countries where gender inequality is the highest people report the lowest satisfaction rates and lowest happiness rates. That's why you look at Afghanistan and is persistently at the bottom of happiness levels globally. You can look at countries like Norway, Sweden, Iceland, Finland.

Those countries are always at the top. What do they also rank at the top in? Gender equality. In Afghanistan... Something feminism brought about. It's funny you bring up Afghanistan, because in Afghanistan, pretty much everybody's poor. Like, there aren't, like, a lot of Steve Jobs is in Afghanistan.

Do you think that women are less equal in Afghanistan? I thought you were talking about wealth inequality. We're talking about inequality, generally speaking. Hold on. There's gender inequality and whether there's wealth inequality, happiness rights. But there's not wealth inequality in Afghanistan, everybody's poor. The one rich guy they had, Osama bin Laden, got killed. Yes, the world is not one dimensional.

But I'm just saying the point you just immediately undercut the point that you are making. Unhappiness in a country. Did you not know that? No, but the point you made was that material wealth inequality is the determinant of unhappiness. I didn't say determining. Wait, wait, wait, that's a straw man, guys. If you pay attention, he's making that. He's making that out to leave the only point. And then you cited the country wherever was.

gender inequality and social stratification or wealth inequality. Gender inequality is less access to reproductive health care. Abortion. Gender inequality is less pay per... But women, this is what's very strange. We liberalized our abortion laws starting in the 1970s in America. But yet before the 1970s, and you can cite a Yale study on this, Yale Law School, before the 1970s, women were much happier than they are today.

Much happier in absolute terms and relative to men. Ah, but you're reading their minds beyond the scientific research. Yeah, if we took a study from Chinese people, did you know Chinese people have like abnormally high rates of happiness? I wonder why that is. Did you know North Koreans report greater satisfaction with our government? I wonder why. Can we trust that study? Do you think that the statistics coming out of Yale and North Korea are equally reliable?

Actually, these days maybe they are. Maybe they are, actually. Okay, do we have another question from the mic? Yes, hello. This question is also for Libthard Blondie. I'm so serious. I need a new username now. That's fantastic. Thank you.

It's kind of a two-parter. The first part is if you were to rank white people in a list of like your favorite race, would they be the last one? Would they be at the bottom? Oh, you got the wrong leftist. Well, to me, well, listen, no, no, no, to me, it seems like you really hate white people. I get the perception that, you know, with your opinions on immigration, specifically wanting to import millions of people, even if they were legal,

coming to the country, I still see it eroding the social fabric of America and destroying what we were to, what we are to call America today. Can we connect that back to whiteness somehow? Well, this is what I'm saying is you are trying to destroy. Now we're at a point about cultural heritage. Can we connect those two? Say that again? We started off thinking a point about whiteness, right?

Yes, because I think that- America is historically a white people, which I agree. By the way, really big country. And I think that America is not America anymore, if it's not white words in coming. This is crazy. Well, if it's not majority white, I do not expect this. They really do hate white people. I'm not one of those leftists. That's the difference. But it seems to me from your immigration opinions that you do hate white people. I'm not here to replace white people. I'm just here to say that white people don't have any special claim to any

land over some immigrant who wants to work just as hard. So do you hold the same opinions? Take the case of James Fishback. That's a white man. I think immigrants work way harder than that man does. Well, listen, I'm not necessarily a faithful. fan of James Fishback. I'm just saying that you should hold that same consistency when it comes to a country like, you know, let's say Cameroon. If Cameroon were to be invaded by Europeans, do you not think that it should stay mostly Cameroonian? What's invasion? Well, they're coming into the country and a three million a year showed up against your laws and you couldn't get rid of them. Hypothetically. I'm not even saying that those people shouldn't suffer consequences. I'm saying

that they shouldn't deport those people. Now, white people started coming into Cameroon. If white people started coming into Cameroon, I'm perfectly fine with saying, hey, those people deserve basic rights. They deserve due process. And in order to protect the people in Cameroon, we should also lock those people up so that they don't leave the country, reoffend, and then come back. So you're saying we need to keep the white people in Cameroon. This debate took a turn that I did not expect pro-imperialism, pro-colonialism-based, downright white supremacy.

Crazy, crazy. I didn't see it coming. I want you all to know that that was. There's a straw man. Do we have another question? Y'all seen that Bo Burnham skit? F***, it's a scarecrow. You've never seen Bo Burnham? No.

Well, not that sketch. Okay, what's the next one? All right, I'm circling back. I'm going back to the feminism part. So, here's the thing. I have a problem with the term feminism to begin with. If you're talking about feminism being that as a woman, I have a brain and I have a right to have an income,

and I have the right to support my family, and I have a right to go to college, and I have a right to be an equal member in my relationship. So if that's what you're calling feminism, then yes, I'm a feminist. That said, I'm also going to say this. As someone who's been married for almost 33 years at this point in time, they are not mutually exclusive. I can be someone who has a brain, who had the advantage of being able to go.

go to college, multiple times, thank you, who has an income that can support my family comfortably, who does not have the benefit of as a middle class member all of those taxed loopholes that were in the first question, and yet can raise my children to be independent thinkers, yes, no matter what side you're on, just be able to support your thoughts. be independent thinkers, be able to be problem solvers, and be able to know that they are a person who has value in this world, regardless of their skin color, their gender, their sexual orientation.

I don't know. You brought racists. Wait, wait, wait. Does the crowd not agree that people are created equal? Y'all should be cheering for that. No, see, why are the... Wait, wait, wait, wait, I thought God, created all of his children equal.

Why are we not cheering for that? She said everyone's equal. Yeah, no, I mean, that's all, that's great. That's a lovely, that was a lovely speech. You know, the real, where the rubber meets the road, though, is whether when we talk about equality, we mean a complementarity in that men and women are different, but of equal dignity made by God. Like Eve coming from Adam's rib rather than his head, which would put her above him or his feet below him.

Well, you're Catholic, so you probably understand this reference that, you know, the first wife of Adam wasn't actually Eve. It was someone else, right? Oh yeah, the Lilith thing? Yeah. That's, the Catholics don't believe that. Really? No. No, no. That's from Frazier and some medieval esotericism. Nothing. Understand, wait a minute.

Not the Christian on Christian violence. Wait, wait, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. Understand that, first of all, it's a very Eurocentric thing for the male to be the figure of the household. Oh, my God, I love you. I disagree. I disagree. I Secondly, secondly, if you want to talk about the Bible, those books were chosen by individuals. There were many other books that aren't in that way. That I agree with. That agreed because Orthodox Christianity... It is true. There are books other than the Bible.

We all agree on that. No, no, no, no. But again, what's your argument that you're going back to to support your idea that feminist is bad? Oh, my, okay. Well, my argument is that it's contrary to. human nature because it posits an anthropology that says that men and women are not complimentary with different virtues and inclinations but that they're identical, that they're indiscernible and therefore rivals and undifferentiated. So I think that's the error.

Wait, wait. Do you think any modern feminist thinks that men and women are indistinguishable? Yeah, basically. I think that... Do you think that I believe that or that he believes that? Yeah, do you think that women can do just about everything a man can do? No, I don't think about everyone would have believed that a man can do, right? Just about everything.

Take everything and then take away just like a few things. Can they be exactly the same as men? No, of course that. What? Do you think women are ordered towards certain behaviors and men are ordered towards certain behaviors? Like women are more nurturing and they're better at being mothers and men are better at being in public life and earning the bread. Men report higher levels of well-being being parents than women do. Did you guys know that?

Women are less happy being parents than men. I think they're a little confused. Okay, stats don't care about your feelings, Michael. That's the, yeah, the bell's over. Okay, fine. Anyway, that's my point. That's why sometimes the lives do this thing where they say, you know, if you like women, you're a feminist. It's like, that's not really what Mary Wollstonecraft and, you know, Simone de Beauvoir.

Yeah, I've never heard that before. Really? If you like women, you like women. I think, you know how conflicts like see the holy ghost. I'll give you the example. Aziz, I'm sorry, said that on a late night show. English teachers across the country have said that in their feminist curriculum in their classrooms. But it's not it.

It's about more than that. It's positing the idea that you refuse to answer that men and women are basically the same rather than complimentary. I think a lot of feminist argument is that women aren't paid the same wage as men. I don't pay my wife a penny. Well, this isn't... She spends my money, but I don't pay her pay her pay. I mean, we could live in that world. Well, as a person who was happily married five years now, I understand.

They were talking. Love that. But I just wanted to be clear. There's a revision of history that just happened in real time, and I hope you guys, Watch this and see this happening. What's that? Michael Knowles just said, hey, you guys think and you can't answer that if you think women and men are the same thing,

I just answered you five seconds ago that I don't think men and women are the same. How are they different? I think they're different biologically. If we're talking about males and females, biologically, they're different. Men are stronger on average. Men are faster on average. Men tend to think in different ways than women do.

How differently? How differently? Yeah, they tend to take on... You mean like they're better at math? Would you go that for? No, of course not. Because, you know, the president of Harvard, the liberal president of Harvard, Larry Summers came out and said that he got booted out of his position for it.

So you'd say men and women think differently. But how do they think differently? Booted out of his position for what? For pointing out that on the bell curve, the reason why women don't win the fields prize, they don't tend to do well at math at the highest levels is because men have a higher IQ at the tail end and a lower IQ at the tail end, that their bell curve is wider. Sure, you can look at the reasons why they have higher IQ. Are men encouraged to go into these math fields more?

Are they encouraged to go into... His argument is that it's just natural. What's the argument for that? Well, I don't know. You just said that men and women's brains work differently, so I asked how so, and you wouldn't tell me how. Sure, no, I think that men think in ways that are more protective. I think that women are more nurturing. I don't know if I would agree with analytical. Women are more emotional. They're more nurturing. No, I think that actually, I think this is a key flaw in conservative ideology is that we pretend that men aren't as emotional as women. Are men better at certain things? Why are men commens?

committing suicide more than women. Because of you. Because of you. Because of you. Okay, all right. Damn. All right. That's the end of the round.

I don't know if I can make that joke here. That's the end of the round. This is great. We got unexpected misogyny from one of the libs, unexpected white supremacy from another lib. No, I jest, I jest. That was one of my favorite episodes we've ever done. Sorry, I kid.

I kid. Don't cancel me, please. I jest, I'm kidding. In my opinion, nobody wins. nobody wins a bar fight. There are only losers. So the question is, who lost tonight? Who's buying the next round?

Is it? Was it Brian? No, the audience loves Brian. Brian, you should run for president with your ability to win over a room. That's amazing. Do we think that our friend, Anne, the leftist blonde, lost tonight?

Lost on one. And do we think that I lost tonight? No, I didn't know. I might have lost in the sense that my guests have confounded me. They've made me think and reorient and see the world differently. Folks, thank you for being here. Thank you to the two of you for being here. See you all on the next episode of Bar Fight.

Hey, Michael. What? We never voted on the VIP. I want Brian to be the VIP. Sorry, hold on. Who? Who won the question round? Brian, do you want some Redneck Riviera whiskey?

Sure. All right, he's that. Come on a level, bro. See your next time on Barfite. That was great. Welcome. Well, some races draw attention, others become the race. Everyone watches.

In Texas, James Tolariko and Ken Paxson are facing off in one of Kalshi's most traded midterm markets. Follow the race in real time on Kalshi and then trade on the candidate you think is going to win. Each correct contract is worth $1 at settlement. Don't just follow the midterms. Trade what happens next on CalShe. Use code daily, D-A-I-L-Y to get up to $25 when you trade $25. That's Cal-She, K-A-L-S-H-I-C-T, trade on anything. 18-plus-only restrictions and eligibility requirements apply.

Event contracts trading involves risk and may not be suitable for all investors. Cal-Shee products are not available in all jurisdictions. Prices, values, and available markets may differ from those mentioned. For more information, see calci.com slash regulatory.