The Michael Knowles Show - Ep. 1328 - Biden Lies About Post 9/11 Visit

Episode Date: September 12, 2023

Biden mumbles incoherently around the world, a major political figure endorses Trump, and California passes the most aggressive bill yet to trans the kids.   Ep.1328   - - -  Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEl   - - -    DailyWire+:   Get 25% of your DailyWire+ membership: https://bit.ly/3VhjaTs   Get your Michael Knowles merch here: https://bit.ly/3X6tlKY    - - -    Today’s Sponsors:   Birch Gold - Text "KNOWLES" to 989898 for your no-cost, no-obligation, FREE information kit: https://birchgold.com/knowles   Provia - Exclusive discount for my listeners! http://www.proviahair.com/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

Joe Biden is wrapping up his whirlwind tour of Vietnam as he wraps up most engagements these days by muttering listlessly before shuffling off the stage. And let's see. I'm just following my orders there. Staff, if anybody haven't spoken, I ain't calling on you. I'm calling on. I said they have five questions. I need it. Be away.

Oh yeah, Anita, V-O-A. He opens up. He says, hey, where's the staff? What was I supposed? Who was I supposed to call on? I can't find who I was supposed to call on. All right, does anyone have questions? And then some of the actual reporters who might ask potentially a challenging question, raise their hands. He says, no, no, not you. I'm not calling you. Who was I supposed to call on? Anyway, all right, bye. The worst part of Biden's performance is not the senility, which we've all known about for years. And it's not even the cynicism, which we've all known about for decades. It's the transparency. Biden isn't even trying to hide his unaccountability. He isn't even trying to pretend to take serious questions from an independent press. He isn't even really claiming to be running the show. In some ways, transparency is worse than deceit. At least if Biden were trying to deceive us into thinking that he's really in charge and responsive to the people. At least it would signal that he respects our intelligence or that he cares what we think. But he doesn't. He jokes about his irresponsibility. He doesn't campaign. He doesn't act as though he needs our votes. And maybe that's because, with all the recent changes

to our electoral system, he doesn't. I'm Michael Knowles. This is the Michael Knowles show. We've got really important news. Miley Cyrus is opening up about her divorce. But we're going to push that pressing national news just a little bit to get to more of Biden because yesterday was obviously the anniversary of the September 11th terror attacks. Very traumatic day for everybody my age and older and a day of incredible historical significance for people who were younger than me who don't really remember what happened. and Joe Biden decided to mark that day also by not remembering what happened. Browns here in New York. And I remember standing there the next day and looking at the building. I felt like I was looking through the gates of hell.

It looked so devastating because the way you could, from where you could stand. That didn't happen. On September 12th, Joe Biden was in Washington, D.C., and he was voting in the Senate and the Capitol on a round. resolution to condemn the World Trade Center attacks. He probably believes, maybe he believes that he was in New York on that day. I actually think it's not that he knows that he's lying. And it's also not that he is totally bought into the lie that he actually believes that it's true. I think there's a third possibility here, which is that Joe Biden doesn't care if what he

says is true. That's called cynicism. It's between deceit and senility. There is this place where Joe Biden has lived for his entire political career, and it's cynicism, indifference to the truth. Ponschus Pilate is probably the typical cynic, who, when he's confronted by Christ, who says, I am the truth, Pilate says, what is truth? Oh, what is truth? Come on, there's no such thing as truth. I think that's where Joe Biden is. He just doesn't, he'll just say whatever sounds good. And maybe he believes it, maybe he doesn't, I think he just doesn't really care. And when you're in a place where the politicians are often going to mislead you, but when you're in a place where they don't even care, they're not even conscious of the fact that they're misleading you, for whom words are just sounds

that sometimes make people feel more inclined to like you and applaud. rather than words constituting meaningful speech with which we can deliberate and come to rational conclusions about the world and decide on a program for the entire political community, what is good, what is true, what is beautiful, how are we going to flourish? When we get to a point where words are just sounds, we are reduced to just grunting baboons. We've ceased to live in human society. I don't want to be too hyperbolic about it, but the fact that that speech has been robbed of its meaning. the fact that we are no longer even scandalized when our politicians lie to us, or even more scandalous, don't care about the truth at all. That accounts for a great deal of our present political problems. There are always political problems in every society, but ours right now are different

and worse than they have been in the past. Now, speaking of presidents in the presidential race, President Trump, the chief rival to Joe Biden right now, has just received a really, really big endorsement. This from South Dakota governor, Christyneau. It is my honor to present to you the man in the arena. He is a man of significance. He is the leader, the fighter that our country needs.

He has my full and complete endorsement for president of the United States of America. Win and save this country. Ladies and gentlemen, the 45th and the 47th, president of the United States. There you have it. generally have not covered endorsements. I mentioned early on when DeSantis was getting some

congressmen because they were some of the first endorsements that he had gotten, people who decided to turn on Trump and go for another guy. I haven't really covered many of the endorsements since. And the reason I'm covering this one, the reason that this one is significant is because Christy Noem is not just a Republican governor. She was a potential presidential candidate. Christy Gnome, like Glenn Yonkin and Virginia, was obviously considering running for president herself. She set herself up to do that during COVID. She was playing kind of coy with it after COVID right up until a couple days ago, I guess. Now she's decided that she's going to endorse Trump, which to me says not only that she thinks that Trump is the best candidate,

which is explicitly what she's saying, but what it means is she believes that Trump just is going to be the nominee. And so she thinks not only is it her interest to get on Trump's side in this battle between him and DeSantis and Vivek and Chris Christie or whoever, but she thinks it's in her interest not to run against him. Trust me, if Christy Noem thought that Donald Trump had any weakness right now and that she would have a shot at the presidency, she would be running. Inside every governor is a president just waiting to get out. Some uncharitable people have asked how many governors, how many presidents are, how many presidents are waiting inside of Chris Christie, which I don't, that's not very nice. That's not, that's a not a nice thing to say at all. But Christy Noem wants to be president and she's not going to run and she is going to endorse this guy because she thinks in another sign of something we've been

talking about for weeks, that the presidential primary is, if not over, pretty severely tilted in the direction of Donald John Trump. Okay, this is a man who likes to have his name written in gold all over the United States, all over the world. And when you want gold, you got to check out Birch Gold. Right now, text Knowles to 98-98-98-Vladimir Putin called the U.S. dollars drop in dominance, quote, objective and irreversible, as Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, formally agreed to use local currencies in trade instead of the U.S. dollar. As demand for the dollar weakens, the buying power of the dollar weakens,

that is why Birch gold is busier than ever. Investors and savers are looking to harness the power of physical gold, held in a tax-sheltered IRA. You can, too. You can protect your IRA or 401k by diversifying with gold from Birch Gold. As the U.S. dollar continues to receive pressure from foreign countries, digital currency and central banks arm yourself with information on how to protect your savings. Learn if gold is right for you, too.

Text Knowles, KNAWLAS to 98-98-98. They will send you a free info kit on gold. With an A-plus rating with the Better Business Bureau, thousands of happy customers, and countless five-star reviews, I trust Birch Gold to help you diversify into gold if central bank digital currency becomes a reality, it will be nice to have some gold to depend on. Right now, Tex-N-N-O-L-EAS to 98-N-A-N-A-N-A-N-A-P. Speaking of presidential candidates, the Vake Ramoswami has just come out.

Another step in his bold campaign to not play it safe, to keep shaking things up, to take strong stances on policy issues. The Vake has just come out against birthright citizenship. So I would end birthright citizenship for illegal immigrants. But not for legal immigrants? And the children of illegal immigrants. Well, what does it mean for everybody else? I mean, we're all citizens, whether a sixth generation or first generation in my case, if you're born in this country, you have citizenship if you're born under legal circumstances.

But I think that if somebody comes to this country illegally and has a child while here, I do think we have to end birthright citizenship. But does that mean you deport like a one-year-old? I think you would do the family. You would take the whole family. So I'm strongly opposed to policies that would separate kids from their parents. I think that that was discussed even in the Trump administration and otherwise as a tactic for deterring people from coming.

As a pro-family leader, I will not adopt such a policy, but we will send back the family unit as such. And I think that if you came to this country illegally, the right answer is you have to be sent back to your country of origin, come back through the same legal means, getting in the same line that everybody who's coming into this country legally is already pursuing. I tend to agree. I think he makes a good point here. And you're going to have some people mostly on the left, but even some people on the right who say, how dare you? Birthright citizenship is a core bedrock principle of this country. You're upending. Well,

it's not, actually. It's not. A lot of what? A lot of people. believe about the Constitution and American history and the American form of government is not true. A lot of it is revisionism from the middle of the 20th century. And this would be a good example of that. I'm not saying that it's clear from the text of the Constitution that the children born to illegal immigrants on U.S. soil are not citizens. That's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is I think it's pretty clearly an open legal question. Here's the text. The text that we have is from the 14th Amendment is all persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the state

wherein they reside. Now, the key here is subject to the jurisdiction thereof. Obviously, anybody who is on American soil ever is subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. in a certain sense in that when you travel to foreign places, you have to observe the laws of those places. But they are not subject to the jurisdiction in the full sense, in that they are not citizens of that country. There are clear exceptions to this issue made by, determined by the courts over time. Native Americans were not subject. Children of diplomats, not subject occupying soldiers, not subject to the jurisdiction thereof. And therefore, all of their children did not automatically receive birthright citizenship. But it's been debated for a

long time now. The case that most clearly weighed in on this was from 1898. It was U.S. versus Wong Kim Ark, which seemed to determine the matter on the side of birthright citizenship. But it remains an open

question. And it gets to something we were talking about yesterday, which is we look to statutes, we look to constitutional interpretation, we look even back before the founding of our country. We look to the common law tradition, which is another place where we get some evidence for birthright citizenship, though it's a little bit different when we're talking about

whether or not someone is born the subject to a king, which is what we get from the English common law tradition, versus a citizen of a republic such as the United States, which entails, one might argue, many more privileges and many fewer responsibilities. It's an open question, and the answers are not always clear. And changing political circumstances sometimes change the way that eternal principles can be applied in politics. That's why politics is different from archaeology. That's why politics is different from history. That's why politics is different from philosophy, because there are changing circumstances in the present that we're in. So not only are we interpreting documents, but we are writing the script as well. And it is simply a fact that seven and a half

percent of all births in the United States, we're talking about 300,000 births per year, are to illegal aliens, 7.5%. That's in addition to the millions of foreigners just entering our country illegally and changing our political structure. Then their children who account for 7.5% of all U.S. births, pre-year, all of that population growth, 7.5% are going to be U.S. citizens. That is a radical changing of the demographics of the United States and a radical changing of the citizenship, which is a radical changing of the political order. That's why the Democrats are encouraging it. And I know I got in trouble a little bit for pointing out that sometimes we need to be a little more willing to wield power in the cases of emergencies that threatened the entirety of the law,

not just one minor aspect of the law, but the entirety of the law, the entirety of the political community. This might be a good example of that, where if you have, contrary to the letter of the law, and certainly to the spirit of the law, where you have a foreign invasion radically changing your political community, which in a republic, by the way, means you're changing the whole thing because we're supposed to have self-government here. Well, in that case, we might need to clarify what exactly is meant by all persons born or naturalized in the United States or citizens of the United States, because we know the 14th Amendment was passed over the question of slavery. That's what it was about. The 14th Amendment has absolutely nothing to do with Guatemalan economic migrants pouring across the border,

the border which will not be defended by Democrats because they know that it will give them political advantage, and which won't be defended even by the Chamber of Commerce Republicans because they want to get cheap labor. We know that, okay? So maybe we need to be willing to wield power. Or we can just sit on our hands and we can whine and complain and we can say, oh, if only the Democrats would support the border. I mean, we're not going to do anything about it because, you know, U.S. v. Wong, Kim Ark in 1898 said that we can't. So we're just going to sit there. It's the same thing as the people who say, well, we can't, we can't regulate Google because you see if we, Google is controlling

the entire public square and all of our speech in the society. But, you know, look, if we regulate Google, that's a private business, they can do whatever they want. Well, then maybe the liberals will regulate our businesses, which they're already doing. Well, if we impose certain boundaries on and, and manage the way that speech is governed in our society. Well, the left might do that too, which they're obviously already doing. That's the whole point. That's the problem we have to address. Okay. And that's a big, that's a big issue, because if you sit on your hands long enough, seven and a half percent of all births per year, you just have a new country at a certain point. And Vivek sees that. And Vivek is steal. This is why he's a candidate who is largely favored by

younger conservatives who recognize that Ronald Reagan's a great guy, Bill Biden. Luckily, he's a great guy. We love our 20th century conservatives, but we have new challenges now. They dealt with their challenges. We have new challenges now. And we need to handle them ourselves. Now, speaking of people in places that they don't belong, there's a fella wants to go into the girls' restroom. He has now gone viral. This video is the It's Mam video. You remember that video in the bodega? It's ma'am. Do I look like a man to you? It's a ma'am. This is, he's a ma'am. This is he. It's ma'am version 2.0. My daughter

goes into those bathroom and no man needs to be in there. You understand me? You are a man. You are a man. You are a man. Start acting like a man. Yeah, let's go outside. You're going to call me a man. You're a man. You're a man. You're a man. You're going to play like one.

Yeah, it's go. What? What happened? Why? Why are you acting this way? I'm a man, so are you. No, I'm not. I'm not a man. What are you?

I was born intersex, dude. I was born intersex, yeah. I was born with both. Sir, you're going to have a problem if you keep going into women's bathroom. Somebody's going to do something to you. I'm a new. I'm just telling you the truth. I'm a man.

You want to go outside? Let's take this outside. Classic female histrionics. You know, this is just every time, every time I disagree with a woman in public, it's always, let's go outside brother or I'm going to beat you into a bloody pulp you know it's just like that's just the way women talk it's just like blah blah blah it's amazing you know so obvious that this man is a woman I love his excuse he says no no no I was born intersex which is hermaphroditic you know genital ambiguity which does happen it's rare but it does happen but he wasn't I would be

willing to bet a fair chunk of change that that guy was not very often transgender identifying people will try to use the case of sexual ambiguity, genital ambiguity at birth to argue for their ideology, which has nothing to do with biology and nothing to do with any ambiguity. It's just transgenderism is the ideology according to which one's body has nothing to do with one's gender identity. Hermaphroditism intersects is when it's a little bit unclear. In the case of that fella, even if he really wants,

intersex or hermaphroditic, it wouldn't be unclear. He's obviously a dude, even if he's got some genital deformities. So he would still go into the men's restroom, and he's obviously a guy. But it's very telling that the trans-identifying people always go to hermaphroditism. They always go to intersex, because even they know that their ideology is completely incoherent. It is not defensible according to anything even resembling a serious epistemology or anthropology. And And so they've got to pull a fast one. You know, they've got to move the goalposts. But even then, doesn't quite work.

If a lady is screaming at you, Adam's apple jiggling in fury and telling you that he wants to take you outside and beat you into a bloody pulp, you could probably be justified in assuming that is a man. Now, very, very important for all of you. For women, and especially for men, is your hair thinning? When you've got to check out Provia. Right now, go to Proviahair.com slash Knowles. Are you one of the millions of American men and women dealing with premature hair thinning and hair loss? Well, maybe you're scared about inheriting that thinning look because it runs in the family. Finally, there is a real solution that delivers on its promise without the heart.

side effects, unwanted chemicals, and unpleasant smells. Provia hair care uses a safe, natural ingredient called Procopil, to effectively target the three main causes of premature hair thinning and loss. Provia supports healthy scalp circulation and delivers nourishing nutrients, strengthen hair follicles, and anchor them to your scalp. Provia guarantees more hair on your head than in the shower drain. Provia is effective for men and women of any age and safe, uncolored, treated, and styled hair. Provia works guaranteed or 100% of your money back. It is that easy.

You know, I have relied on my hair a lot in my public life. Right now, new customers save over 50% off Provia's introductory package at Proviahair.com slash Knowles. See results for yourself right now. Do not wait. Proviahair.com slash Knowles. If you're even mildly familiar with this show, you're probably aware of my autumnal affinity for a certain seasonal beverage. I am a certified aficionado of the PSL, the pumpkin spice latte. I am a swarthy Italian man for nine months of the year, but then when fall rolls around, I transform, I transition

into a very pale, basic white girl in a north face jacket and an infinity scarf. So what better way to bring the fall atmosphere into your home than with the all-new, Michael Knowles Pumpkin Spice candle. That's right, baby. It's wonderful. It's filled with cinnamon and presumably pumpkin spice. It's now available in my collection at dailywire.com slash shop. These are going to sell out fast.

I'm sure I know that they are. They're probably sold out already by the time you're listening to it. If you do want one, go get it right now. And then also speaking in my collection, yes or no, the game has sold out again. So I warn you, don't say I didn't tell you. Don't say I didn't tell you so. All right. I always tell you this. And it did sell out. So I hate to say it, but that's the way it goes. It will come back in stock. You need to secure your game if you have not already, especially as we start to approach Thanksgiving and the Christmas season. They're going to sell even faster. If you already have the game, be sure to get the all-new conspiracy theory expansion pack in time for spooky season.

Do not wait. Order your pumpkin spice candles and your yes or no game over at dailywire.com slash shop today. Speaking of transgenderism, do I get to keep any of my show on YouTube today? No, all right. I hope you're at DailyWire.com right now, and I hope you're at M. Null's show on Twitter. California has just passed a bill that would require judges to consider whether parents affirm gender identity, that is, go along and trans their kids, in custody battles. This is a Democrat-backed bill, obviously AB-9-57, passed the State Assembly on Friday and the State Senate on Thursday. so if Newsom signs it, the bill will require judges to consider how pro-trans a parent is in custody battles. And if you're not pro-trans, if you won't trans your kid, you could lose custody of your kid.

To which I would advise all of my friends in California, if you're having a child, if you have a child already, flee. You have to flee. I guess if you are in a very strict, strong, highly defined marriage. You know, you're a Catholic who believes in Catholic teaching, or you're an Orthodox Jew, or you're a Muslim. And you take your faith very, very seriously not only on the question of sexuality, meaning gender identity, but also in the question of marriage, can you get divorced? You know, a Catholic church, we just, we just, there is no divorce. You're not allowed to divorce. So I'm not saying it has never happened, but that's a good sign.

Okay, you're not going to have to deal with Gavin Newsom over here trying to trans your kids and take your kids away from you if you won't chop his genitals off. If you're not in that, if you're like most people today who are a little bit unclear about what they think about marriage or maybe they're a little bit on the fence and I don't know. I don't go all the way with the crazy trans stuff, but I'm okay with some of the LGBT movement or whatever. If you're ambiguous in any way, get out, flee, run. man. This is an important rule in politics. You got to know when to hold them, know when to fold them, know when to walk away, and know when to run. This would be a case where you should run. Gavin Newsom is saying, I'm going to take your kid away from you and chop your kid up and turn your kid into a grotesque eunuch. And I'm going to brainwash your kid and I'm going to give your kid a

miserable life. And there's nothing you can do to stop it because I am wielding political power and the power of the law. And a lot of conservatives are not willing to do the same. This is something, this is the only thing that really disappoints me about many conservatives. And I know this situation is starting to change, but it's been true for too long. Conservatives don't want to fight back and they don't want to wield political power because they've bought into a BS liberal libertarian notion that wielding the government ever at all for any reason is unjust and terrible and tyrannical and authoritarian and blah, blah, blah, whatever. They're trying to chop your kids' genitals off and take them away from you and deprive you

of custody of your children. If you don't stand up and wield the government to stop that and to punish the very bad people who are doing this and to keep them out of political power for as long as you possibly can, then you are engaging in a moral failing. You're failing your political responsibility and your moral responsibility. in this case, your responsibility to your children. And it is because, it is precisely because Republicans have not wielded political power that the demography of California has radically changed.

And largely because of the influx of illegal immigrants, California has been able to be dominated by Democrats now because they just get more voters and they get more representation in the government. And so they get to wield more power. And Republicans, it started out on even an issue that seems totally unrelated to trans, They say, we're not going to do anything about the illegal immigration. Okay. Then you get to certain corrupt election practices, ballot harvesting, mail-in ballots. The Republicans say, well, we're not going to do too much about it. We don't want to seem like we're authoritarian or we don't

want people to vote. We don't want to be called racist or sexist or phobic or whatever nonsense they throw at us. So we're going to back away. Well, now we're at the point where Gavin Newsom's going to chop your kids up and take away your visitation. So now we're at the point, actually, where I think you have to make a tactical retreat. And you have to make a tactical retreat for what purpose. There's a big divide on the right. Part of the right says, we need to break up the country. We need there to be a conservative America and a liberal America and just break up the political entity, which is preposterous. It never happens. That never happens peacefully. It's not going to happen peacefully. The liberals are not going to do it. But the flip side of that is we need to tactically

retreat the conservatives to the red places, the liberals to the blue places, and then we conservatives need to impose our much better political vision on the whole country. and I know they're going to call us authoritarian, and I know it's not authoritarian to say, no, Gavin Newsom, you don't get to chop up a child. No, Gavin Newsom, you don't get to take a kid away from his dad because his dad knows that he's a boy. That's not authoritarian. That's just. That's liberal in the truest sense of the word. That's good. That's right. That's the point of being a citizen in a self-governing republic. Come on. All right. That rant is over, but we're still speaking. of women's issues, and we get to Miley Cyrus. You know I'm a Miley fan. I mean, I don't listen to her music. I don't really listen to any modern music, but I kind of get a kick out of her because she says things that are at least contrary to what the liberals always believe sometimes, and I think she's got a good voice, and I always love the party in the USA. So here is Miley Cyrus explaining her divorce. I have to slow down, because this is like actually serious. So Glastonbury was in June,

which was when the decision had been made that me and Liam's commitment to being married just really came from, of course, a place of love first because we've been together for 10 years, but also from a place of trauma and just trying to rebuild as quickly as we could. The day of the show was the day that I had decided that it was no longer going to work in my life

to be in that relationship. So that was another moment where the work, the performance, the character came first. And I guess that's why it's now, so important to me for that to not be the case, that the human comes first. Notice how clinical and controlled Miley is here. If you're listening to this, and I bring up this story not because I care about celebrity gossip with Miley Cyrus, but because it tells you a lot about how to engage in society and a lot about how our political order works.

Miley is reading off an iPad. She's got her words written out perfectly here, and she's being very controlled. She goes, and that was the moment at which I decided that this relationship was not going to work in my life. And it's all this really vague clinical language. But then she says, she goes, look, I've always just worked, okay? And the show must go on. And I was working and I was working too much. And I think she's implying here the reason her marriage fell apart was because she and her husband just were too focused on their careers and just always put their work, which is show business, first above everything else. I think that's what a lot of people do.

A lot of people put their jobs first. That's a cause of a lot of marital strain. A lot of people put their careers first and their education and they're settling into their professional life first. That's why they don't get married until sometimes it's too late or it's much more difficult to get married. This is why they don't have kids. They put off having kids until very often it's too late. And it's a lie. it's a scam, and they come to regret it, and the people who get suckered in by even something

that seems noble, you know, getting on your hustle and working hard and putting the show first, even they will come to regret that very often. Because you want to work hard, and you want to be serious in your professional life, and you want to have good material means, but that's not everything. You want to put on a good show. Everybody's performing these days. Not only are we at the point of society where everyone's going to be famous for 15, minutes. Everyone is famous, at least at a local level, whenever they want to be, because we're

always all performing for TikTok and Instagram and Snapchat and Facebook and whatever, Twitter. So we're all always performing. Sometimes we put that show first. And this reminds me of a line that a Dante professor of mine told me once in Italy. You know, I was brief, in my wayward youth, I was briefly a professional actor. And this Dante professor of mine, he said, you know, yes, Miguelutsu. I I wanted to be an actor as a young boy. I took it to say very seriously. My mother discouraged it. She told me, there's the door you want to be an actor.

There's the door. But I thought about it. And I felt so sorry for him. And I said, oh, no. Professor, you never got to be an actor. You never got to live out your dream. And he said, oh, Megaluzo, I used to want to be an actor, but now I am the real thing. and I love that line.

I use that line. Yeah, yeah, I used to be an actor. Now I'm the real thing, and it's better to be the real thing. It's very nice to play a married woman on a sitcom or in a movie. I'm sure Miley Cyrus enjoys doing that. It is better to actually be a wife and a mother. It's better to be the real thing. It's true for men, too.

I'm sure it's fun being a rock star, but I'm sure it's fun to be a wife. a rock star and to play this kind of character where you're just beloved by everybody, it's better to be beloved by your family who actually will continue to care for you once the music dies down, where that's a deeper kind of love and commitment and reality. It's better to be the real thing. Megan Markle gave up being an actual princess so that she could audition to try to play princesses in Hollywood. That's how backwards our society. We love the semblance of the thing, but we're so afraid of the reality of it because we're afraid of commitment, because we're afraid of commitment, not just to another person, not just to circumstances and a home and a place,

but a commitment even to an idea, even to the truth. So we go out and we perform, even modern spirituality. We make these vague gestures about the universe, man, you know, and like the spirits, and the vibes. But we don't actually commit to religious belief because that would then impose certain obligations on us. Because if you really think that your prayers do something, then that raises the question, well, how do they do something?

Who hears our prayers? Who answers our prayers? What does He, God, demand of us as a result of that line of thinking? Theology, which is faith-seeking understanding. We don't want any of that. So we just keep making these half-hearted gestures. We just keep playing roles in movies, on TikTok, in our daily lives. And that will leave us empty.

The show is good, but the real thing is a lot better. Now, speaking of the show must go on. Got some good news a few days ago. I'm finally getting to it now. You remember in the spring, I gave a talk at the University of Pittsburgh, and this was protested. It was the last in a series of talks. One was with my colleague, Cabot Phillips. one was with Riley Gaines, my fellow Tennessean, and then the final one was me.

And the left in Pittsburgh and Pennsylvania was very upset that I was speaking because at CPAC, I made a comment that was obviously true and which the libs were furious about. But it's a comment that I'm not allowed to say on YouTube. I think you know which one I'm talking about, you know, that eradication from public life entirely. And so there were something like 11,000 signatures against my coming, the university tried to shut it down. The local politicians tried to shut it down. Antifa terrorists tried to shut it down by throwing an explosive at the building while we were walking on stage. Still, though, we were able to go on. They kept threatening. They set the street on fire. They were rioting. At the very end of our debate, the cops basically rushed us off stage and out of the building. So we had to cancel the meet and greet, had to cancel some of the events we had afterward. And then the University of Pittsburgh tried to punish the college Republicans for having the audacity to host me. by charging them an $18,000, almost $19,000 security fee. And ISI, the group that brought me the Intercollegiate Studies Institute and the College Republicans,

they fought back really hard. And Pitt got a lot of bad press, and now they are no longer requiring the CRs to pay that fee. That fee was effectively a Conservatives on campus fee. That was the fee to say, hey, we're a public university and we're not allowed to stop you from bringing ordinary conservatives to campus. But we're going to punish you for it. We're going to bankrupt you if you ever actually do it. And so it was very important that Pitt back down and those jerks over at Pitt finally called Uncle. And that's great news.

And it's great news especially because my new speech season is approaching. We're launching it this month. I'll give you the full run down to schools in a few weeks. We've got some great schools this semester. We're going to launch it September 26th at Georgetown. So if you're in Washington, D.C., head on over. I think you're going to reserve tickets now. So go check it out.

I'll see in D.C. And please don't throw any explosives at me. And if you do, I hope Georgetown. doesn't try to charge us all like 20 grand just for just for having ducked and missed the explosive. As you know, spooky season is quickly approaching. There will be demons out on the prowl. And I'm not just talking about those woke corporations who look upon your values with disdain. Let's unwoke Halloween with Jeremy's chocolate. Our delicious chocolate's come in two forms. He him with nuts and she her, which are nutless.

just as God intended. Don't be a ghoul. Head on over to jeremy's chocolate.com in order your chocolates right now in time for Halloween. My favorite comment yesterday is from A. Romano 703 who says,

this guy is always teaching me new words, perspicacious. Wow. Yes, I love that word, perspicacious. Having ready insight into things. Perspicacity. Is that a good one?

I like that. Bill Buckley used to do that. Bill O'Reilly used to do that, too. You have a word out there. They'd sprinkle in. perspicacious. Hmm, it's a good one.

Which one should I do today? I don't know. I haven't even thought of it. Speaking of schools, great news out of New York. New York City teachers who refuse to get the Fauci-Oachie are now going to get their jobs back with back pay. This is according to New York State Supreme Court Judge Ralph Porteo, who ruled that the decision to fire 10 employees of the New York Education Department and deny them religious exemptions was unlawful. arbitrary and capricious. So that's good news. We're so glad to hear it. But unfortunately, this is still a win for the libs because the libs, by passing these mandates, which were obviously

illegal and unconstitutional and which over time, if people just stood firm, very likely would have been ruled that way as we're seeing around the country and even in New York, they still used the mandates to pressure everyone else voluntarily to get the jabs. This was the secret story of the mandates. The mandates were not primarily about getting everyone to take the Fauci-Aouchi

through coercion. The mandates were about getting enough people voluntarily to take the Fauci-Oachie that even if this thing were overruled later on, it wouldn't matter. They would have already gotten what they wanted. What the Libs were doing here was asking

forgiveness rather than permission, which is generally a good rule in politics, because politics, especially Republican politics, lowercase R, you know, democratic politics, lowercase D, is about action. It's about things happening very quickly. Sometimes the action happens first, the deliberation happens later. Well, that's what we're seeing here. And they're going to do it again. They're going to try to do the exact same thing again. I hope people stand up. You know, Daily Wire stood up. We took the Biden administration all the way to the Supreme Court, and we won. But it's happening. It's happening all around the country. Now, speaking of this issue of immigration and the emergency and the crisis with immigration,

you know that New York City mayor, Eric Adams, who's a liberal Democrat, he just came out, he said, this immigration crisis, this is going to destroy New York City. And this is after Eric Adams had said for a long time we're sanctuary city, diversity is our strength, everyone's welcome here. But then they started coming after Greg Abbott and Ron DeSantis sent buses up New York, and all of a sudden, Eric Adams changed his tune. Well, now that Eric Adams changed his tune, even the liberals on the view, who are as establishment lib as they get, even they, after years of diversities are strength and no one is illegal and sanctuary cities are great, they're changing their tune too. This issue will destroy New York City, the city we knew. We're about to lose.

I think we need to find, and we've dealt with this before. I lived in Miami. I was an immigrant in Miami in the 80s. You'll remember when we had the Mariel boat lift. 125,000 Cubans came in a matter of six months. It puts tremendous stress on a city, on a community, on the social services. They need to be resettled elsewhere. They need to spread out.

This is a massive country. And it's only going to get worse with global warming. and climate change because people can't live in certain parts of this world. And don't forget about this totally unrelated boogeyman. We got to get that in here to every story. But listen to what Anandivara. Annavara is a huge live. But she goes, look, but they got it.

We got to spread these immigrants out. We can't. Come on. These immigrants, they're going to destroy New York City. Well, hold on. I thought the immigrants were our strength. I thought we're a nation of immigrants. New York's a city.

The more immigrants, the better. But then Eric Adams, mayor of New York changed his tune. and now all the other liberals are changing their tune too. Why? Because Anna Navarro knows that she's on the same team as Eric Adams. And Eric Adams flipped. And so now the rest of the team is going to flip. This is a concept in political theory that the political boils down to a distinction between friends and enemies. This is a something that isn't often spoken about explicitly because it was articulated most clearly by a political philosopher named Carl Schmidt. And Carl Schmidt had the misfortune of being a German in the 1930s like Heidegger. And so he's kind of been canceled. But even Leo Strauss, for instance, another great political philosopher, largely exonerates Carl Schmidt of a lot of the nasty charges against him. And so I think it's fair to mention this point because the point he's making here is obviously true that the political.

political boils down to very practical things. It's not just pie in the sky, guys. It's not just abstractions. It boils down to, are you on my team or are you on or are you on the other team? If you're on my team, I'm going to show you more grace. If you're on the other team, we're going to try to drive you out of the public square. And there are a lot of squishy lib types who bemoan the fact that politics has become so tribal these days. Politics has always been tribal. Partisan politics has always been partisan. That's what a party is. and this notion that there's a distinction between friends and enemies, it actually goes much, much deeper than some political differences.

You know, Democrats and Republicans left and right. It's a basic question. You know, Ronald Reagan used to say that we have no enemies, only opponents here. And so we'd always talk about its Democrat opponents. And there's something really beautifully true about that, because if you call your domestic adversaries, your enemies, What you're doing is saying that there is no, there's no cohesent political unit here with the right to declare war, with the right to declare who really is an enemy, with the right to really move the entire body politic. And so I think it's really beautiful that Ronald Reagan tried to avoid that.

Increasingly, though, you hear the left talk about us as enemies, and you're the right talk about the left as enemies. That tells you about a breakdown in the political order. There is a video that I was hoping to get to today. I'll have to just tease you with this. But I don't know how tempting this is going to be, because the video is absolutely repulsive. The mayor of Burbank, California, has just subjected himself to being spanked in public by a drag queen. I guess we'll get to it tomorrow. Not because the video is so sensationalist, but because it tells you a lot about the civic religion that is now governing our society.

The rest of the show continues now. You know what day it is. It's Trans Tuesday. You don't want to miss it. Become a member. Use Code NOLSKIN at checkout for two months free on all annual plans.