The Michael Knowles Show - Ep. 1579 - Trump's Plan To SLASH Credit Card Interest Rates

Episode Date: September 23, 2024

President Trump endorses usury laws, Good Morning America cheers on a child strutting in drag, and Kamala proposes cutting military aid to Israel.   Click here to join the member-exclusive portion of my show: https://bit.ly/4biDlri   Ep.1579   - - -   DailyWire+:   From the white guys who brought you “What is a Woman?” comes Matt Walsh’s next question: “Am I Racist?” | IN THEATERS NOW! Get tickets: https://www.amiracist.com   See the ground-breaking documentary from Matt Walsh that became his first cultural phenomenon. "What Is A Woman?" is the film that started it all. Watch now at dailywireplus.com.   Order your Mayflower Cigars here: https://bit.ly/3Qwwxx2 (Must be 21+ to purchase. Exclusions may apply)   - - -    Today’s Sponsors:   Birch Gold - Text "KNOWLES" to 989898, or go to https://birchgold.com/knowles, for your no-cost, no-obligation, FREE information kit. Qualifying purchases will get an exclusive GOLDEN Truth Bomb.   Hillsdale College - Enroll for FREE today at https://www.hillsdale.edu/knowles   Responsible Man - Be the man America needs you to be. Shop Responsible Man, and get an exclusive discount with code KNOWLES at https://responsibleman.com   - - -   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

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. Lots of places can expose you to identity theft. Oh no. That's why LifeLock monitors hundreds of millions of data points a second for threats to your identity, which is way more than anyone can do on their own.

If we find anything suspicious, like new loans are changed. to your financial accounts, we alert you right away, all through text, phone, email, or the LifeLock app. Get the alerts that could make all the difference. Save up to 40% your first year at lifelock.com slash special offer. Terms apply. President Trump has just announced a major, ambitious new campaign pledge that could dramatically affect the lives of nearly half the American population. President Trump wants to slash credit card interest rates, which today are nearly 24, percent on average, and cap them at 10 percent. And while working Americans catch up, we're going to put a temporary cap on credit card interest

rates. We're going to cap it at around 10 percent. We can't let them make 25 and 30 percent. This is welcome news to many Americans struggling with credit card debt. But Trump's critics argue that the effect of a credit card rate cap would simply be to prevent many Americans from accessing credit in the first place. that's also true. Lenders are not going to give away money to people who are unlikely to pay it back. So the downside is that many Americans would not be able to access credit. The upside is that they also

wouldn't be permanent debt slaves to unscrupulous companies. The proposal is not all that radical, actually. In fact, it's a return to the persistent Western tradition going back in millennia. Usory was condemned in the Old Testament and the New Testament. by at least four ecumenical councils, by many popes and doctors of the church, later by leading Protestants as well as Catholics, and even in the Quran and the Hadith, for that matter. In recent centuries, we've relaxed those prohibitions, which led to an explosion of industry, no doubt, but also to the creation of a new surf class that can never escape the crushing burden of debt payments. This is the fundamental distinction between Trump's credit card proposal and Kamala's call for price controls on groceries.

They're both price controls. But Kamala's proposal would serve no benefit to the economy other than the creation of food shortages and breadlines. Trump's proposal would benefit the economy in a fundamental way, in that it would force us to face the reality of finite resources, responsibility, and long-term investment. America is currently drowning in debt, both personal and public. As the political philosopher Patrick Danin has observed, debt is the chief inheritance. that Americans now leave to the next generation. That is irresponsible. It's unsustainable.

It might well topple the whole American empire. Government has encouraged this problem with easy money. Now, Trump is proposing that government do something radical in our irresponsible age and actually try to fix the problem it largely created. I'm Michael Knowles. It's the Michael Knowles show. Welcome back to the show. Kamala Harris has weighed in on the second assassination attempt on President Trump, and she, of course, is making it all about the LGBTQ. That's really what it's all about,

you know? There's so much more to say first, though, text inoles to 98, 98, 98, let's talk about your hard-earned money. With Kamala Harris proposing massive tax hikes, you might be thinking it's time to make more of your savings tax sheltered and inflation sheltered. That is why I trust Birch Gold Group to help you. They will assist you in converting your retirement account into physical gold and you won't pay a penny out of pocket for the conversion. Just text the word Knowles, K-N-W-L-E-S to 98-9-8-9-8-8-8-8-8-8-8. And wait, there's more. This is the final month for you to take home your very own limited edition, highly coveted, one-of-a-kind, 24-carat gold-plated truth bomb on qualifying purchases. You heard that right.

A golden truth bomb. Who could ask for anything more? Right now, text NOLS, KNAWLES, to 98, 98, to claim your eligibility before September 30th. In a time of high taxes and high inflation, protect your savings with gold from birch gold. Text Noles to 98,

98, 98, 98 for your free info kit today. Very conservative stuff from President Trump. You're going to hear some of the moderate, squishy conservatives say that President Trump's plan to cap interest rates on credit cards is, it's

Christ controls, it's leftism, it's Marxism, it's no different than what Kamala Harris wants to do. Superficially, there are similarities, but it's quite different. Anti-usory laws are very conservative, whether you support them or not. You've got to admit, they're pretty conservative, man. We've had them going back millennia. Okay, that's not leftism. That's actually deeply conservative. President Trump paradoxically demonstrates this kind of deep conservatism pretty regularly. On the surface, he appears to be upending Republican and conservative orthodoxies. But when one considers those present orthodoxies and their origin, how long they've been around, one realizes that Trump is not so much destroying tradition, but he's actually returning to a deeper

tradition. You see this on the Republican exaltation of free trade at all costs. That was never really a conservative point of view. That was a more liberal point of view. The conservatives were focused on economic growth, to be sure, but on economic growth in service of other national interests. So you don't want GDP growth at the expense of the American worker, an American manufacturing, American national security, and American communities, and the ability to support a family. You've got to put their things in their proper place. Same thing with immigration. In recent years, the GOP and the conservatives have been all for immigration, at least really in the 90s and the 2000s.

but limiting immigration is actually a pretty conservative point of view, and it was the Republican policy for a rather long time. Trump has summed this up in an interview he just gave, where he was talking about food. Well, he was talking about his health at first, and he pointed out that he used to get a little exercise, but now people keep trying to shoot him when he gets his exercise, so he doesn't get quite as much anymore.

And then he starts talking about food, and his defense of his McDonald's diet it is actually, contains a ton of political wisdom. What are two things you do to stay healthy? Well, I used to play golf a little bit. That gave me, so I don't know, but it seems to be quite a dangerous sport in retrospect.

I try and eat properly. I try, I do the best. I do, but proper hamburgers. But I like perhaps all of the wrong food, but then I say, does anybody know what the right food is? I have people lecturing me for years. Oh, don't eat this, don't eat that. They're gone.

They have passed away long ago. And here I am. So I'm not sure I want to make too many changes. That is conservatism summed up in two sentences. All these people, they tell me I have to make all these changes, that what I'm doing is so terrible. Well, excuse me, all those people are gone, and I'm still here. Maybe my coughing suggests, I need fewer cigars. not actually, because I think of the great cigar smokers. Winston Churchill, live forever.

George Burns lived forever. All of these guys that lived a very long time. And Trump is saying this about the fast food. He says, look, I eat McDonald's. Yeah, but I eat proper McDonald's. You know, I eat the proper hamburgers. And sure, maybe I'm not eating according to the passing fashions of the day. But you know what? All the people who have followed the passing fashions of the day They've all died out. And those of us who stick to a more moderate, I don't know, a diet, plan of exercise, habit more broadly. We tend to endure. The things that people have been doing for a really long time that have stuck around this long, probably there's something to it.

That is as conservative as one can imagine. Because it's not just saying do something because people did it in the past. people did the Atkins diet in the past. I don't know, people did all sorts of crazy stuff in the past. And then it went away. Conservatism, traditionalism says, hey, maybe we ought to defer to the wisdom of the ages and not merely try to recreate the world anew every single day.

Maybe if something has not just existed in the past, but has persisted through all of these years, all of these decades, all of these millennia, maybe there's something to it. Maybe before we totally throw it out, we ought to really consider if there's some wisdom there. Now, some people hate Trump's vision of conservatism. I think, most especially, of a certain former member of Congress and daughter of a former

vice president. That would be Liz Cheney, who is so furious that Trump remains the Republican nominee that she has proposed, she has proposed a new political party. Whether it's organizing a new party, look, it's hard for me to see how the Republican Party, given what it has done, can make the argument convincingly or credibly that people ought to be voting for Republican candidates until it really recognizes what it's done. There is certainly going to be a big shift, I think, in how our politics work. I don't know exactly what that will look like. I don't think it will just simply be, well, the Republican Party is going to put up a new, you know,

slate of candidates and off to the races. I think far too much has happened. It's too damaging. Far too much has happened. It's way too damaging. We need a whole party. This Republican Party is totally unsalvageable. Why is that? Liz Cheney has endorsed Kamala Harris. So why is that? What has changed so much? Has the GOP really changed on the big issues? Not really. I mentioned Trump is a little bit more pro-tariff than maybe, I don't know, Mitt Romney would have been. But Ronald Reagan supported tariffs in certain cases. So I don't think Trump is returning to a more robust conservative past, but that's not a huge change.

Trump wants to stop illegal immigration. That's something we should all, all Americans should be able to agree on. now the left is vocally for illegal immigration, and many squishes on the right are tacitly for illegal immigration. But again, that was a shit. I don't know, Trump is the most pro-life president we've had in practice. But the GOP has said it's pro-life for a really long time. So what's really changed under Trump? I can't tell. Other than he's actually following through on certain campaign promises that Republicans had been making for many years and didn't follow through on,

that's why you want to start a new political party. That's why Liz Cheney, so-called principled conservative, is going to endorse the most radically pro-abortion, pro-trans, pro-dismantling the American Empire, or if not dismantling it, at least radically shifting up some of our alliances, pro-illegal immigration, anti-business, anti-industry, anti... What? No, I think what this suggests is, not that the Republican Party really is fundamental.

changed, with that Liz Cheney has changed. Maybe she was always a little bit on the squishy side of the party, and so even a slight movement to the right for the GOP would push her over into the Democrat camp. But I think actually what's deeper than that is a phenomenon observed by a number of political philosophers, most notably Carl Schmidt, who had a bit of a dodgy active political life. But he made some good points in political philosophy, one of which is that politics often boils down to a distinction between friends and enemies. And this is, I suspect, what's going on with people like Liz Cheney, maybe with people like David French, who previously was on the right and

would write in defense of all these right-wing causes. And now he writes for the New York Times and defends all these left-wing causes. I think it might just be that Liz Cheney is looking around and seeing that the people who support her now are exclusively Democrats and really no Republicans at all support her, I guess, other than her father. and so she's she is the one who's changing. She's changing her political allegiances. She's changing her political beliefs and principles. She's changing the candidates she supports because all of her political friends are now on the other side of the aisle.

And she knows where her bread is buttered. Many, many such cases. But don't accuse us. Don't accuse the Republicans of having lost our principles or, you know, having become irredeemably different than we were. previously. It ain't really the GOP that's changed. Between the GOP and the Liz Cheney's of the world, I think it's pretty clearly Liz Cheney. There's so much more to say first, though, right now, go to Hillsdale.edu slash Knowles. History, economics, great works of literature, the meaning of the U.S. Constitution. Did you study those things in school? If you did, who knows if you learned true things

about them? And either way, it's probably time for a refresher. Time and technology have changed a lot of things, but they have not changed basic fundamental truths about the world and our place in it. That is why I'm so excited that Hillsdale College is offering more than 40 free online courses in the most important and enduring subjects. You can learn about the works of C.S. Lewis, the stories in the book of Genesis, the meaning of the U.S. Constitution, the rise and fall of the Roman Republic, or the history of the ancient church with Hillsdale College's online courses all available for free. I personally recommend you sign up for C.S. Lewis on Christianity. In this seven lecture course, you will examine some of Lewis's classic works, including mere Christianity, the screw tape letters, and abolition of man.

This course is self-paced, so you can start whenever and wherever, enroll in C.S. Lewis on Christianity to discover Lewis's core lessons regarding the truth and goodness of the Christian faith and how to apply those lessons to your life. Go to Hillsdale.edu slash Knowles right now. It's free. It's easy to get started. Hillsdale.edu slash Knowles to start Hillsdale.edu slash Knowles. Speaking of conservatives' electoral chances, there is a scary poll. It's come out of Texas. It was conducted by morning consult. It suggests that for the first time ever, my friend Senator Ted Cruz is down in the polls. That he's down at 44 percent compared to his opponents, 45 percent. Now, this is within the margin of error of the poll.

The poll margin of error is about two points. So it's still within the margin of error. And this does seem to happen to every election cycle with Senator Cruz, because the left hates Cruz more than just about any Republican politician. Maybe they hate Trump more, but Cruz is definitely up there. So every cycle now you hear, this is the chance. Texas is going to go blue. They're going to vote out that mean dastardly Ted Cruz. Cruz is a top target for the left. I'm a little nervous. I mean, they've obviously encouraged mass migration into Texas because they think it's going to give them an electoral majority probably permanently. So this is just a call. I don't have much more analysis on it than this. If you are in Texas,

you have to get out the vote. We cannot lose Texas. We cannot lose Senator Cruz in the U.S. Senate. You need to get out the vote. Voting throughout much of the country has begun actually already. And there is ballot harvesting in a lot of places in the country. Now I'm speaking broadly to Americans. There is ballot harvesting. There is early voting. There are drop-offs. There is early in person voting in some places. You've got to get out the vote. You've got to get your friends to vote. You've got to call people. You've got to pick up that phone and text people and get out the vote. We cannot lose Texas. We cannot lose Senator Cruz, probably the best U.S. Senator we have, certainly in the absolute upper one percentile of them. So we've got to do it, folks. The libs

are salivating over Texas. They've been trying to turn Texas blue for decades at this point. Do not give them the satisfaction and do not in so doing cost us a top Republican senator. Get out the vote. Do not let the libs have this victory. Okay. Now, speaking of polling, can we even rely on polling? There is a fascinating story that's come out about the future of political campaigns in polling. This comes as a result of a new company called AARU. Co-founders of this company are Cam Fink and Ned Co. they say they've cracked the code for predicting accurate election results. And it turns out that the key to accurately predicting elections is to take the people out of it. They are using AI, AI bots that simulate people, and they are polling the AI bots.

And the reason this really, really matters is that to conduct a poll can take days. It can take a week. It can take multiple weeks. And maybe you poll 1,000 people or 2,000 people. and it's somewhat unreliable, and the people who are actually answering the poll might be self-selecting, and with changes in technology to phones, to cell phones, to tablets, it's a little hard to reach people, harder than it was in the past. With AI polling, with these simulated voters, these bots, it takes about 30 seconds to conduct a poll. And you can do it. Aru is doing this with around 5,000 AI respondents.

the cost of this is about one-tenth the cost of human surveys. We'll see if it works. This is obviously the first election that this technology has existed for. If this works, this will radically change all of political campaigning, all of it, because polling is expensive. So you get polling at the national level, you get polling at some of the really important house seats, but you don't get a ton of polling in the less well-known house seats or at the state level or, you know, for dog catcher. If this works, you will have polling everywhere. You will also, if this works, have politicians poll testing their techniques before they try them out, before they actually practice their tactics. So you'll have a politician write a speech or the speech writer write a speech.

You will have that speech poll tested against 5,000 AI respondents. They will get feedback. Before they ever give the speech, they will be tailoring their speeches to, the robots that are supposedly better representatives of people than the people are. This will make politicians become even less authentic because every single thing they do will not merely be, as it is now, a reaction to how the audience reacts. It will be a pre-reaction. They will test this out on people before any actual people get to hear their messages. So the politicians will become less authentic.

And so I think paradoxically, this could give rise to more Trump-like figures in the future. A lot of people on the right have been wondering, what happens after Trump? Is there a Trumpism without Trump? And there's no question that Trump is an American original. You can't pretend to be Trump. When the candidates in 2016 tried to do their Trump impression, they all failed. So Trump is Trump. I think Trumpism without Trump is also a failure because I think, I think,

you've got to match form to substance. I think that Trumpism only works. You know, Trumpism, this assault on a stale liberal establishment, ideologies that are disconnected from political reality. It only works when you have a figure who really stands out from the crowd against the political establishment. But what this does mean is if the political class is going to become even less authentic, even more made of cardboard, even more robotic, because they'll actually be basing their campaigns on robots, then paradoxically, the politicians who will break through will have to be Trumpian figures. This is really bad news for the establishment GOP consultant class. But in the future, it seems to me, especially if this kind of technology proves useful as a very

likely will, the real future for Republican leadership is probably only going to be made up of Trump-like figures. That is going to give the Liz Cheneas of the world. nightmares. No wonder they want to start a new party. Now, speaking of our brave new world, I have the most disgusting video that I've seen in a really, really long time. This comes to us by way of Good Morning America. This, I think, totally dispels at leftist denials of the practical consequences of their views. This is something that is straight out of the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. There's so much more to say first, though, go to responsible man.com. Code Knowles. Gentlemen, let's talk about your health. When the left pushes its agenda, I have a way to fortify

yourself against the tide of cultural decay. That is, responsible man vitamins. Responsible man created the Emerson multivitamin for men who take their role seriously. This is not some feel-good supplement designed by coastal elites who think that masculinity is toxic. No, sir. This is a multivitamin packed with 33 key ingredients that support your immune system, sharpen your mind and keep your heart and muscle strong. Responsible men is a Daily Wire Ventures company, so you know these vitamins are made right here in America. No Chinese knockoffs.

You're not going to be ingesting lead? Just good old American quality, because a strong America needs strong men, and strong men need vitamins. Take responsibility for your health, something that we conservatives know is crucial to a flourishing society, take advantage of responsible man's fall sale going on right now, go to responsible man.com, use code Knowles, KennawLAS,

a checkout for 30% off plus an additional $9 off your first order. Hurry, because this deal won't last long. Responsibleman.com, code noles, KnaWLAS, for 30% off. Gentlemen, in a world where the libs want to redefine manhood, taking care of your health is practically a revolutionary act, go to responsibleman.com today. Responsible man, be the man America needs. The most disgusting story I've seen, this is making its way.

around X and other social media platforms. Good Morning America parading a young boy dressed up as a woman strutting and jiggling down a catwalk to the depraved and perverse cheers and applause of the live studio audience. Okay, we've blurred the kid, obviously. True Sodom and Gomorrah level stuff. sometimes that phrase is invoked and it's overstated and it's hyperbolic. This is not hyperbolic. This is actually worse than the kind of behavior you see in the story of Sodom and Gomorrah.

The first question to ask yourself, if you are in any way tempted to defend a drag kid, I think that kid's something like 11 years old, a little boy being dressed up like a girl dancing provocatively down a catwalk on national network television while an audience of perverts and lunatics claps like seals, if you're in any way tempted to defend that, ask yourself, would you defend that scene if it were an actual little girl? An actual little girl in a little skirt, showing her legs, wearing these kinds of shoes, strutting down a catwalk, then lying down on the ground, flopping her legs around. Would you defend that if it were an 11-year-old girl, like an actual girl. Certainly not. You'd say this is child abuse. This is sexualizing kids. This is playing to

pedophiles. This is as disgusting as it could possibly get. Okay. So then why would you defend it if it's a little boy pretending to be a little girl? Why would you be? Well, because that's an expression of his sexual identity and orientation and gender identity. It's the same behavior. It's just a more perverse version of that behavior. No, no, no, but that's a, but that's a, different because in the one case, it's a girl being viewed as a sexual object, you know, being made to strut around in behavior that might be acceptable for an adult woman, though even there you might want to curtail that behavior. But for a little kid, it's obviously totally gross. That's what happens when it's a little girl. But when it's a little boy

pretending to be a little girl, why then? It's actually just this boy exploring his own identity and exercising his true individual autonomy and, I mean, obviously all bogus arguments. But let me ask you something. If you were in the middle, if you are on the center left, there are left-wingers who watch and listen to this show. What's the liberal argument against this? If you're listening to this show, you probably know, at least at some level, that this is perverse and disgusting and wrong. Why? From the liberal perspective, why is it wrong? Because kids, because little boys shouldn't dress up. like little girls? No, no. What if the little boy identifies as a little girl? What if he's a little girl born in a little boy's body? Well, because kids should not, they shouldn't be strutting around in general in a way that seems lascivious and seems inappropriate, especially given one's age. Well, hold on. You're telling me that that little child shouldn't be able to explore his desires and identity? Are you trying to stifle and oppress and deny the little child's desire? The little boy wants to be there. we are told. Well, no, actually the parents are the, it's the parents' fault. The parents should not be allowing the child to engage in this kind of behavior. Hold on, you're telling me the parents

should try to stifle the identity and desires of the kid. What are you? You're going to sign the kid up for conversion therapy next? Parents have no right to stifle any of the desires that have supposedly come organically from the child. Well, no, but actually, Michael, desires don't just come organically from individuals, but they're cultivated by the outside environment, by schools, and by parents. This is why the left spends so much time focusing on education and trying to minimize the role that especially conservative parents can play. Oh, hold on, hold on. So you're telling me that we need to put place limits on what teachers can present to children, maybe limits of books in the library. No, no, no. Any way you cut it, there is really no

liberal argument against this. Liberalism is totally vulnerable to being exploited by the most perverse people in the world, which is how you get, hat tip to lips of TikTok here. It's how you get someone like Dr. Lindsay Doe, who has a million followers on social media, who is defending what she refers to as virtuous pedophiles. It's short for virtuous pedophiles. Not virtuous, as in, they're better than everyone because they're attracted to children, but virtuous like having moral standards and a sexual orientation that they have no control over, like the rest of us. Before you get all worked up, I'm talking about pedophilia, not child molestation or rape.

Pedophilia is the sexual attraction to children. It's a parapheria. There's a link to more information about it in the description, videos I've made in the past explaining the kind of human diversity and development. Malistation and rape are different. These are abusive actions that often have nothing to do with attraction. and many child abusers are actually sexually attracted to adults, but they act out on children. Meaning you probably don't object to pedophiles because you're compassionate and rational,

but you may loathe child molesters and rapists because they violate people. I personally try not to judge either. It's always the eyes. The eyes always give it away. If you're just listening to the show right now, this woman's eyes make AOC look like she squins. Okay. this woman's eyes are popping, bugging out of her head, which is not dispositive, but it's usually a sign that the person has a screw loose. And then if you listen to what this woman has said, she obviously does.

When I first heard this, I wondered, is this satire? This can't be right. And yet, even if it were satire, it follows the liberal argument perfectly. I guess that's what would make it really great satire if it weren't really. and I think it is real. Her argument is that sexual desires are innate and immutable. The left certainly defends this idea. This is why the left is banning so-called conversion therapy for kids who, well, now for kids who think they're the opposite sex and obviously are not, or previously for kids who, you know, I don't know, they had a sexual attraction, same-sex attraction

or some other kind of sexual attraction, and they didn't want that so they'd go to therapists. this is totally outlawed now in the places that the lives control because they say sexual desires are innate and immutable. Okay, well, if they're innate and immutable, what do you do about pedophiles? Because their desire for children, according to the left, is innate and immutable. So you can't blame people for their innate and immutable characteristics. In fact, what this woman says is these people are virtuous if they don't act on their desires. There's nothing wrong with that.

desire. There can never be anything wrong with a desire. The only thing that's wrong is acting on that desire. So how is the left wrong about that? How is this woman wrong? She's wrong both ideologically and appetitively. She's wrong ideologically in that. I'm not going to suggest that desire has no innate or biological basis. It might well. Who knows? But desire changes over time. People cultivate all sorts of different desires. Probably the first time you had a sip of whiskey, you didn't like the taste of the whiskey. But the more you drink whiskey, many people come to like whiskey. Same thing is true for, I don't know, caviar or something, oysters. Or I don't know, something that seems kind of yucky at first, but then you cultivate a taste for it. This is what we

called an acquired taste. So obviously not all tastes, not all desires are innate and immutable. some of them grow and change over time. Now, that's ideologically why she's wrong or anthropologically. Appetatively, the way she's wrong is that these guys suggest that if you have a desire for something, the best way to make sure you don't act on this desire is to live out the desire in your fantasies. You hear a lot of arguments in favor of pornography. You hear arguments sometimes in favor of prostitution or, well, they're all kind of Freudian arguments that suggest that the human mind is like a steam engine, and you've just got to blow off steam every once in a while or you're going to explode. That's not really how appetite and desire works.

Anyone who's ever cultivated a bad habit or a good habit knows that you don't remedy bad desires by indulging them a little bit. You remedy bad desires by avoiding them and cultivating the habit of virtue that, that, makes the desire for the bad thing less and less over time. If you're a heroin addict, you don't fix your heroin problem by just doing a little bit of heroin every so often. You know, blowing off a little steam. If you're a heroin addict, the way you live a better life is by not doing heroin anymore. And the longer you can go without doing heroin, and the more that you replace the desire for heroin with something good, I don't know, desire to paint or something like that, then the more you'll build up a habit of virtue and the

less you'll be in the grip of vice. What these people argue is, no, no, no, if, you know, pedophiles are just born with this sick desire and there's no way that it will ever be ameliorated. So, they should just, you know, fantasize in their minds or they, some people have suggested sex dolls and robots as a way to treat people with these disorder desires or pornography or whatever. But all that will do is reinforce the negative desire. It will make it more likely that these people commit actual crimes in the real world. It's really a debate between Freud and Aristotle, I guess, to really oversimplify it. It's a debate between liberalism and the classical view of politics. Which is it going to be? Who do you think is right? The lady with the crazy

bugged out eyes are Aristotle. I think I've got my answer. Now, speaking of the LGBTQ movement, Kamala Harris was just asked what she thinks about the second assassination of President Trump. Whether politicians are really safe, is the Secret Service really doing its job? You know, they almost pop Trump's head off twice. What does Kamala Harris think about that? She thinks we really need to think about the LGBT. Do you have full confidence in the Secret Service to protect all of you? I do.

You feel safe for you and your family? I do. But, I mean, you can go back to Ohio. Not everybody has Secret Service. And there are far too many people in our country right now who are not feeling safe. I mean, I look at Project 2025, and I look at, you know, like the don't say gay laws coming out of Florida. Members of the LGBTQ community don't feel safe right now. Immigrants or people with an immigrant background don't feel safe right now.

Women don't feel safe right now. And so, yes, I feel safe. I have secret service protection. But that doesn't change my perspective on the importance of fighting for the safety of everybody in our country. Oh, you're asking me what I think about my opponent having his head blown off nearly twice. I think it's really important to focus on Haitian migrants in Ohio, the ones that I'm imported hundreds of thousands at a time and homosexuals and transvestites. I think that's really, that's, they're really under threat, you know. Okay. So some people are viewing this as merely a

deflection away from offering sympathy for her opponent to offering sympathy for her political supporters. This is worse than that. Because when, when she says the people really under threat, Are the migrants in Ohio? The people really under threat. Are the homosexuals and the transvestites? The next question is, well, who threatens them? And the answer is, in Kamala's mind and the mind of the left, Trump. The real people we need to protect are the people who are being criticized by Trump.

Trump, who poses an existential threat to our country. We need to protect. And how do you protect them from Trump? I don't know that kid in Butler, Pennsylvania, he showed us one way to protect you from Trump. That guy in the golf course in Florida with the muzzle sticking through the fence, he showed you another way to protect you from Trump. Trump's an existential threat, according to Kamala Harris. Threatens our very country, our very democracy. He's a Nazi, according to Biden and Harris.

How do you protect yourself from a Nazi? You don't try to reason with him, do you? Kamala Harris's answer. Kamala's answers, Biden's answers, despite their weak protestations against political violence in general, in the abstract, their answers when they're asked about the actual assassination attempts on Trump have amounted to a green light for further assassins. They're saying, bring it on. You want to talk to me about political threats in this country? The real threats are against the people that Trump is threatening. Forget about the near assassinations. When, when Kamala Harris and Joe Biden say they're disappointed to hear of the assassination attempts, their explanations as to their disappointment,

consistently lead one to come to the conclusion that they're only disappointed that the assassination attempts didn't work. Now, what you need to do, as soon as you possibly can, is watch the groundbreaking documentary from Matt Walsh that became his first cultural phenomenon. That is, what is a woman?

The film that started at all. You can join as a DailyWR Plus member, watch it on demand anytime you want. This hit documentary tackles one of the most debated questions of our time, one of the stupidest questions of our time, Matt Walsh's journey to find an answer as captivated audiences across the world. Go to dailywire.com slash subscribe to join today. Use code DW30 for 30% off your new DailyWR Plus membership. My favorite comment on Friday is from Larry Joe 9-633, who says Cuba jailing people for memes. Gavin Newsom said, I'd like two scoops of that, please. That's true. That's even at the federal level,

they're jailing conservatives for posting memes. But you're right. Whenever you see some shenanigans in Cuba or Venezuela or some other tin pot dictatorship, you just see the leftist governor is just salivating. Ooh, that's a good idea. I've got to write that one down. Now, speaking of foreign affairs, this is a story. Well, actually, okay, before we get to what I really want to say about foreign affairs,

we'll stick on Kamala for one second because Kamala just gave a really tough answer to a question that threatens her political campaign. Her campaign has played things relatively well. They have a ton of support in the media, so they've been able to paper over all of her rough edges and all of the things that voters would hate about her. But one issue that continues to bedevil the Democrats is Israel. And it's because it's a wedge issue for the Democrats.

The activist base despises Israel. They're leading the intifada on the campuses. But the establishment, the donor class, is still broadly in favor of Israel. And the American public, more broadly, generally support Israel over the Palestinians, over the Iranians. So the Democrats are in a damned if you do, damned if you do situation. Kamala has just asked about aid to Israel.

Here's the best you could muster. The matter of my president, just to follow up really quickly, is there a specific policy change that you as by as president of the United States would say you would do that would help this along because, you know, you've gotten a lot of credit for, um, emphasizing the humanity of Palestinians. But what I often hear from folks is that there's no policy. change that would, that either you or the president, President Biden have gone and said they would do? Is there a specific policy change as president that you would do in our helping of Israel?

We need to get this deal done and we need to get it done immediately and that is my position and that is my policy. We need to get this deal done. But in the way that we send weapons, in the way that we interact as their ally, are there specific policy changes? Well, Eugene, for example, one of the things that we have done that I am entirely supportive of is the pause that we've put on the 2,000 pound bombs. And so there is some leverage that we have had and used. But ultimately, the thing that is going to unlock everything else in that region is getting this deal done.

And I'm not going to disclose private conversations, but I will tell you, I've had direct conversations with the prime minister. Okay. And so we're going to get this deal done. really what it's all about. We're going to get this deal done. Now, I know that Joe Biden and I have been in office for three and a half years now, and it's during our administration that all of this war has broken out after relative peace and actually peace in the Middle East under Donald Trump. But listen, we've got to get this deal done. We got to get this deal done, said the woman who's currently in

office. So there's no evidence to suggest that she could ever get a deal done. If she were capable of getting a deal done, the deal would be done already. She's the vice president. And the president is basically incapacitated. And he's imbued her with presidential authority on all sorts of matters. And they haven't gotten a deal done. And her policy doesn't really differ from Biden's anyway. She copied and pasted his platform onto her website. So there's no evidence that she'll get a deal done. So the only thing she's offering here is she says, look, we've paused 2,000 pound bombs to Israel, which is to say, she says, the only thing we can do is slightly reduce our support for Israel. Is that a good policy to slightly reduce your support for a putative ally?

That is kind of like the Ukraine policy. The Ukraine policy is not help Ukraine to win against Russia. The Ukraine policy is give Ukraine just enough arms and munitions to keep the war going. So you're going to end up with a lot of dead Ukrainians, but it's also going to lead the Russians to keep sending their young men into fight, and it's going to kill a lot of Russians. And the euphemism that is used for this is to degrade the Russian army, to degrade the Russian military. But all that means is just lead the war into a stalemate so that lots of people on both sides die. And it's too bad for the Ukrainians, but at least you weaken the Russians, and that's fine. That's the limit of their grand strategy. And it's the same thing here. Okay, we're not going to

defund Israel totally, but we're going to take away one type of bomb from them. So it's just this, it's this foreign policy of shrugging your shoulders. Because as I mentioned last week. There are really only three positions that one can hold for American foreign policy vis-a-vis the Israel-Gaza war. One is continue to support Israel, as we have for many decades now, even as Israel does things that a lot of Americans disagree with. Or you could stop supporting Israel and start supporting Palestine, such as it is, but there's really no such thing as Palestine. There's just the Iranians. And you wouldn't only be turning away from Israel. You'd be turning away from many of our other allies in the Middle East who oppose Iran, Iran, which is the country that's funding all of these proxies, like Hamas, like Hezbollah, like the Houthis, like a number of other groups.

So now you're going to be irritating, I don't know, maybe the Saudis, maybe the Bahrainis, maybe Kuwait, maybe, but you're going to be sucking up then to the Palestinians and Hamas and Hezbollah in Iran. Is that going to really serve the American interest? or the third option, I guess, is you just take your hands off entirely and you say, look, it's the Middle East, ain't our problem, they can duke it out. But that solution is basically to say, we're not going to be the global hegemon anymore. We're not going to be the empire of the world. So then you're inviting China to step into that vacuum or you're inviting some other state. Probably it would just be China right now. You're inviting Russia to come in to Europe. your invite. So even that is not without consequence to America. It's to say, okay, we're going to

encourage another foreign power to become the global empire. Is that what the Democrats one? Is that what the American people want? Probably not. So what are you going to do? None of those options. The Republicans have concluded, okay, the acceptable option is basically to just support Israel as we have. And it's kind of annoying and they do things we don't like. and, you know, it'd probably be better for America if they would wind down this war. But broadly speaking, we're going to stick with our longstanding alliance, even if it's irritating and even if they're doing things we dislike. The Democrats are just not doing anything.

They're saying we're going to defend Israel, but we're also going to give money to the Iranians, and we're going to go soft on them and work against our own alliance in the Middle East. But also, we're not going to do too much. We're not going to give anyone a clear victory. So we're going to kind of back away on the world stage, and we're just going to leave everything in a helter-skelter stalemate because these people can't come to conclusions about anything.

That's what it is. It just leaves you in a kind of, well, something that is endemic to liberalism, a kind of radical skepticism, a kind of mealy-mouthed indifference that endangers everyone because sometimes a wrong decision can even be better than indecision.

And that's where we are. Kamala's answer, I don't know, she might as well babble about bend diagrams and yellow school buses. It's going to have as much of practical foreign policy import as the nonsense she just said.

Now, it's Music Monday. The rest of the show continues now. You don't want to miss it. Become a member use code Knowles, K&WLES. It's check out for two months free on all annual plans. Republicans are Nazis. You cannot separate yourselves from the bad white people. Growing up, I never thought much about race. Never really seemed to matter that much, at least not to me. Am I racist? I would really appreciate it if you love. I'm trying to learn on this journey. I'm going to sort this out. I need to go deeper undercover. They don't say I'm racist. Joining us now is Mad. Certify DEI expert. Here's my certification.

What you're doing is you're stretching out of your whiteness. This is more for you and less for you. Is America inherently racist? The word inherent is challenging there. I want to rename the George Washington Monument to the George Floyd Monument. America is racist to its bones. So inherently. Yeah.

This country is a piece of... White folks, trash. White supremacy. White woman. White boy. Is there a black person around? What's a black person right here? Does he not exist?

Hi, Robin. Hi. What's your name? I'm Matt. I just had to ask who you are because you have to be careful. Never be too careful. In theaters now, rated PG-13.