The Michael Knowles Show - Ep. 1516 - Disney Exec Admits On-Camera "We're Not Hiring White Men"

Episode Date: June 21, 2024

Democrats want to force your daughter to register for the draft, a Disney executive admits they won't hire white guys, and Senator Ted Cruz introduces a bill to outlaw revenge and deepfake adult videos.   Click here to join the member-exclusive portion of my show: https://bit.ly/4biDlri   Ep.1516   - - -   DailyWire+:   Check out my new candle collection, available now: https://bit.ly/3VrZ6Ot   Get 10% off your tickets to Sound of Hope: The Story of Possum Trot at http://angel.com/MICHAEL   Get 25% off your DailyWire+ Membership here: https://bit.ly/4akO7wC   Get your Yes or No game here: https://bit.ly/3X6tlKY   - - -    Today’s Sponsors:   Freedom Project Academy - Save 10% on tuition when you enroll at https://freedomforschool.com/   TUVU - Try TUVU for 30 days free: https://www.tuvu.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

Democrats are trying to draft your daughter. They want your daughter to be required to serve in the military, in combat even, whether she wants to or not. The Senate Armed Services Committee has snuck the provision that would potentially send America's sweet little daughters off to be slaughtered on some foreign battlefield into the National Defense Authorization Act. Some Republicans are pushing back, but not enough. I want to hear every single elected Republican condemn this. Some issues are open to compromise. Tax rates or immigration levels, for instance. Some issues are not. Some issues are lines in the sand. The fact that for the past 11 years we have sent women willingly into battle is a national disgrace. Now Democrats want to send women unwillingly into combat. Any Republican who would even consider voting for this is good for nothing political. the same might be said of any nation that would needlessly send its daughters into gunfire. I'm Michael Knowles. This is the Michael Nulls show. Welcome back to the show. Liberal Congress

Lady, Corey Bush, claims to have performed miracles and cured cancerous tumors through faith healing. We will examine those claims in just a moment. First, though, I know one way to heal the unpleasant sense in general my asthma in your home, and that would be to get the delicious Sicilian spice. not Sicilian spice, Sicilian summer candle, in addition to your pumpkin spice candle, in addition to your wise man candle, which is the new version of smells and bells, in addition to your Hymdi la Chamb candle, in addition to your old soul candle, in addition to your mayflower candles, we have a ton of beautiful mayflower candles and lovely jars of color. Go to the candleclub.com today to see all the candles. You have to put the the the in there. People are going to forget to put the da and they're going to type in something else and it's not going to work.

You got to go to the candleclub.com. We have apparently, I've just mentioned these candles for the past few days and we've sold, I think, a bazillion of them. And the poor people who are trying to fulfill these orders are panicking and pulling their hair out and sweating bullets. So let's make them sweat even more. Get the candles before they're sold out, especially the seasonal one Sicilian summer is a delight. Speaking of personnel decisions, James O'Keefe, as a new undercover video out. This is from the O'Keefe Media Group.

He spoke, or one of his reporters, spoke to Michael Giordano, senior vice president and team lead at 20th Television, which is part of the Walt Disney Company. And this SVP over there admits that Disney regularly discriminates against white guys. Certainly, there are been times where, you know, there's no way we're hiring away now. just kind of unspoken. There are times when it's spoken.

How would they say it? No way we're hiding a white helmets won't be. Like straight to you? Okay. They'd be very careful how they message that to agents. According to these videotapes, Disney blatantly discriminated against whites, white men in particular. I think I'm sort of like well prepared for it. I'm well positioned for it.

Right. As far as Disney's concerned, I'm a white male. That's not who they're looking to promote them. As a white guy, even Michael is his own doubts about the possibility for advancement for himself at Disney. In fact, Michael actually got to experience Disney's discrimination against white males firsthand. You know, I've been at the company 11 years now, so I have friends in HR and I have friends on those provisions, and they're like, look, nobody else is going to tell you this, Mike, but they're not considering any white males for a shot. Okay. None of this is really surprising to me.

Two things about this are surprising. One, James O'Keefe is interviewing a heterosexual man. It seems like usually in these undercover stings, it's gay guys who are spilling the beans. I believe just listening to the undercover reporters side of it, sounds like that's a woman. So that makes it interesting.

And then the second thing that makes it interesting, is that this Disney employee is complaining about it. We all know it's happening. No one is surprised at all that Disney and pretty much every other corporation is discriminating against white men. This has been the law of the land for decades now. This is the point of affirmative action. The point of affirmative action in college admissions and in hiring is to discriminate specifically against white men and to give an advantage to non-white men and to allow the non-white men, non-white and non-men,

to pass over otherwise equally or more qualified white men for positions based on the color of their skin or their sex. So we know that. Nothing about that is surprising. What is surprising to me, other than the fact that it's a straight guy here, is that this straight white man is complaining about it.

That a guy who would work for a super liberal company like Disney. This is not, I imagine, not some rock-ribbed right-winger is coming out and saying, you know, actually, this is wrong. Discriminating against white men is wrong. That could spark an important political awakening because Disney is taking this to the extreme. This guy goes on, I won't take you through the whole video. You can watch James O'Keefe's undercover staying. It's really good.

Disney has gone so far that apparently when a half-black guy went up, for a promotion. He didn't get the promotion because he didn't look black enough. We wanted to hire somebody in the department a few years ago now, who was half black, but didn't appear half black. And there was a creative executive who was like, we're not, like, that's not, that's not what's one. Like, they wanted somebody in meetings who would appear a certain way, and he wasn't going to bring that to the meeting. I mean, it kind of feels like where, you know, at some point there's going to be a lawsuit.

That's kind of how it feels just because of, you know. There should be, the guy is half black. And if you're half black, you're black, I thought, Barack Obama's only half black, but he's the first black president. So surely a guy who's half black could be the next black illustrator at Disney or whatever the position was. But no, because he didn't look black enough. pretty soon Disney is going to pull out, you know, measuring tape to measure the side of the cranium, start doing phrenology examinations on these people. No, I'm sorry. That phenotype is a little too Caucasoid for like an over here. Uh-uh. No, sir. We've got to measure the width of the nose,

the height of the brow ridges. No, I'm so sorry, Mr. Applicant. I don't care if you went to Harvard. You're out of here. We got, we need someone who's about three shades darker. It's like there's a meme from family guy where a cop holds up a swatch to determine how he's going to punish someone and the swatch just shows different shades. And if you're white, you're not going to get punished. And the darker you get the more likely you are to be punished. It's like that except the opposite. That's how it goes for hiring. As is often the case with liberal comedy. It makes a point, but it gets it exactly wrong. That's how it goes with hiring. If this guy were darker, in his telling at least, he would have been promoted. And does

anyone doubt that? Does anyone of any race, of any political persuasion really doubt that? No, we know that that's how these companies behave, because one, we see their DEI policies from within the company, and two, we know what affirmative action is, and that's the whole point of affirmative action. If DEI and affirmative action did not give an advantage to people who are otherwise less qualified than the white guy candidates, then you wouldn't need DEI, and you wouldn't need DEI, and you wouldn't need affirmative action because they would just be promoted on merit itself. But they're not. So there's this new criterion introduced. And that's how it works. Of course. Not surprising that it's happening, surprising that this guy is starting to complain. If moderate liberal white guys

or black guys or white women or Asian women or if, but if people who are otherwise in the middle or on the left, and especially those. who are in the group that's actually being wronged here, just came out and said, now, we're not going to do this anymore. If just the white guys who are being told you're going to be disadvantaged in college admissions and hiring, if just those white guys came out and said, nah, no thanks. We want to be treated fairly. That would represent a fundamental shift in American politics.

The reason that it hasn't happened already, the reason why the libs think they can get away with punishing white guys for being white guys is because white people have virtually no racial identity, no racial consciousness. Pew Research did a survey on this some years ago. Every racial group has a greater than 50% racial consciousness other than white people, meaning greater than 50% of people when asked,

is your race somewhat or very important to you? We'll say yes, except for white people. For Hispanics and Asians, it's north of 50% for black people. It's north of 70% for white people. 15%. So that's how they get away with it. You would never get away with it in this day and age against an Asian, Hispanic, or black person. It's only white people. So the only way that that's going to change is if the white guy is like this Disney employee come out and say, hey, I'm a white

guy and you're treating me unfairly because I'm a white guy and I'm not going to take it anymore. I'm going to vote for candidates who aren't going to treat me unfairly because I'm a white guy. And I'm going to bring lawsuits against companies that treat me unfairly because I'm a white guy. And I'm going to favor a politics that says, you need to treat me fairly. That's the only way it changes. But if that were to change, don't forget, you know, white people are still the majority of Americans, despite even all the mass migration, it's still true. That would represent a major political shift. There's so much more to say first, though, go to freedomforschool.com. The garbage that the lives are pushing in public schools is absolutely horrifying. A huge percentage

of today's teachers are graduating from woke universities where Marxist professes teachers teach them that they must go forth and indoctrinate your kids. You need to get your kids out of government-controlled schools and into Freedom Project Academy. FPA has perfected online learning, offering live, on-demand, and homeschool courses for students K-12. Freedom Project Academy was built on Christian values and the classical curriculum. Students read full books, write in cursive, and study the full scope of history. Right now, you can save 10% on tuition when you enroll at freedom for school.com. That is freedom for school.com. Check out their fully accredited courses and teachers, preview classes, and request a free information packet. Subscribe to their

Rumble channel to stay informed on what's happening in America's schools. We as a nation cannot afford to hand over another generation to the lives. Take back your child's freedom at Freedom Project Academy. Enroll at freedomfor school.com. That is freedom f-o-r-school.com. Speaking of white guys not getting jobs, RFK Jr. is not going to be at the CNN presidential debate happening, I think, next week. Why not? Because, officially, because Kennedy didn't meet the criteria to appear, unofficially, because he was never going to appear because the race is between Trump and Biden. So it was never going to happen. The rules were always going to be such that RFK Jr. wasn't going to make it.

USAA knows dynamic duos can save the day, like superheroes and sidekicks or auto and home insurance. With USAA, you can bundle your auto and home and save up to 10%. Tap the banner to learn more and get a quote at usaa.com slash bundle. Restrictions apply. Trump doesn't seem to love RFK Jr., but Biden really seems to hate RFK Jr. And the Democrats really seem to hate RFK Jr. And the reason for that is RFK Jr stands to pull significantly more votes from Joe Biden than he would from Donald Trump. RFK Jr. is a bigger threat to Joe Biden than he is to Donald Trump. And the liberals control the political establishment and they just weren't going to let this guy appear. But the official reasons are he doesn't have 15% in four national polls that had been approved by CNN. He only earned that in three of the accepted polls. Now, who knows? Maybe he earns it in a poll that's not accepted by CNN doesn't matter. Just on that, he would not appear. And he's not on a sufficient number of state ballots to read.

the 270 electoral vote threshold that would give him the White House. So it'd be nice if RFK Jr. could appear on those ballots, from my view, because I think he takes more votes from Biden. But he hasn't. So far, he's only got ballot access in six states, according to the New York Times. That means he could only possibly win 89 electoral college votes. It means he couldn't be president, even if he won everything. Yeah, of course, of course. The takeaway for Republicans here, though, is that. The liberals really, really don't want RFK Jr. to be a figure in this race. They fear that he will be a Ross-Pro-like figure from 1992.

Ross Perot, a kind of right-wing guy, comes out, runs for the presidency, and spoils it for George H.W. Bush. Or even fast forward to the 2000 election, speaking of George W. Bush, Ralph Nader, who was relatively a blip on the radar, but he was the Green Party candidate. he pulled just enough votes from Al Gore to toss the election to George Bush. So I think Kennedy could do that and it would benefit Trump. I think Republicans should quietly boost RFK Jr. I think at the very least Republicans should decry the unfairness that RFK Jr. has not been given ballot access, especially because a lot of the ballot access is being gate-kept by Democrat secretaries of state who recognize the threat that he poses to their party and to Joe Biden and they don't want to let him on. and because the debate is being gate kept by CNN.

It's not even by the Commission on Presidential Debates anymore because Biden doesn't want to work with them because the Commission on Presidential Debates won't give him the commercial breaks that he needs to catch his breath and will bring people into the audience and the people will probably applaud for Trump and boo Joe Biden. So it's CNN. Instead, CNN doesn't want this guy there because they also feel that RFK is going to spoil the race.

Republicans should be at the very least quietly decrying the unfairness, boosting RFK Jr. RFK Jr., he doesn't. have to take away that many votes to throw the election to Donald Trump. And much weaker candidates with far less cachet in their respective parties or their respective coalitions have done a lot worse. Let's keep boosting that RFK. Let's, we're not going to get him to the debate, but let's boost them enough to drive Biden crazy. The Democrats have already shown us their hand. That is what they are afraid of. Speaking of not appearing in multiple states, really, really great news. News, Porn Hub, the biggest porn company in the world, has just suspended service in five more

states. They have suspended service in Kentucky, Indiana, Idaho, Kansas, and Nebraska. This is really, really great news. But why are they suspending the service? They are suspending the service because these five states are said to require age verification. They're not going to ban porn. Probably they should ban porn, but they're not going to do that. They're taking a very modest measure to say, okay, if you want to look at deprave porn and you want to access websites that have regularly been caught engaged in extraordinarily degrading and downright illegal activity, you know, videos of underage girls that then the websites, you know, they try to take down or whatever and they're mired in legal battles over that, but really, really gross. disreputable stuff. An adult can look at that, say the states. But they have to be adults. You've got to show us that you're not a little kid. And Pornhub says, we're not doing business. It tells you everything

you need to know about Pornhub. The fact that Pornhub would rather stop doing business altogether than take reasonable measures to prevent little kids from looking at their disgusting pornography is very, very telling. Let's just leave it at that. I'll be cautious in my language because I know Pornhub is very litigious because they're very, very depraved people in a very depraved industry.

But let's just leave, let's just consider that fact. A company would rather stop doing business altogether than take simple measurements to make sure little kids aren't consuming their dangerous product. That tells you pretty, much all you need to know about their business model. It tells you pretty much all you need to

know about how politicians ought to think about this company. Now, let's be as charitable as we can to the pornographers. Maybe the pornographer's argument is, no, it's not, we don't want kids looking at this stuff, but we respect the privacy of our adult consumers. And we don't want to force adults to upload proof that they're over 18 or 21 or whatever. I guess it's 18 for the website. We don't want to collect that information on our adult users. Okay, that raises another question. Even if this is about the privacy of adults,

why are adults so ashamed to consume your product? Why is that? I consume products that are age-restricted. I consume alcohol. I consume tobacco. In fact, I have a tobacco company called Mayflower Cigars. And I have to show my ID when I purchase those products. Even when I purchase my own cigar, I have to show the ID on the website. I'm not ashamed of that. I'm not ashamed of smoking cigars. I'm not ashamed of having a drink every now and again. So I show my ID no problem. I certainly would be ashamed to show my ID to a pornography website because pornography is a very shameful activity.

and the fact that the very best argument Pornhup can make, I'm giving them every benefit of the doubt, which I shouldn't. The very best argument they can make is, well, we can't require people to show their IDs. Our product is disgusting and degenerate

and a great shame and humiliation to all of the users. That's not a great argument. Right, you should probably close up shop, not just in those five states, but period, because what you're giving people is filthy and disgusting, and it degrades them,

and it's poison for the brain and for the soul. Yeah, and porn hubs implicitly admitting it. At best. And at worst, what they are implicitly admitting tells you something really, really dark about their business model. Now, speaking of getting some wins against the pornography industry, Senator Ted Cruz, my man, T.C. has just introduced a bill to outlaw revenge and deep fake pornography. The bill is called, and this is so... DC. I love it. This is so Senate, so Congress. It's the tools to address known exploitation by

immobilizing technological deep fakes on websites and networks act. If you didn't catch that, that comes out to the Take It Down Act. Really, Washington loves a good acronym. And because Senator Ted Cruz is one of the most intelligent people ever to work and live in Washington, D.C., he comes up with a really good acronym, but that's the great. The Take it Down Act, what would it do? It would criminalize the publication of non-consensual intimate imagery, including AI imagery, deep fake porn. So, you know, as I predicted years ago, I said the real problem isn't that Scarlett Johansson is going to have computers manipulate her image and make it look like she's in porn. The real problem is the girl in your eighth grade math class is going to have that done to her. That's really shocking and that's going to spread like a cancer, not just among public figures, but among private figures.

This is really good. There are new procedures that would be put in place if this bill has passed to require the big platforms to take this content down pretty much immediately. They also have to remove copies of the images. Really good stuff. This should have been done 30 years ago. The politicians should have anticipated this. And to some degree they did. Back in the 90s, there was a bill passed called the Communications Decency Act, which actually includes Section 230, which is what gives social media companies the ability to skirt different kinds of liability laws.

And that provision has come under fire a lot from conservatives who feel that Big Tech is censoring us in recent years. But the Communications Decency Act initially was aimed at decency. It was an anti-obscenity act. Same with the Child Online Protection Act, both of which were gutted by liberal courts. we could have solved this problem 30 years ago. We didn't. So now we got to deal with it today, 2024. This is a no-brainer. Anyone who votes against this is real suspect, real, real, real sus.

Any senator who's voting to support deep fake pornography, check their hard drive. There's so much more to say. First, though, go to tuvoo.com slash knolls. Do you remember when social media were all about staying connected to loved ones, catching up with old friends and being with the people you care about. Today, social media feel like navigating a maze of ads and irrelevant content. As a parent, watching kids dive into the digital jungle is horrifying. I don't think I'm going to give my kid a smartphone until he turns 42.

One wrong click and suddenly the kids are exposed to things, their eyes should not see. Not to worry, I've got good news for you. Tuvu is the wholesome social media platform built on traditional values that prioritizes family-friendly content and was designed to create meaningful connections. Tuvoo's three-tier moderation system will give you peace of mind knowing you and your kids are safe from unwanted explicit content. Their advanced filters and active monitoring

ensure a secure and fun online experience for you and your family. On Tuvu, you won't see a single ad as you scroll through posts. Your data will never be sold to advertisers for profit, and you can be sure that the content you see is family-friendly. When you download Tuvu, you can try it for free for 30 days, then it's just $4.99 per month. Go to T-U-V-U-U-D-U-D-U-R-NOLS or look for the Tu-V-U app on Google Play or the App Store.

T-U-V-U-D-U-D-U-S-Nals. And follow me over there. My favorite comment yesterday is from Ryan Weiss 1721. It says, breaking news, Zinn has been banned in the U.S. In an unrelated note, readiness in the Department of Defense has dropped 85%. So true. I mentioned that the main people who take Zinn are fratty white guys, you know, like Patagonia wearing yuppies.

well, a lot of fratty white guys also represented in the military and other servicemen that I know, not just the white guys, but a broad array of them. They like popping the six-milly lip-pillies, okay? There are very few indulgences that are men and women in uniform get to engage in, and they're going to take away that Zen. Okay, I hope China and Russia don't start acting up anytime soon. That's not going to look great. Speaking of men and women, NPR, National Public Radio has a real dumb piece out on the future of marriage.

But NPR is such a perfect representation of the liberal establishment that it's worth reading what they have to say because it shows you what our liberal technocratic overlords are thinking. And they ask a question, what will marriage look like in the future? I have a simple answer to that. Marriage will look in the future like it, like it, really looks in the present like it looked in the past, like it has always looked, because it's a natural institution and raised in Christianity to the level of a sacrament,

and it can't be changed. What God has joined, no man can separate. That's my view of it. But the libs think that everything socially constructed man, because the libs think that man is God. Not that we're made in the image and likeness of God, but that we've made God in our own image.

Ultimately, we are gods, and we can do whatever we want, and we can redefine words, and we can redefine our own biology and our own nature. We can transcend the species homo sapiens, become homodeus. That's what they say in almost exactly those words. So of course they think they can redefine marriage. They did it at the level of the Supreme Court nine years ago. What will it look like in the future? Three examples from NPR. Jennifer Koka, 37, polyamorous woman with a primary

partner of seven years in Richmond, Virginia. I definitely dreamt of getting married a lot when I was a kid, but as I got older, I realized marriage is basically just a piece of paper. Let's pause on the first of three examples they use. A marriage is not a piece of paper. A piece of paper is one thing that can represent marriage, but it's not synonymous with marriage. No married couple holds up the marriage license or the marriage certificate and says, there is my marriage. That is synonymous with my marriage. No, the error that this woman is making, the error that the liberals are making, or even that the decadent people who say, man, I don't need to get married. My concubine and I, we're great, man, you know, we don't need to, it's, I don't need some piece of paper to tell me

about my relationship. No, you don't need a piece of paper to tell you what your relationship is or to form your relationship, but, but the piece of paper does represent that relationship. The error they're making is not even so much about marriage as it is about symbols. The piece of paper symbolizes, signifies, represents the marriage. So when you don't, when you don't have something that can symbolize the marriage, it might be because there's nothing to symbolize. Maybe I'm saying this in an inarticulate way. The only reason not to sign the paper, the only reason not to represent the marriage is because

there's nothing there to represent. That's why you would be afraid of signifying something is if there's nothing to signify or if the representation of it would be inaccurate and would not reflect the reality of that thing. they just don't understand symbols. It's not surprising because as words cease to mean anything, as we deny that marriage would refer to a real thing, we're denying the link between a symbol and the symbolized.

And so then we all just start babbling, basically. Then words totally lose their meaning. Because you can say the word woman and I can say the word woman. Well, you and I probably agree. But some lib can say the word woman and I can say the word woman. And we could be talking about totally different things. The libs would have severed the relationship between symbol and symbolized. Then we can't talk to each other at all.

Then we lose the distinguishing human feature, which is speech, which it represents and expresses our rational faculties. Next one. Doyle Tate. Single dad in Jacksonville, Florida. I would love to be married one day. I decided I wasn't going to wait for a man who may never come. Wait, hold on. Doyle is a single dad, but he's waiting for a man.

That's kind of weird because a man can't marry another man. That doesn't make any sense. And if you want to have kids, a man certainly can't marry another man because that doesn't make kids. So wait, this guy is a single homosexual who has a kid. How's he have a kid? Well, he says, so I started the process of surrogacy when I was around 30. Aphrodite roses now four and a half months, so it's been wonderful. So a homosexual man who wants to be in a homosexual relationship and seems to be

pursuing that, also wants to have a kid. So he purchased a girl. He purchased the raw materials to make a human being. And he went to the baby store and bought the raw materials and then intentionally deprived a child of her mother. A little girl deprived her of her mother, really evil stuff. And he's still pursuing all sorts of depraved activities with men. So he's never even going to give this girl a stepmother. But at least he gets to feel a little bit better about his disordered affections and desires. Not good, but put all of that aside for a second. How does this represent the future of marriage? He's a single person. He's single. And he's not even looking for the kind of person who could create a marriage with him. But he doesn't even have a dude to have a fake marriage.

He's just single. And so NPR is now saying, look, marriage can be a thing in which a couple explicitly says we are not married because they won't sign a marriage certificate. Or marriage can be a thing where it's just one person. And maybe you go buy a child, but there's no partner, there's no spouse. Marriage can be that. What's the final thing marriage can be?

This is Aravind Boudupali, married man in Baltimore. My love life with my partner, May, it looks like a true partnership. Okay, partner it. So unless they have an accounting firm, together, unless May is transgender or something, this one sounds like an actual marriage. Because it's a man and a woman, and they say they're married, said, we're an interracial marriage,

but I don't think that it's ever posed an issue for us in our respective communities. NPR asks, what do changing romantic norms mean for the future of marriage? Hold on. Three examples they give. One of those things is not like the other. One, we're two people, I've got a concubine. We're not married. This is the future of marriage. Number two guy, I'm a single homosexual. I'm not married. I'm not even going to try to be married. That's the new kind of marriage. Okay. Third one, we're an interracial couple and it's never been a problem at all and we are married. That's the future of marriage. Okay, that could be the future of marriage, but that's also the present of marriage and that's also the past of marriage. What the libs are trying to do is we're trying to blur the

distinction between not marriage and marriage by comparing bizarro homosexual relations and concubinage with interracial marriage, which has always existed. Mass migration has not always existed. The intermingling of different peoples has at various times been more and less pronounced, so interracial marriage would be more or less likely. But it's existed forever for all of human history. It in no way contradicts the definition of marriage. The first two fundamentally contradict the definition of marriage because the first one says outright, we are not married. And the second one only involves one adult, who doesn't even like women. This is how they blur it. Well, it's kind of, when you really think about it, gay marriage or individual marriage, or I don't know,

a ritual of a woman marrying herself, which is a real thing that's been happening in recent years, that's kind of like interracial marriage. No, it's not. It's categorically different. It is fundamentally different in kind, but they have to blur it because they know that their view of the future of marriage is crazy. And when social conservatives warned 10, 20, 30 years ago, what the lives were really after is not the expansion of marriage, but the abolition of marriage. This is what they were talking about, and they were 100% right. Speaking of weird hippie stuff, I have to get to the story before we get to the mailbag. Congress lady Corey Bush, she's one of the more eccentric of the new liberal members of Congress.

She apparently claimed in her book that she came out with a couple years ago that she has performed a miracle. She healed a woman with tumors by laying hands on her and praying over her. And she recounted this story, as far as I can tell in only one interview, and that was with Margaret Hoover on PBS. You're a pastor. Yes. You write about healing through faith. At one point, you came across a woman with, quote, several visits. visible tumors on her torso. Tell me what happened.

So at that time, I, along with a group of friends, we would go out on the street and just meet with people and pray with people and offer them food. And this lady came to us and she had these tumors. I mean, she wanted us to like feel them. And I just remember I put my hand on her and my hand just began to move. And the lumps that were there were no longer there. And she was so happy and she went on about her day. And I never saw her again. So you think the tumor has disappeared?

I do. I do. Spiritual healing is a part of what you believe, you know. And the medical healing is a similar thing because I still, I'm going to believe that, this treatment that this doctor is giving me is going to help me in my situation. Okay. I'm a little skeptical of Corey Bush's powers. I'm a little skeptical because right off the top, Margaret Hoover says, you're a pastor. She goes, yes, I am. And that's not possible because pastors are men and members of the clergy and they receive the sacrament of holy orders. And anyway, so I think probably her religious views are a little jumbled up. But that's it. That's the only

criticism I want to make here because I can't believe I'm agreeing with Cory Bush or I'm in principle what she's saying is possible. Yeah, God does perform miracles and sometimes people are the occasions of those miracles and they are always the observers and recipients of those miracles, at least as far as we know. So that can happen. And what what's amazing is Corey Bush goes even further. And she says, I'm not doubting medical science, like physical empirical science. I'm just saying that there is a spiritual aspect to reality as well, on top of the physical. And she's right. Whether, it's a little presumptuous of Corey Bush, one, to call herself a pastor, and two, to say she's performing these miracles. And so plenty of

reason to be skeptical of her accounts. But the principle that she's articulating, it pains me somewhat to have to say this, but Corey Bush is actually expressing an insightful view here. You know, Corey Bush is, she's right, there is spiritual reality. God does perform miracles. People are the conduits and

recipients of those miracles. And yeah, God in eternity does act through contingent, historical, time, and space. Yeah, she's got a point. Corey Bush has a point. That's it. That's probably the last time you're ever going to hear me say that.

But Cory Bush has a point. If you haven't heard, Jeremy Boring held a live town hall last week where he announced an exciting partnership with Angel Studios to bring you a brand new film called Sound of Hope, the story of Possum Trot. It's coming to theaters this 4th of July. You might know Angel Studios from their movie Sound of Freedom, which was a huge, huge hit last year. It shined a powerful light on the child sex trafficking crisis. Now Angel Studios is back, continuing their fight for kids. Wire is joining with them. Sound of Hope is the true story of 22 families from a rural church who adopted 77

kids from the foster system, sparking a movement to save vulnerable children everywhere. We have a trailer for you so you can get a feel for what this movie is all about. Take a look. Are you sure these people want us? I know they do. You can call me mama. It's hard to feel like I'm the only one who sees these things. 70% of the kids in the system are there because of neglect. The other 30% are put through hell. We need your help. Can you imagine our keys on their own? We can't just look away. The state ain't no family. Are you sure these people want us? I know they do. You can call me mama. Oh, Lord. If we can't wrap our arms around the most vulnerable, then what do we add? No, and the children can't take the noise anymore.

This is something that we must do. 22 families want to adopt. The whole town wants kids now. That's about right. What's happening with possum trot could mean a huge change for the system. We want the ones that nobody else won't. Who hurt you, baby? I'm not giving up on you.

You can't give up on me either. Everybody's falling upon. I'm doing the best I can. A real... world hits heart. I don't want to be here. I can't give him back. We got to work on this together. We owe people now. And love never gives up. I watched this film. It's an incredibly moving film and it places strong family values at the core. Movies are called to action. Right now, there are over 100,000 children in foster care that need homes. They need our help. Best way to do that is by seeing Sound of Hope in

theaters that will certainly help spread the message. Sound of Hope is coming to theaters July 4th. Tickets are on sale now, go to angel.com slash Michael, M-I-C-H-A-E-L. Finally, we've arrived at my favorite time of the week when I get to hear from your questions in the mailbag. Our mailbag is sponsored by Pure Talk. Go to PureTalk.com slash Knowles. Start saving on wireless today.

PureTalk.com slash Knowles. Take it away. Hey, Michael. Back from America's evil top hat. I was just talking to a black man, which I guess you guys would call African-Canadian. Anyway, we're talking about the N-word. And he brought up some points that made the whole conversation and way more woke than it already was. He mentioned that white people before the Transatlantic slave trade

used to use the hard RN word as insults between each other to insult their stupidity. It then morphed into the racial epitaph towards black people that we all know and love and then morphed into the colloquialism for the word fella, as you mentioned. So he said, it's more racist to use the soft ah, because you're appropriating African American etymology. I guess my question is, what's worse to be inherently racist or to be perceived as racist? Anyway, I love the show. God bless. Yeah, I think your friend is just mistaken about his etymology.

The etymology of the N-word is a little bit blurry. Sometimes people think it relates to the word niggardly, like cheap, but there's not a ton of evidence of that. The earliest appearance of something like the N-word appears before the, transatlantic slave trade. And it just is referred to black people, you know, like Negro or Niger or so, you know, it just refers to blackness. So that's, that's it. I have no idea what your friend is talking about that it was used as an insult to mean stupid among white people. I've never seen that anywhere or heard of that. And I think it's pretty clearly mistaken. So I think your buddy's got to stop appropriating actual etymology for his own purposes

and transforming it. And no, I think, furthermore, you know, it obviously can be an ugly word and it can be used in an ugly way. But the fact that that is the word that we treat with the same taboo that the ancient Israelites treated the tetragrammaton tells you a lot about the distorted priorities

of modern liberal culture. Next question. Hey, smoke daddy, Mike. First time mailbagger. Two questions. One, I am turning 21 on Saturday, and I'm planning to take my fiancé and I to a local bar so that I may have my first drink. I've waited until this point to have one, so what's your suggestion for what I should order? Second, my actual question, what do you think Gen Z will be like as the oldest generation when the time comes?

Respect for elders of my generation has turned to a general mockery and disdain for the senior population, so I'm wondering how we, Gen Z, will act when it is our turn to be these seniors. Thanks so much. your first drink I'm tempted to say Johnny Black because it's inexpensive enough

that a 21 year old can pay for it but still good enough that it's worth having for your first drink you've been waiting all this time for your first drink but if you've really never had a sip of alcohol before

like no wine at Christmas dinner or anything like that you actually might want to start with something a little softer you might want to start with a beer or a glass of wine more of a wine man myself being of Italian extraction. So I don't know, you could order yourself a glass.

I don't know what bar you're going to, but you could order yourself a glass of either kind of a nice wine, maybe like an Amarone or something or, or, I don't know, just get a glass of cab. That's it. Depends how rowdy you want to be. You want to just jump into the deep end, go for the Johnny Blackman. Dan, what was the second part of the question? I wasn't even, Ben, were you, I was so focused on the booze. all right well unfortunately you're not getting an answer to the second part of your question

if i remember it or any of the producers remember it i'll try to come back to it next question hey michael last week on your show you talked about the gayification of star wars and this really got me thinking about the conservative mindset when it comes to entertainment more broadly you know conservatives throughout my lifetime i've taken either one or two stances on on entertainment more broadly is that either one it's a frivolous childish thing that really shouldn't be engaged with, or either it's been the pearl clutching church ladies who have said that Dungeons and Dragons and Harry Potter are works of the devil. So what can conservatives do to really reclaim the entertainment industry? We love your thoughts on this. Keep up the great work.

I love the show. My friend Spencer Claven had great thoughts on this the other day. He never talking about it, and he published a column about it at the American mind, which is the way for conservatives to reclaim the entertainment industry or the popular culture is, for conservatives to cultivate taste. The problem is not even that conservatives don't know how to do the nuts and bolts of making novels and comic books and movies and stuff. They could use a little work in that area, but that's not even so much a problem. The problem is conservatives don't appreciate that stuff.

Conservatives have lost a sense of taste. So you can't, I don't mean to blame the audience here. or the lack thereof for an audience for conservative fiction content. But it just doesn't seem to be there. It seems to be the sort of thing that conservatives say they want. We want conservative movies and we want conservative TV shows and we want conservative comic books and we want conservative comic con and we want whatever. But I don't really see a lot of evidence that that's true.

It's the sort of thing I think they want to want, but I don't know that they really want it. Some people do. Obviously, look, we've come out with some of this content and people watch it. And some of it, they've been pretty big hits. But I think we're just talking about an order of scale here. When you think about the audience that the liberal media reach, the liberal entertainment media reach, it's just orders of magnitude larger than the audience that even the very best conservative entertainment company is reaching. And that's a problem with taste. And it's because conservatives say stuff like, you shouldn't study humanities in school.

you should study something's going to make you money, like engineering or welding or something. Yeah, engineering and welding are great, but you should also read Virgil and Plato, and you should also read the Russian novelists, and you should also read poetry every now and again. Could you imagine? And you should also go look at paintings and know something, even anything about painting and art, and you have to cultivate these desires. Listen to music that is beautiful and ornate and challenging, and you got to do that stuff too. And even if you think it's a little frou-frew or whatever, the reason you have to do that too is because otherwise you will seed the popular culture to the libs. And then inasmuch as we can say politics is downstream of culture, the libs are going to dominate politics. That's why, to use Spencer's headline, it's a matter of taste. Next question.

Hey, Michael. My name is Kean. I recently joined the Navy and I'm leaving for basic training here in the coming days. I'm a little nervous, but ready to go. And I would like to be. to ask for any kind of advice you could give me, whether it be just life in general or religion or really just really anything. Any advice you give me is greatly appreciated. And if it helps, I'm a Lutheran Church, Missouri Synod, Lutheran, if that helps with the religious advice. Thank you. Love your show. Have a good day. Cool, man. Hey, that's great. Here's my first advice. Go buy a banjo. My grandfather was a Navy captain. I got a fair bit of Navy throughout my family. My grandfather,

obviously a career man, was the commanding officer on a number of ships, also of a base in Vietnam, Nabe. And so, you know, he was deployed for long periods of time. And one time, he bought a banjo. And he would just play the banjo on the ship. And I have that banjo now, and I play it for my kids. And it's a great little family heirloom. And he was a great edifying. kind of wholesome recreation to have when he was lonely out there at sea. So buy a banjo or something like a banjo. Then, after that, you mentioned religion a couple of times there at least. Say your morning prayers. Say your prayers in the morning. It's going to set your day up a lot better. I like the rosary. I don't know exactly how Lutherans or your particular flavor of Lutheran

feels about the rosary, but I really like the rosary. It's my favorite daily prayer. So I sometimes wait till nighttime to pray it. I've realized I want my whole day. I didn't have, you know, the rosary in my mind. And then I'd also get too tired and I'd often fail to finish it. So say your prayers in the morning, whatever, whatever those prayers may be, say them in the morning. And, you know, recognize that you're in a great position because even with all the craziness going on in the Department of Defense, the Pentagon, the top brass, you know, General Millie with his purple hair, screaming about white rage or whatever, even with all of that, you are doing something that is noble, that is missional that is really sturdy, you know, serving your country to protect, to protect the homeland

and your friends and family and fellow Americans, that's a good thing. And so that, that missional aspect should really drive you. And so then the only, yeah, the only other thing I'd say is fair wind and following seas, man. Good stuff. Thanks for your service. It is fake headline Friday. The rest of the show is continuing right now. You don't want to miss it, because you Become a member use code Knowles, K-N-A-W-L-E-S at checkout for two months free on all annual plans. Help me figure out the fake headline. I'll see you in the member of Sigmundum.