The Michael Knowles Show - Ep. 1167 - Libs Blame Historic Surge Of Illegal Aliens On Republicans

Episode Date: January 23, 2023

Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEl Democrats blame the historic surge in illegal border crossings on Republicans, the World Economic Forum pushes a four-day workweek for the elite, and a new study shows it’s probably not great to pump little kids full of puberty blockers. - - -  DailyWire+: Use code DONOTCOMPLY to get 40% OFF new annual DailyWire+ membership plans: https://bit.ly/3SsC5se Get your Michael Knowles merch here: https://bit.ly/3X6tlKY   - - -  Today’s Sponsors: PureTalk - Get 50% off your first month with promo code ‘KNOWLES’’ https://www.puretalkusa.com/landing/KNOWLES - - - Socials: Follow on Twitter: https://bit.ly/3RwKpq6  Follow on Instagram: https://bit.ly/3BqZLXA  Follow on Facebook: https://bit.ly/3eEmwyg  Subscribe on YouTube: https://bit.ly/3L273Ek Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Choice Hotels get you more of what you value. Here's a little tune to help you remember. Same drive, different day. Don't you wish you were getting away? Pack your beds and come on through. Texas, Ohio, Alaska, we're up there too. Comfort in. It's calling your name.

Save on the stay. Oh, and free waffles are yours to claim. Well, I hope you like my little song. Book direct at choiceotails.com. Federal agents encountered more than a quarter million illegal aliens at the border last month. 251,487, to be exact, the highest number ever recorded in U.S. history. And that is just the number that were detected. Many people are blaming Democrats who opened the border.

Some are blaming the squishes who let the Democrats get away with it. But the Democrats are blaming the Republicans for noticing the problem. according to one Biden administration official, quote, of course the numbers will be higher when Republican elected officials, like smugglers, falsely proclaim the border is open because of a court order to lift Title 42. In other words, the border is open, not because the Democrats opened it, but because the Republicans pointed out that it's open. This is a weird sort of quantum politics.

in which observing the political problem supposedly creates the political problem in the first place. But the libs make this kind of claim all the time. Democrats, for instance, encourage men to identify as women, even though men cannot be women, and even though men who think that they're women have all sorts of problems, depression, anxiety, and they kill themselves at extremely high rates. But according to the libs, the reason that men who think their women are depressed and suicidal has nothing to do with the fact that they're not really women, has nothing to do with the problem itself. Rather, it only occurs because conservatives observe that fact, and that apparently results in transphobia. Another example, poor black people in the inner cities disproportionately do poorly in school

and then don't graduate, or they do graduate, but without much of an education, and then often, often fail to get good jobs and ascend the socioeconomic ladder. And according to Libs, the reason that that group often doesn't learn very much in school has nothing to do with political, cultural, and pedagogical failures, but rather occurs because the mean old conservatives observe that fact, which then results in racism, which is why the problem perpetuates itself. Now we are being told that illegal aliens are crossing the border, not because the Democrats opened it, but because conservatives observe the open border. But the classical mechanics version of politics, I think, provides the better explanation. The political problems exist in the real world. And the only reason

the libs want us to stop noticing is so that we don't do anything to stop them. I'm Michael Knowles. It's the Michael Knowles show. Welcome back to the show. My favorite comment from Friday is from Brett who says, quote, I don't follow sports. Then Michael proceeds to call a hockey play a basketball player. We appreciate the honesty, Michael. I will tell you the truth as I see it. That is all I can do. I will not pretend to be something that I am not. And I sincerely did not know that that hockey player was not a basketball player. I do know the difference between hockey and basketball, but that is pretty much where my knowledge of those sports end. Okay, when I want to know about sports, I got to call buddies of mine who pay attention. I got to call the Crane brothers. I got to

called David Cohn. I got to use Pure Talk. Right now, go to Peartotoc.com, use promo code Knowles. If one of your goals this year is to do business with companies who share your beliefs, then you've got to check up Pure Talk. Pure Talk is the antidote to woke wireless companies. It is proudly veteran-owned, employs a U.S.-based customer service team, and absolutely refuses to spend money on fake news networks. Not to mention, Pure Talk service is fantastic. They're one of the largest networks in the country. You can get blazing fast data talk and text for as low as $30 a month. That's probably half of what you're paying Verizon, ATT, or T-Mobile. Switch over to Pure Talk in as little as 10 minutes while keeping your phone and your phone number.

Your first month is guaranteed risk-free. Try it. If you're not completely happy with the service, you will get your money back. This year, make it a goal to support the companies that support you. Go to PureTalk.com, enter promo code Knowles to save 50% off your first month. That is PureTalk.com, promo code Knowles, KNAW-W-L-E-S. Pure Talk is simply smarter. Wireless. Speaking of the southern border, Congressman Dan Crenshaw has a plan for how to deal with the problem at the southern border,

and that plan involves guns and bombs. We recently introduced AUMF and authorized use of military force against the cartels in any other organizations that traffic fentanyl specifically. So why now and why not years ago? These Mexican drug cartels have been around for a while. But the difference now is fentanyl. This is not a drug problem. This is not a war on drug problem.

This is a poisoning problem. And they are killing about 80,000 Americans a year. And the Mexican government does very little to thwart this. And I think there should be bipartisan efforts in Congress to pass and authorize use of military force to deal with them. If anything, that simply gives our president more leverage when trying to get the Mexican government to do its job. And that's its job on thwarting immigration, which the cartels also control, and thwarting fentanyl coming north across our border and killing American citizens. You know, these people are a lot more like ISIS than they are the mafia. I know Dan Crenshaw gets a lot of flack and people think that he is too quick to use military force or to advocate using military force.

On the question of the Mexican cartels at the southern border, though, in principle, Does anybody object to this? Plenty of people can object to sending American dollars and weapons and troops even to go fight the war in Ukraine against Russia. Plenty of people can and I think ought to object to things like that. Or to adventurism in Libya and all sorts of wars of empire that the U.S. has fought. But if the situation at the southern border does not call for the U.S. military, what does? we are being subject right now to what is essentially an invasion and have been for many decades. And when I say invasion, I'm not just talking about mothers with their kids crossing the border

or even the economic migrants, the young men who want to come over and get better jobs and send money back to their families and whatever. I'm talking about the Mexican drug cartels, some of the worst people on the face of the earth, who control 100% of border border. crossings from the Mexico side, who are shipping in tons of drugs, specifically fentanyl, which is killing Americans in the worst drug crisis we've ever had in our nation's history, which traffics women and girls across that border, and according to certain studies, rapes 60 to 80% of them, according to fusion and amnesty international. I mean, these guys are just demons.

And so if the, if the U.S. military would not be justified in repelling an invasion of that sort, then what's the point of the military? So I think in principle, Dan is actually making a very good point here. There's one caveat, though. I would not. If I were the president today, I would not two-day sign off on having the military go down to the southern border. And the reason for that is, I might have them be on our side of the border to stop people from crossing, but I wouldn't have them go into Mexico and actually destroy the cartels just yet. The reason I wouldn't do that is the drug cartels in Mexico constitute a fair bit of what could be called the Mexican government. By which I mean, there's an analogous situation in Italy for a long time. In Italy, the Italian government, for most of that nation's history, has not been the only or even necessarily the dominant force in Italian politics. There are a couple other forces.

There's obviously the church, the church, you know, the Vatican is right there, the Holy See. It's been a big force in Italian politics. And the mafia. The mafia is a big force in Italian politics. There's a great show that came out fairly recently called Subura about these three powers that control Rome, the government, the church, and the mafia. The mafia is a big part of it. And a similar situation is true in Mexico.

The mob plays a huge role down there. And so if you destroy the cartels, if you launch a war against the cartels, you're going to completely destabilize that country. And then what's going to happen? If you have an open border, then you're just going to have millions more people pouring across that border if that border is not secure. So the first thing you would have to do is secure the border. First thing you would have to do is build the wall, get the enforcement down, send more border patrol agents, deport more illegal aliens. You'd have to do all of that. But then at that point,

should we use military force against the cartels? Well, if the drugs and the traffic humans keep coming through, yeah, I see no problem with that whatsoever. Speaking of the failures of the Biden administration. Senator John Kennedy, Senator Foghorn Leghorn himself, one of my absolute favorite figures in all of American politics, he says that the U.S. is headed for a debt-sealing standoff and that we shouldn't be all that worried about the U.S. actually defaulting on its debt, and here's why. The federal government spends too much, particularly the last two years, and has too much debt. And if we don't stop it, we're going to end up in a deep recession. And Google may have to lay off up to 25 members of Congress. That's how bad it'll be.

I don't know who does Kennedy's writing for him. Maybe he writes these lines himself. Reagan used to do this. Reagan used to have a whole treasure trove of zingers just ready to go. But that's a really good one. That there are many people in our politics who are in bed with big tech and that Google might have to lay off those members of Congress if the default. So I don't think that the U.S. is going to default. But I agree with Kennedy that, one, there are a lot of members of Congress who are beholden to big tech. And two, the debt situation has spiraled so out of control that, frankly, at this point, it seems almost hopeless. That's very hard to dig out of $32 trillion of debt when the debt is, what, roughly 100% of GDP or something or more.

Speaking of being in bed with big tech, there is an issue that I have tried to avoid talking about because I think it's extremely petty and tedious. But I feel somewhat impelled to talk about it. You know, I was on the road last week. I didn't have much of an opportunity to get involved in the high school squabble of Stephen Crowder and making all sorts of claims about the daily wire hosts and the like. I generally find a conversation about political commentators negotiating contracts with media companies to be the single most boring thing on the planet, basically like chloroform on a screen. But I was perfectly willing to take the personal insinuations on the chin, even though it's not true. But just after I filmed my last show of the week last week, Stephen, our friend of many years,

lobbed an attack at Jeremy that really very, very few things get me angry. You know, I'm like the least angry guy in all of politics. It's probably hampered my career, frankly. And I've said on the show before, I get angry like twice a year. And I guess we started early this year. I guess we started in January. I was going to launch into a succinct but comprehensive monologue on why the allegations that have been made about the daily wire hosts and the company itself are not true, manifestly not true. I was going to, I had a lot to say on this subject.

But actually, I mentioned this today to Jeremy, and he said, you know, just be magnanimous and let it go. ago. And that was my instinct in the first place and to kind of stay above the fray and not get involved in these squabbles. I felt that what was done to Jeremy was very, very unjust, very, unjust. And I'm someone who sees behind the scenes, you know, I've been around this crew for a very long time now. But I guess his inclination is to be even more magnanimous than I. So all of that just to say, Jeremy Boring gets a lot of flack. That guy is, and don't tell him, him, I said anything nice about him. You know, men are not supposed to say nice things about one another, especially buddies.

You know, it's not how we really operate around here. There are very, very few people in politics who are as generous and loyal and principled as Jeremy Boring. And in deference to his magnanimity, I will leave it at that. I'll leave it at that. But it's important. Loyalty is an important thing, and integrity is an important thing. I'll just leave it at that, okay? Speaking of employment, the World Economic Forum,

the World Economic Forum, which just concluded last week in Davos, Switzerland, had a panel on the future of work, and the future of work looks really pleasant for the elites, if you ask the World Economic Forum. The World Economic Forum panel on the future of the work week suggested that perhaps the elites need more time off. Not everybody needs more time off, but the elites need more time off. There was an international study that showed that revenues actually rose for companies that cut down their work week from five days to four days. And this is true, really only for the upper class, the Dutch employment minister, Karian van Genie.

acknowledged that the four-day work week conversation remains, quote, very much a discussion for the upper class. This is now a year after virtual commutes became commonplace for white-collar employees. Sixty-seven percent of these white-collar employees were able to work from home exclusively. Now, this would be compared to, say, teachers. Forty-eight percent of educators were able to work from home exclusively. Thirty-five percent of health care professionals were to work from home exclusively, which seems kind of high to me, but I guess people do telemedicine. And then basically zero percent of service employees are able to work from home exclusively because they have to do real jobs with their bodies in time and space so that all the white

color people can stay at home. As a technical matter, I guess this makes sense. But as a spiritual matter, this is a very, very bad idea. And the reason it's a bad idea is not because white color workers who are telecommuting on their laptops while they're in their pajamas. It's not because that is necessarily going to diminish profits for a company or tick down GDP for a country. The reason that this is a very bad idea is because idle hands are the devil's playground. The reason this is a bad idea is because it accelerates a very bad trend that we've been seeing in our culture now for years, which is a trend away from physical reality. It's a trend away from acknowledging that that we are bodies as well as souls. You see that particularly expressed in transgenderism. Transgenderism

says my body has nothing to do with who I am. I'm purely metaphysical, so I might look like a boy, but I'm really a girl. You see this in the move away from real social contact during the lockdowns. We weren't allowed to hug our loved ones. Well, that's okay. We can just zoom with them. Let's have Zoom drinks and Zoom dinner. That's obviously not as satisfying. And because when people work from home, maybe they're more efficient in some ways, but they've got a lot of downtime and they don't get dressed, and they say, well, what does it matter if I get dressed? I can wear sweatpants and socks all day because no one really cares. Well, it matters because you are in part a body and you live in time and space. And so if you treat yourself like a big, just lunk of meat, then you're going to behave like a big

lunk of meat and not like a dignified human being as you should. This is especially worrisome for the elites because the elites are extremely decadent. You know, their idea of fighting injustice around the world is to fly to an alpine Swiss resort and go skiing for a few days and eat fancy meals and drink fancy drinks hobnobbing with the richest and most powerful people on earth. Okay, decadence is an occupational hazard for these sorts of people. And now they're saying, we need to be a little bit more decadent. Well, oh, you poor little people go out there. You bring me my filet mignon. You deliver it on Uber eats and then you go back and you eat your bugs. I don't know what accent that is. I don't know what accent that is. I'm not sure exactly, but it's just a vague kind of cosmopolitan accent. It's a very bad idea. Everybody, especially the elites, need to be actively involved. There's no neutrality. This is something we've talked about on the show a lot. There's no neutrality in speech. There's no neutrality in politics. There's no neutrality in the physical world. You've always got to be doing something. The question is, what are you doing? Are you spending time playing with your kids? Are you spending

time working, building up a business? Are you spending time fixing up the house? Or are you spending time loafing around and, you know, just getting drunk and indulging your lusts. There was an article that showed that there were apparently hundreds and hundreds of high-class prostitutes who were descending on Davos for the conference. What are you doing? What are you doing? If anybody needs to remain more occupied, not less, I think it is those elites. Now, speaking of what the elites were eating in Davos, there was, there's one video that really seemed to go viral from the whole world economic forum conference. This year, the elites played it a little bit closer to the chest, you know. They, they did not, George Soros did not show up. I don't think Bill Gates showed up. They weren't totally as wild as they

often are in their commentary with all the clips because they know that we're sort of on to them and we're paying more attention. But there was one clip that went viral. And this was the chairman of, How do you pronounce this company, Simons? Is that the name? Let's choose to pronounce it that way. Who said that people need to stop eating meat and that in the future we're going to have very different types of proteins than meat? It's a very important point that you are addressing. My daughter 24 inspired me and said that how can you advocate for these zero carbon value change if you still eat meat? meat. And so I stopped eating meat. Now the math would say, well, you need to stop eating meat 11 years to compensate for a flight to Thailand. Yes, but if a billion people stop eating

meat, I tell you it has a big impact. Not only does it have a big impact on the current food system, but it will also inspire innovation of food systems. And I predict we will have proteins not coming from meat in the future. They will probably taste even better. So why are we trying to mimic meat if we can have a better taste? They will be zero carbon and much healthier than the kind of food that we eat today. So this is the main clip that's gone viral from the World Economic Forum.

And what's amazing to me is no one has pointed out what this answer was in reaction to. the question, and I haven't really found a clip of the question as well, but I did get to see it as it was happening. You can stream all of those. This is one of the odd things about the World Economic Forum. We think of it as this highly secretive sort of cabal of people. They live stream most of their events. And the question that was asked specifically referenced eating bugs. The question that was asked was about how we can get people to move away from eating bugs. And the question that was asked was about how we can get people to move away from eating meat and go toward more vegetarian or vegan or even edible insects diets. And his answer, the CEO of this company, or chairman rather, a very important company, was, oh yes, of course, that's what we have to do. We need a billion people to stop eating meat. And the proteins of the

future, they're not going to come from meat. They're going to taste much better. specifically in a reaction to a question that mentions edible insects. So when we hear that the Davos said is talking about, you will eat the bugs, you will live in the pod, you will owe nothing and be happy, they mean that. They mean that. Even at the conference where they were clearly trying to downplay

a lot of their more ambitious projects, that is clearly something that they have in mind. And if you listen to that guy, I don't think that that guy has bad intentions. I think that guy probably has very good intentions. I think he genuinely believes that is a virtuous thing to do, is this is the other fact of the great reset and the plans of the liberal elites who want to remake the world after their own image. They believe that they are doing the right thing. And their plan makes sense if you start with the premise that there is no God, there is no soul, there is no such thing as dignity. We're all just kind of random product. of evolution, and we're all going to get wiped out by the sun monster if we don't stop living like dignified human beings. If you start with all those premises, you're going to end up at that

conclusion. It's like what always happens in logic. Garbage in, garbage out. Speaking of skepticism, of scientific advances, there's a new study just came out. You're going to be shocked to hear this one. A new study shows that puberty blockers might cause depression. So if you pump little kids full of drugs to stop them from going through puberty, this might kind of mess them up a little bit. Breaking news, I know. Stop the presses. This is a study that was done on animals, and it found out that these puberty blockers might have all these problems. All decades after doctors began to give these puberty blockers to children. This study was the first of its kind to use an animal model to examine the potential neurological and psychiatric effects of the

puberty blockers. And they found that they had profound effects of increased depression in female mice and then a male mice increased stress and a loss of interest in female mice. Profound, profound effects. All 22 years after doctors, quack started prescribing these to kids, this always happens. This has happened throughout all of history. And you know this because of now how we look at scientific procedures from the past. We look at things like lobotomies. And we say, wow, that's ghastly. When women seemed to be a little bit hysterical and eccentric, we used to just scramble up their brains. That was the consensus medical procedure from all the fancy people in the white lab coats. Before that, when people had various

ailments, we would put leeches on their body, or we would cut them open a little bit and just get some blood to come out, because we thought, if you get rid of the bad blood, then they might improve. We've had all sorts of quack procedures for all of human history. And so if you observe that from the perspective of history, you're a sophisticated, educated person. But in my experience, it's always the very same people who can look back at the history of medical science and mock it or be aghast at the kind of procedures that were conducted, they're the very same people who pretend that now we've figured everything out and that you can't question the science. In fact, I did this interview. It went viral with this medical student, Bronte Remzig, who's a kind of

TikTok pro-abortion activist. And her argument for abortion consistently boiled down to, well, the American Association of Obstetricians says that abortion is good. So that's the science and that's why we need to do it. I said, okay, well, if you're just deferring to the authority of the scientists, in the 1950s, the scientific consensus was that performing lobotomies on hysterical women was good. Would you have performed a lobotomy if you were a doctor or medical student in the 50s, and that's what the trade associations of the doctors told you to do? And this girl, got to give her credit for honesty, she kept contradicting herself a little bit, but she did say, yes, I would have. Yeah, I totally would have. Say, well, okay, at least you're consistent.

I would not have. Call me crazy. Call me a radical. I would not have performed a lobotomy, even if the scientific consensus told me to. I gave a speech somewhat recently about how science is fake. The only thing I really know about science is that it has been wrong about pretty much everything for all of human history. Over the long course of history, it has gotten pretty much everything wrong. And so the question is not, wow, gosh, maybe we need to stop these puberty blocking drugs. Yeah, of course we do. But what else? What else are we doing right now? We were told that those MRNA vaccines were totally safe, totally effective. We very quickly found out that they were not very effective.

Now we're finding out that they don't seem all that safe either. Anybody with two brain cells to rub together could have known this at the time, except for the elites, except for the scientists. Those were the only ones that got fooled. It's how I think about Katanji Jackson, the justice on the Supreme Court, who was asked during her confirmation. what is a woman? She couldn't answer it. So I don't know. I'm not a biologist. Katanchi Jackson has two degrees from Harvard. Not one but two, an undergraduate and a graduate degree. And I thought, of course, of course. Any random Joe on the street could tell you what a woman is. It takes two degrees from Harvard to not know what a woman is. Of course. Any random Joe on the street

could have told you pumping little kids full of drugs to stop them from going through puberty, probably wasn't going to be the best thing we've ever done. 22 years later, the guys in the lab coats realized, huh, maybe this isn't, maybe this isn't the best idea. We figured it all out now, though. Now we figured out science, right? Technological advances are not always progress. They're not always good.

Great example of this. I tried to talk about this over a week ago, and I just kept running out of time, but I think it fits in very well with what we're talking about right now. Anna Kendrick, the actress, recently went on a podcast to lament a breakup that she just had with some guy that she was really in love with, but they never got married and then they broke up. And very sad, tale as old as time in Hollywood, but it got really, really dark when Anna Kendrick revealed that she and this guy had actually created embryos together. That is, they'd conceived babies that they just locked away in a freezer who now, I suppose, will remain in a freezer. who now I suppose will remain in that freezer forever.

I was with someone and this was somebody I lived with and for all intents and purposes my husband. Really, we had embryos together and we, you know, this was my person. And then about six years in somewhere around there, I remember telling my brother when things had first kind of gone down, I'm living with a stranger. Like, I don't know what's happening. It wasn't just the, oh, I'm losing a relationship.

It was that I believed that if we broke up or, you know, if he left basically, it was a confirmation that it's because I'm impossible. I'm lucky that he's even tolerating my bullshit. Okay, so she's saying a lot of things here that don't make sense. She said, look, this guy was for all intents and purposes my husband. But he wasn't. And you were not for all intents and purposes his wife because you didn't have that ring and you didn't take that vow

before the minister and the witnesses and the public and God and because you didn't have that marriage contract, you weren't. You were his concubine. You could have maybe even become his common-law wife if you had lived together longer. Cohabitation is not for all intents and purposes the same thing as marriage. You're missing the essential part of marriage, which is the vow to remain together. And then you went further down this route of irresponsibility, or you and this guy went further down this route of irresponsibility. and techno dystopia, you had children, but you didn't quite have children. And the way that she says this is so jarring. It kind of sends a chill up your back.

She goes, yeah, look, I mean, look, we live together, you know, we shared a refrigerator, we had the same Uber Eats account, and we had embryos, you know, and we had a dog, and we, you know, we, he sometimes took the pillow in the middle of the night, and we created human beings together that we put in a freezer, you know, and then we, and sometimes we even borrowed each other's cars. Say, hold on, wait, what did you just say? I said we sometimes barred each other's cars. No, before that. Oh, you know, I, no, I said that we shared the same refrigerator. No, after that, what was the thing of, oh, we had embryos together? You had embryos together? Oh, you had children. Well, not quite. Not quite. Because now what you can do, because of our

technological advances is you can make the most consequential decision, maybe of your life, certainly one of them, to have children, you can engage in the most significant act, one of the most significant acts you can ever engage in while still pretending that you haven't made that decision, while still pretending that you haven't committed that action, while remaining, as modern people are so inclined to try to remain, totally uncommitted. Because we know that whenever you make a decision to do something, all of a sudden, you are foreclosing the other options available. When you decide to marry one person, you are simultaneously deciding not to marry this other person or that other person or this.

And I'm not just saying this in a flippant way. Oh, well, I'm picking this one gal. That means all the other gals in the world are off. Too bad. I would have fun with him. No, you're being a little more specific. Maybe, you know, you're dating this woman, but you still have an old flame for your old high school sweetheart. I don't know. Or you still, you have a crush on that girl from whatever. And you still, you're ex-girlfriend, you and you think about her sometimes. And you are deciding. No, that person dead to me. That person dead to me. That other person dead to me. That other person dead to me. I will never fulfill that love story that I wanted to fulfill, because I am making a decision here. And two roads diverged in a yellow wood, and sorry I could not be one traveler and travel both long I stood and looked down one as far as I could to wear it bent in the undergrowth. Then took the other as just as fair.

And having perhaps better claim because it was grassy and wanted to wear. As for that, the passing there had lain them equally about the same. And each that morning equally lay and leaves no trod and black. Oh, I kept the first for another day. but knowing how way leads on to way. I doubted that I should ever come back, and I shall say this with a sigh somewhere ages and ages hence. Two roads diverged and wood and I, I took the one less traveled and that has made all the difference when in fact, there's no evidence that the other road was less traveled or the other one was more traveled or anything like that. You're making a decision

and you know that way leads on to way and you're not going to come back to the other one. And people don't want to do that anymore. That's why younger people don't tend to stay in one career. They tend to kind of switch up their jobs and switch up their careers. That's why young people don't get married early these days. Well, we just need to meet new people and travel and have new experiences. This is why young people very often don't want to have children these days. It's because when you have children, you are closing off a stage of life that you were in adolescence and you're entering into a new stage of life and people don't want to do this.

This is why young people these days, I think, remain enamored of their childhood interests. It's why you have so many more young people these days continuing to pursue the same kinds of activities that they did when they were children. I said, look, I'm not a big Disney guy, but I could see an argument for why adults can go to Disney World. But the reason that adults should go to Disney World is to take their children there.

I think it's fine for adults to play little board games and even video games and whatever. They can do all that stuff. But at a certain point, these things that are really for children become weird for adults to do, unless the adults are doing it with their children. You actually get this opportunity to kind of relive your childhood

and engage in all these fun things and roll around on the ground and wrestle and play and, I don't know, throw a ball around. But if you do it just for yourself and you pretend that you're still a child, that's going to be grotesque. If you do it in a natural and orderly flow of life where you make a decision, go on, enter into society, have kids, play around, do all the stuff that people are supposed to do, then it's nice and it's nice and it makes sense and it's good and you're not stuck in this grotesquery

where you're like a hamster spinning on a wheel. You're like a hamster that was pumped with puberty blockers spinning on a wheel and you don't go into maturity and then you end up whining on podcasts about how you don't seem to be going anywhere. This month, we are celebrating the anniversary of one of the greatest moments in Daily Wire history. After months of us leading the legal battle against the federal government and a national do not comply campaign, the Supreme Court ruled in our favor and blocked the Biden administration's outrageous vaccine mandate. This mandate would have set a dangerous precedent giving the unelected OSHA power over the personal medical decisions of American citizens. The Supreme Court recognized this gross power grab and made the right decision, and we are so proud

to have led the charge in this fight. But we could not have done it without you. Thousands of you joined the Daily Wire and over a million Americans signed our petition against the mandates to celebrate, we are offering 40% off our annual memberships with the code, do not comply. Had we not won that Supreme Court case, the Daily Wire would have had to either mandate the vaccine or shut down. And it's not just the Daily Wire, this is true of all the private companies around the country. There would not have been some third option because we would have been political targets. The government would have sent its jackbooted thugs here. And they would have fined us hundreds of thousands of dollars every single day until after, after,

not that many days, we had no money left, and then they would have closed the doors down. Okay. So to celebrate one of the greatest moments in DailyWire history, with 40% off your annual membership, you can go to at dailywire.com slash subscribe, join the winning team as we continue to crush the libs as do not comply for 40% off. Do not comply. Speaking of life, there was a celebration of life for Diamond. I mentioned on the show, just a day or two after it happened. That diamond of diamond and silk fame recently died. She was quite young.

Gosh, I think she was only 54 or something like that. And she was great. I only got to meet her, I think a couple of times. I was on her show. She may have been on my show. And I really just loved the whole act, and I thought she was really, really talented and stood up for important things

at a consequential moment in American history. and very courageously endorsed Donald Trump, which at the time was not really smiled upon by the powers that be. And so Trump has come out with statements about this lady, wonderful lady, and said, you know, there's going to be a celebration of life, and you should all, you know, say prayers for her. Sunday, January 8, 2023, the world lost an angel and true friend. And Lynette Diamond, Hardaway, she was great.

Diamond lived a life founded on her passion and love for all of humanity. The legacy she lives behind will forever remain in our heart. She was a really great person. Please join us on Saturday, January 21st, in Fayetteville, North Carolina. She loved that state, and so do I. As we celebrate the life of Diamond. She lived it in a. credible way and we're going to have a wonderful celebration and ceremony.

All of Diamond's families and silk. We love Silk. Her sister, she loved her sister so much and they loved each other and they really loved the world. They were with me from the beginning and they never wavered. So we're going to celebrate Silk. We'll be there, but I'll be there and we're going to celebrate the life of Diamond. See you in North Carolina. Thank you. thing for Trump to do and wonderful for everyone to get together and pray for a diamond and think back on all the good memories. The reason I mention this in particular is because of a phrase that kept coming up in President Trump's comments. He said, the celebration, we're going to celebrate the life. It's a celebration of life. It's a celebration of life. This is how it was reported in the news.

This was not a funeral. This was not awake. This was a celebration of life. And increasingly, that is what funerals are called in our culture. You will, frankly, now it might be even more common than the word funeral. Come, we're going to have a celebration of life. And it's a little different than a funeral. A funeral, that's where the body is. You're in the presence of the body. If it's an open casket wake, you actually see the body.

But you're at least in the presence of the body. You say prayers. There's usually a priest. There is a right and ritual to this. There can be a requiem mass, perhaps. It happens over a series of a couple or a few days. When you go, you throw flowers on the coffin. It's lowered into the ground.

You bury it. And that's that. And then you lay the body to rest. A celebration of life doesn't do that. Celebration of life, usually the body is not present, and it's just the family and friends get together. And the whole point of it is it's supposed to be a happy time. Don't be sad.

The deceased person wouldn't want you to be sad. You should be happy. Let's get some upbeat music going. and let's get some, let's be festive and let's all be happy. And I just, I always find the celebrations of life to be trying too hard. I think it's a big mistake for people to do. I know a lot of people do it. I've been to plenty of them.

But I think the funeral idea has it more correct. Because death is a genuinely sad thing. And we can pretend that it's not a sad thing. We say, oh, well, let's just celebrate the life. Let's ignore the fact of death. Let's just focus on the happy times. But it's going to be there. You're not going to ignore that reality.

Kind of reminds me of what we're talking about at the top of the show. Democrats want to ignore the political realities. And they want to say, no, no, no. It's only if you observe them. That's when the problem kicks in. Don't talk about the open border. Because when you mention the open border, that's when it's really going to be a problem

and people are going to flood over. Don't mention the sad fact of death. As long as we all just pretend to be happy, then we'll all be happy. That's not true. Jesus wept when his friend died. Jesus wept. Jesus, who is incarnate to redeem mankind from death and give mankind life eternal, weeps when his friend dies. Moments before, he raises his friend from the dead.

Why does he weep? It's the shortest verse in the Gospels. Jesus wept. Why? He weeps because death is a sad thing. It's so sad. It's so tragic that God gave his only begotten son to suffer and die so that mankind might have eternal life. So it seems to me, as with so many things in our culture, when we're trying to be happy by ignoring reality, when in fact the only chance that we have of really being happy is if we accept reality in all its sadness, in all its tragedy, and see through it, and push back through that reality, you have to first, I think, in my own experience, been to a number of funerals and celebrations of life. You have to accept the sad fact. This person has died and death is bad and their soul is departed and their body is going to turn to dust.

But if you have faith in the resurrection, you say, but that's not the end of the story. And if you don't have faith in the resurrection, if you're more inclined to these kind of secular affairs, again, I'm not accusing Diamond and Silk of being secularists, or I don't know their religious views. It's just very common in our culture now to engage in what is essentially a secular affair, which is a celebration of life. If you just take the secular view of things, then you can pretend that there's hope, but you don't really have hope. You don't actually. You really think that is the end of the story. Taking a dirt nap and turn into worm food, that really is the end of the story for you. And I just don't think that it is. It reminds me of a C.S. Lewis quote,

I go back to a lot. If you look for truth, you might find comfort. You might. I think you will find comfort. But if you look for the truth, you might find comfort in the end. But if you look for comfort, you will find neither truth nor comfort. You will find only soft soap and wishful thinking to begin. Festivities and upbeat rock music and just focus on the good times. And in the end, despair. Let's not do that. You have a look reality square in the face if you want to have any hope of joy and happiness. If you just, if you try to ignore reality, it's not going to get you there. Speaking of death, Elon Musk says that after he got his second COVID booster shot, he felt like he was dying. He said, I had major side effects from my second booster shot, felt like I was dying

for several days, hopefully no permanent damage, but I don't know. And my cousin, who's young and in peak health, had a serious case of myocarditis, had to go to the hospital. The reason, the reason, The reason this matters is not because this is a novel thing. I think many people I know who received the COVID shot, any of the COVID shots, said, oh, yeah, I felt really bad right after I took it, or after the boosters, or yeah, my uncle died right shortly thereafter, or oh, so-and-so had a stroke, or so-and-so had a blood clot, or so-and-so, whatever. So that isn't surprising, at least not to me, at least not to the people who had the number of this whole thing from the earliest days. the reason it matters is because Elon Musk is so prominent. He controls a social media website. Had Elon Musk not owned Twitter and posted that comment on Twitter in the pre-Elon Twitter days, he might have been banned for it. Okay. And all of this takes me back to when I was a little kid, I would see these commercials for mesothelioma and say, have you or a loved one been diagnosed with mesothelioma? You may be entitled to financial compensation. Call the law group of Jacobian Myers, or I forget, whichever

log group it was, and you can join a class action because you were exposed to dangerous chemicals. And this crops up every year. There's some version of this on the air. And there were people who actually believed that with this COVID shot, or this series of COVID shots, from the people who had been wrong about everything, and in some cases who had lied about everything in the epidemic, that this COVID shot that was rushed through with this experimental kind of drug treatment, that there would be no side effects whatsoever. No, no, no, now we figured out the science. No, no, no, now we figured. There are eternal problems that have plagued science and politics and mankind since the dawn of time. But sometime around 2019, we just figured it all out. And now

those questions. If you can believe that, and very often it's the elites who believe that. very often it's the people with the fancy degrees who have people who have two degrees from Harvard who believe that. If you can believe that, you can believe absolutely anything at all. And very often those people do. The rest of the show continues. Now I'm very happy now that we're live, totally live again,

to have the member block back. You do not want to miss it. It's Music Monday, baby. We're listening to some cool, fast, hip tunes. I don't even know what the tune is yet. I'll read the sheet. The producers left me on the member block. Become a member right now. Use code NOLS, KNOW LES at checkout for two months free on all annual plans. We'll see you over there.