The Michael Knowles Show - Ep. 23 - Arming Snowflakes: Antonia Okafor on Campus Carry

Episode Date: September 7, 2017

Campus carry superstar Antonia Okafor stops by the studio to discuss why we need to arm the snowflakes and all the best pro-2nd Amendment arguments. Then, Zo Rachel and Paul Bois join the Panel of Deplorables to talk Diane Feinstein's anti-Catholic religious test, Trump's listening to Pelosi on DACA, Hillary's wonderfully destructive book tour, and how women's breasts aren't sexual. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

College snowflakes are melting down at universities across the country, assaulting professors and vandalizing buildings. Antonio Okifor is here to tell us why we should let them have guns. Then, Zoe Rachel and Paul Baud join the panel of deplorables to discuss Democrat Senator Diane Feinstein's anti-Catholic religious test, Hillary's wonderfully destructive book tour, Trump's DACA Deal with Pelosi, and the alleged asexuality of women's nipples. I'm Michael Knowles, and this is the Michael Knowles Show. I am joined today by campus carry activist Antonia Okifor. And really, Antonia needs no introduction. But for those of you who are unfamiliar with her work,

I just wanted to play a quick clip of Antonia every day of her life. That is a striking resemblance to John Rambo. A striking resemblance. You look much better in person. Thank you. I have not been working out as much as I used to. You're much less of an Italian man than you used to be. Yeah, exactly.

Yeah. So you are the leading campus carry activist in the country problem. Oh, wow. What, that's what I would say. I'm not even flattering you. I think that's true. What is the 30-second pitch to like students at college campuses carry guns? Oh, yeah.

Well, okay, first of all, I do not think that the people, they're snowflake worthy of that name, should probably have a gun, but more unlikely they're against guns, so it's okay. And the hot barrel would just melt them. So it's really a moot point. It would. The silence or that they don't want people to have, too, would just also do the same. But basically, it's the fact that those people would just do the same. the fact that those people who already have a concealed carry license off campus, that they should have that same right on campus. That's really what campus career is about. It's not also,

it's not about making these superheroes or whatever. You have a permit and you have a gun, and therefore now you're able to protect everybody on campus and if something happens. It's about really liberty. It's about personal protection, about making sure that I have that right to self-preservation that the Second Amendment guarantees really under God, really, not really by the government. So it's a natural right. Yeah, it is a natural right. Yeah, and even more so, those people who just hate the Constitution,

if you just bring it into the whole self-defense aspect of it, it's like, you know, you talk about sexual assault on campus, well, why don't you allow these women to be able to protect themselves on campus? And that's what the whole campus carry issues about. Because women are not as physically strong as men. That's just a biological fact. I know, I know. You're going to bring biology into this.

I'm triggering the whole audience here. Whatever. But they aren't. And then there's this great equalizer, this sweet, sweet justice that just sends freedom seeds down the firing range. When you became a campus carry activist, you were not a gun nut. You had just shot a few times, right? What made you pick this issue? Yeah, I think that's why I bring the whole liberty aspect of it into it, is because it really was not a, oh, yeah, I love guns.

And I just want everyone to have guns. I mean, now, two years in, I do really love guns. But, you know, it's not where it started. You know, it started because selfishly, you know, I was a woman, a college campus, on a college campus. I was a graduate student. And I was walking home at night. And I realized that I had no means of self-protection of protecting myself. That, you know, it's not okay for me to just have, you know, 9-1-1 in one hand with my cell phone.

And that's literally like I would do. It would have 9-1-1 and have it pre-dialed and have my finger on the submit button. And then I would have, you know, the rape whistle that they give you in a phone. freshman year orientation saying, here you go, I hope you don't get raped. I mean, that's basic, but I hope someone hears you afterwards. So that's basically what it came down to. And I realized, you know, I don't want that for women. And to be an empowered woman, I think it's really about, you know, protecting yourself before something happens, not talking about health care insurance that, you know, deals with something that has already happened. That's right. And that's the whole thing.

There is this insane idea that you're going, you have a rape whistle and you're going to blow the whistle and then the rapist is going to say, okay, all right, well, I didn't know you had a whistle. I'll see you later. Yeah, it's not like you're screaming already. I'll come back when the cops come and then he can arrest me, right? Yeah, and the thing is that the cops even, that's the whole issue that people talk about

from the left, right? I wrote this New York Times op-ed about that, and most of this New York Times audience was saying most of the response was like, well, why don't you just get a, you know, a police officer when the week before they're like, we hate cops. I'm like, you guys got to choose one way or the other. But really, it's this, they might come in six to seven minutes, but a lot can happen in six to seven minutes.

And so, why don't we take your... I'm going to refrain from making any jokes about that because I think they'd be in poor taste, but you make a very valid point. But you just made it. I implied one. That is true. That is, it's both a joke and a reality. Everything that matters in that scenario is going to happen before the cops get there,

nine times out of ten. Absolutely. And you wrote, that was a great New York Times piece. Thank you. wrote in it, this is a personal thing for you. You grew up in a single mother household. You had been assaulted. This isn't just some political philosophy conversation. This is something that you can really speak about as an individual. Absolutely. And also the fact that at that point when I was making those decisions of, man, I do want to fight for this issue because, you know,

it is not even a political issue because I dealt with it, but I was coming from the left at that point. I was brand new. I think I don't even think at that time I made a decision that I realized, you know what, I do have concerted values. And that's why I realize I can strongly, you know, go to the point that it is not a political issue. It really is, um, maybe, yeah, American issue. It's a human rights issue. It really is. But particularly with women, um, and the differences that science has proven over and over again. Um, but really when it's not even just about that, I mean, you're, I mean, you are coming against someone who is a male or woman who has a firearm, that person's going to win, you know, regardless of how big you are of

your male or not. I know, I am very macho. It is true. I physically intimidate a lot of attackers. Italians. At least one of those is true. It adds to it. But no, even despite all those great qualities, you know, it's still best for you at that point to have something that's going to be an equalizer. So I think that's important. Do you think there's a racial component of this to, you know, specifically toward arming young black women who are, say, disproportionately more likely to be assaulted? Do you think there is a racial inequality on this issue? I think, I mean, the stats have been showing that black women

and black women are the fastest growing demographic who are becoming gun owners. And so I think they are seeing that, or whether it's a political issue and that's a lot of people, they hate this fact that, you know, black women are now becoming gun owners. And so they twist it into, well, because what happened the last year, oh, is Trump, you know, racism and it's just been, it's just been, you know, just blown up a proportion and that's why we happen now. Yes.

To protect against Trump. Yeah. That's the worry. It's against Trump and the racism that's, you know, just prevalent now just because of it. No, and I always, and they talk to me about that. They'll interview me about that and be like, no, it's been happening the last few years before we even knew about Trump. So, hasn't been going to do with that.

For me, I think it's also has to do with the rise of women in general, you know, a lot more of us. You talk about feminism, a lot more of us are, you know, by our, by herself at home. A lot of us are still pursuing education longer and maybe, you know, that transition from leaving a household where your father figure is there and then having it where your spouse is there, there's a bigger gap there. So a lot more women feel that they have to take safety into their own hands. And I also think that's just an extension of, you know, if you want to bring the feminist aspect of it, the feminist movement is an extension of that independence. And so black women especially are in these areas that tend to be statistically more dangerous and they're by themselves.

And so I hear all the time with other women with their daughters and they're like, I want to buy his gun because I want to protect my daughter. I want to know how to use it. I want to protect myself. So I think that's really what it's about. The single woman aspect of it is so interesting because it's, if a woman is living with her father, living with her husband or partner, whatever, live in boyfriend, there is a physically, hopefully somewhat strong man there to give her backup. But if she's living alone or living with young kids, there is a very thin line between her and danger. Absolutely. Yeah, absolutely.

And it really doesn't have to be about race. I was on One America News Network, and I was debating this Democratic strategist, and he was like, well, women don't need guns. Because, I mean, you guys just need to advocate for better health care insurance and rise in pay. The right to an abortion. And rights and abortion, of course,

even though the woman is not going to be alive enough point. But, okay, rights to abortion. And then also, you know, that you have better, you know, advantages in the workforce. I'm like, how does that even, or a better access to education? I'm like, okay, even I have all those things. I have great health care. I really do.

I have great health care. And I'm college educated and grad school. And I still need a gun to protect. myself. Listen, attacker, I make an extra 24 cents on the dollar without controlling for education. So back off, buddy. Absolutely, absolutely. I am empowered through health care benefits. No, all those things are after the fact that you still need a firearm or whatever. It doesn't have to be a firearm. And that's what's like we've empowered, the organization that I started. It's not just having a firearm that's going to be there for protection because, first of all, you know, you could be younger than 21,

and just not going to be able to have access to that permit. I mean, there's pepper spray. It's having a knife or whatever, whatever means you can use, to be able to protect yourself, but a lot of universities are even keeping like pepper spray from being an option. Massachusetts does not allow anybody to have pepper spray on alcohol.

Other than Antifa when they go and they protest Trump supporters. You can bring all the papers where you want. Exactly, exactly. Then they're totally okay. I mean, they're so thin. I mean, they need something. But everybody else is our white supremacism, so they can't deal with pepper spray. So from what I can tell, your politics are slightly to the right of Attila the Hun or Genghis Khan.

It was not always that way. You voted for Barack Obama twice. I have, yeah. What happened? I know. To quote Hillary Clinton, what happened? Because everyone, it was really cool to vote for Obama. There's so many people that I know, I'm like, wow, you voted for Obama in 2008, but everyone did.

Especially if you're in my age. But yeah, the second time is when people are like, wow, I don't know if I can trust you. But I think it was really the economic issue. It was the fiscal side of realizing that, first of all, Obamacare and how egregious that was. Descrowing the economy. Absolutely. And back to my generation. And, you know, I was studying public policy at the time.

Who knew, like, actual facts could change someone's mind? Rarely it does. Yeah. Well, so. So, but yeah, basically that. And then realizing also that, you know, all of these. these policies, even if you just focus on African Americans, if you really are just focused on that because that's right, the reason why, you know, as a black woman, as a black person, a lot of us

voted for Obama because we were just like, well, this is our chance to do better than we have the horse. First black president and historical election. Yeah, absolutely. And they believe all the hope and change that you talked about. And then realizing that not only did they not help the black community, if you're just looking at their poverty race were higher, welfare, you know, being dependent on the government was higher. Like, having food stamps as a staple of your legacy that have more food stamps than you have before. It's not something I want to aspire to. It's a little counterproductive.

Yeah, exactly. And so this looking at that issue really made me realize that I wanted to change over, at least on the economic side. And then everything, Liberty really just changes everything else. And the gun issue really helped too. So you felt the social issues followed from the economic issues. I think so. Yeah, a lot of it.

But also, I mean, you talk about this, you know, coming from Italian. you know, background. And, you know, my family is very conservative and just values, right? Even though they vote for Hillary and Bernie last time, they, I think a lot of people in minority community, they really have these conservative values. But because they see reality, right? Yeah. It's not, there isn't latte sipping on the yacht. There isn't, you don't go to Al Gore's movie premieres and things like that. Climate change. Climate change is not the most important thing to these people. I'm sorry. That's why I'm just like, okay, with Bernie, I'm like, okay, okay, that's nice, but my mom is not talking about like, oh, but those poor polar bears.

But the panda bears and the polar bears. By the way, there are more polar bears today than there have ever been in history. Even on that, that drives me crazy. But you're right. Nobody is saying, ah, but in a hundred years, the temperature might be 0.2 centigrade higher. And so, listen to screaming kids who I can't feed. Calm down. We need to talk about the polar bears. Absolutely not. I mean, my parents are from Nigeria, too. So even more so, they're like, Unless you're talking about that for me to eat, I don't really care. But I do care that, you know, I think I can't go to this other party or another party because the media tells me that they're all racist and they're sex and misogynist. That's what I think really gets them, unfortunately, is regards to the value system.

And that's the same thing I had too is that. But media tells me that they're racist and they hate me as a person. There's that social aspect. It's that virtue signaling aspect. Yeah, absolutely. I recently had dinner with a friend of mine. A friend of mine for 20 years. We went to middle school together, high school.

We sit down and she said, do you really believe the things you put on Facebook? I said, I don't even know what I put on Facebook, but presumably I do. She said, what, so you're a racist now? I said, what? How did that find? I've had many black girlfriends. Yeah, that's right. Yeah, you're kidding me.

I got Antonio Ogapoor posters on my wall. So, I cut that out. Yeah. Cut that out before a sweet little Elisa season. No, no, no. So. So this is a person I've known for 20 years, but there's this heavy virtue signaling, sick, oppressive culture surrounding conservative politics. How do we break that?

Well, the ironic thing about that, too, is that when you hear what these people on the left are saying, that's the real racism right there with the policies. Like, oh, you can never, oh, one of these professors that got in trouble, I forgot one of those elitist ones. You know, I believe. And they got in trouble because they basically said that they might have heard about it. They basically said that having the best way to have a better life is kind of this middle class, you know, culture and middle class behavior like getting married and, you know, having kids, you know, in bedlock and stuff like that. And people got mad because they said that they were racist because a black person could never aspire to.

How could a black person do that? No black person has ever gotten married and had a good life. No. That's impossible. Exactly. And it is stopped there like, and I'm just looking at it. Like, does no one see how racist that is? There is no difference between those guys and Richard Spencer.

There is no difference. They are two sides of the same coin. I absolutely agree, but then I'm going to be called a racist. That's right. When I say stuff like that. So I am now white supremacists. I don't know the last time that you saw me. But now I am officially white.

I always suspected of you, Antonio. But that's, well, all right. Let's bring on some of those other supremacists. They're at least deplorable. We have to introduce our panel. We have, Zoe Rachel, his eminence, Paul Bois, and we're going to keep Antonio O'Kefour around for the panel. So let's get right into the news.

In the name of tolerance, Democrats are instituting religious tests against prospective judicial nominees. Here is Diane Feinstein grilling an appeal court nominee, Amy Barrett. When you read your speeches, the conclusion one draws is that the dogma lives loudly within you. And that's of concern when you come to big issues that large numbers of people have fought for for years in this country. Was that even English?

I don't even know of what she just said was English. Diane must have forgotten Article 6 of the Constitution, which reads, quote, no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States. Other Democrats are doing it too. She is not alone here. Dick Durbin, Senator Dick Durbin asked Barrett if she considers herself a, quote, Orthodox Catholic. Bernie Sanders grilled the Office of Management and Budget nominee on whether he thought Jews would go to heaven. So we have to ask Paul Bois, do Jews go to heaven?

No, I'm kidding. I'm going to ask you a different question. The dogma lives loudly within you, your eminence. What is up with the resurgence in anti-Catholicism from the government? Well, we're definitely a long way from the days of people putting no Catholics allowed in their storefronts. I think we've definitely evolved into a full-blown anti-Christian sentiment. But I think the main reason why Pelosi, I mean, Feinstein and Durbin are specifically targeting her for Catholicism is because a faithful Catholic, which is what she is and someone like Scalia is,

are going to operate under the dictates of Thomas Aquinich, which states that a government has to bow down to the laws of God. So that means that that's going to inform their legalistic decision-making, which means no same-sex marriage, no abortion, and no socialism. So pretty much everything they stand for goes out the window. I must say every single thing that Paul Blas says sounds, about as authoritative as it could possibly be. And for those of you who are not watching,

you really ought to watch because it appears that Paul's coming to us from directly in front of the Vatican. So great, Jai. Didn't know you were traveling, Paul, but that's excellent. So is there any legitimate concern that someone's religious views

could make them unfit to hold office in the United States? Well, first up, what is this Darth Feinstein? The dogma flows strongly through you. What the corn is? that, man. Anyway, you know, if you have in our

Constitution, you have the right to life and it can't be deprived of you without due process of law and the rights that fall underneath that. Here's the thing. You can't adhere to any of those rights without some basis

of faith. Now, when we say due process of law, what law are we talking about? Because you can't say that these are inherent qualifiable rights by man because another man will have a different perspective on those laws. That's why you have lynch mobs. Lynch moms that will go and say, no, this person is guilty, no trial by juror. We're going to lynch him right here without due process.

So you can't say that these are inherent qualified laws. You have to apply faith to know that there is a law that says you cannot deprive a person of their life, their legal due process, without this law. once again according to what law? There has to be the faith that puts this on a foundation of a particular law that is beyond the qualifications of man. That is such short. Sorry, go ahead.

I'll say, in short, you can't help but apply faith to this law. And it has to be a particular faith that squares with this law. That is such a good point. And nobody makes it. Everybody talks past it. But you're right. There is a meta law. there is a faith to even believe in the law.

And people say all the time, they say, well, we can't legislate morality. But all we do is legislate morality. Tax law is legislating morality. Healthcare provisions are legislating morality. We bring our views of the world and human nature and government to bear when we construct laws for our society. Everybody misses that. Right, right. And once again, what morality, though, it still comes down to a faith of which morality

is the most sound and most conducive that upholds our inherent rights. That can only be indicted by our treaty. And that brings up another question about this, which is, Antonia, something tells me that a Muslim nominee would not have been grilled in this way by the esteemed Senator Feinstein. Is this religious test being applied selectively? Oh, yeah, absolutely. And we see that with a lot of things, too, even with the feminist, right?

They'll attack all the Christians. They'll say, oh, my gosh, you know, you're bringing back women, decades, and everything like that. But they will never talk about Muslim people and Islam, which is very, I would say, probably very anti-feminist. As if, like, they kind of get their- Understatement of the year. Like, okay, seriously, like, they get to pick and choose who they want to say is going to be a part of their cause. Like, you know, Linder Sarsore. I mean, come on.

Of course. I mean, she's the one who's talked about a jihad and stuff like that. And then also, what is, what is it? Sharia law when she says that she actually wants, you know, that to be part of the law of the U.S., of the land. And then the feminists are, you know, suddenly quiet about that. I mean, that's what we're basically dealing with, where there's no actual principle here.

There's no, you know, logic or reasoning. It's just oppression hierarchies. Absolutely. Well, we can move on to another. esteemed religious reverend, Reverend Hillary Clinton. Politico is reporting that Hillary campaign alumni are dreading her forthcoming book tour, with anonymous staffers reacting, quote, oh God, quote, I can't handle it, and, quote, the final torture. Now, to date, Hillary has blamed her election loss on the FBI, James Comey, the Russians, Vladimir Putin, anti-American

forces, low information voters, the optimism of her supporters, pollsters, Barack Obama's re-election, Barack Obama himself, voters desire for change, misogyny, suburban women, the mainstream media, television executives, cable news, Netflix, misguided documentarians, Facebook, Twitter, WikiLeaks, fake news, Bernie Sanders, Joe Biden, and Macedonia. That last one's kind of hard to figure out. Antonia, what does Hillary help to accomplish by blaming everybody else under the sun? Is this about her legacy? Is this about protecting her family's reputation?

What is she doing? Well, the ironic thing, though, is that if it's about protecting her family's reputation or herself, it's actually making it worse. I think it's like any reasonable person is just like, okay, oh, come on. I mean, this is a little bad. You're not a Kathy, you know, like Griffin or whatever her name is, you know, the one of the redhead with, you know, basically coming back two days after that whole Trump thing. I just called her whatever her name is. Yeah, you know, the de-list, A-list, you know, actress or whatever. It's just own up to it. It was your fault and you have more respect, male or female, when you do that. But she's not deciding to do that. And I think it's going to hurt her cause and whatever her cause was cause of making $100,000. Yeah, whatever. That's, I think that was the whole cause. The Clintons were the cause. And this brings up the loyalty questions. So the Democratic Party has been pretty good to the Clintons. They have supported them for a long time. Why is?

is Hillary Clinton going on a 15 city attack the Democrats tour? Isn't it a little ungrateful? Ungrateful? Yeah, yeah. That's a good word. You pick some good words, man. Look, I have the best words, don't we folks? You know, you give good word, man. You give good word. Okay. That's just Democrats. It's in their nature to throw people under the bus.

That's just what they do. And in terms of, you know, and Hillary's going to try to get, you know, she's going to throw them and try to terminate them the same way she got rid of them emails and got rid of that server. And, you know, with Democrats, they have, they have to separate themselves or somehow sanctify themselves in their own sanctimonious way

for why it is that they're the losers that they are. It's just like, you know, you know, she said, is that own up to it. Own up to what it is that you did. Now, like I said, even when you got these drones out there trying to remove like these Confederate symbols,

figures in history, the flag and stuff like that, they're trying to separate themselves for what is their fault? And Hillary Clinton is following that model. She's trying to separate herself from what is her fault and trying to put it on somebody else. Zoe Rachel typically pulling his punches, typically very calm.

No, you're absolutely right, though. That is exactly it. It's just passing the buck and running away the moment that there's trouble. Paul, Paul Bois, the longer that Hillary Clinton remains the face of the Democratic Party, the better it is for us. It's absolutely terrific.

President Trump's approval ratings are fairly low, but I know of one person whose approval ratings are lower. That would be Hillary Rodham Clinton. According to an NBC poll that just came out, her approval ratings are 30%, the lowest that they have ever been. Who are the Democrats going to put up to counteract the attacks of Hill Dog? Well, I think it's pretty much the case now. Democrats are Trump's greatest ally.

And as they've gone knee-deep in this intersectionality narrative, they ran it for eight years with Barack Obama. They tried it with Hillary Clinton. It did not work out. And I think they're just so wedded to it. They're going to have no choice but to run the intersectionality narrative again. And the only person that they really have that kind of fits that bill is Kamala Harris. So Elizabeth Warren is not going to. Yeah, Elizabeth Warren is not going to do it.

But Kamala Harris is probably the one that they're going to run. And as long she's tweeting out tweets about how Trump can't pardon people who, been convicted of a crime, then I don't think we have anything to worry about here. But Liz Warren, I thought, was a Native American, which as far as I can tell, is a more oppressed minority than Kamala Harris. Antonio, did you say something? Well, yeah, I just think it's funny because it's like, oh, well, a black person, Obama, and then Hillary Clinton's a woman, and just put them together, and then we're good.

That's how we actually went next time. It has nothing to do with actual issues. This is continuing up with the first of everything. A black woman, first president. You know, all that matters. Yeah. It's going to get really weird, like five or six candidates down the line. When you start gnashing different things together, two heads coming out.

Who knows? President Trump tweeted out this morning, for all of those DACA that are concerned about your status during the six-month period, you have nothing to worry about. No action in that Trumpian exclamatory way. Here is Nancy Pelosi. gloating about it. Some of the concerns that people have when come out is, it came out of, but he said six months,

and these people are being fearful that it said, pack up because you're out of here in six months, not, we have six months and we're going to pass a bill, so take comfort. So that's why I said to him, I, when he called this morning, I said, thanks for calling. This is what we need, the people really need a reassurance from you, Mr. President, that the six-month period is not a period of roundup, but it's just that the DACA is frozen and that these people will not be vulnerable. That is really hard to watch. And after that, I can't believe I would leave you on this,

but I have to say goodbye to Facebook and YouTube. I know you're begging. You said, why didn't you cut it off before Nancy Pelosi came on? So right now, if you're a subscriber, we appreciate it. You help us keep the lights on and bring out great people like Antonia. I get to keep my job. And Marshall gets to keep his job this week. So go over to dailywire.com right now.

It's $10 a month, $100 a year. You get me. You get the Andrew Claven show. You get the Ben Shapiro show. Forget all that. It doesn't really matter. You get the Leftist Tears Tumblr. This, it is obviously waterproof, saltproof, snowflakey proof.

It is the finest vessel for delicious liberal tears. You can have them hot or cold. always salty, always really, really delicious. So go over there right now, DailyWire.com, and we'll be right back. Antonia, President Trump seems to be buddy-buddies with Nancy Pelosi today. Is this the long-dreaded, long-awaited Trump pivot to the left?

No, it really isn't. Oh, thank goodness. All right. Let that aside. Everyone can just be, okay, it's a tweet. It's Trump, and you're just like, this is one of those like, oh, Trump, you're awesome. But, so Congress.

So it's out to Congress, really is what it's really about. But it's, no, it's good. You make a great observation, which is it's just a tweet. Every time we go crazy, we start ripping our hair out, we say this is the end of the Republican Party. It's just some tweet, and then it moves on, and he tweets something else. And it's not a big deal. It doesn't destroy the country.

Well, I hope your optimism is proven correct. Paul Bois, this is a tricky situation. What is the best path forward for President Trump regarding these so-called dreamers. It certainly is a tricky situation, Michael, and that's one I certainly struggle with as a Catholic. And I certainly do have compassion for the dreamers and the kind of situation that they're in.

However, I do believe that DACA is not the way to solve it, especially with Obama just ramming it down our throats through executive order. So what Congress needs to figure out here is how can we compassionately deal with the dreamers who are here under no fault of their own? simultaneously giving a strong deferrence to the law here. And that's

a difficult tightrope to watch to walk, so they're going to have a tough time doing it, but I'm still up in the air about how to handle it. I'll tell you, with that answer, I wish you were on the U.S. Council of Catholic bishops because they make all of these awful political statements that

seem to me not quite infallible. Zoe, everybody thinks that these dreamers are a bunch of eight-year-old kids, but the dreamers are as old as 30, years old. It is not they're not all four-year-olds. Some of them are well into their adulthood, what would have been considered until recently, middle age. Why are Democrats so much better than Republicans at coming up with these emotionally manipulative euphemisms?

Man, that is a good question. And I pray that we get an answer. But you know, at the same time, I think we're asking these questions of, you know, of Trump and the House and the Senate and these other people. The question I'm asking is, look, if America is this, this rotten country of these awful people, why is it that y'all think that you can come here and improve your lives? Why is it that you think that you can be a better person of coming to a country of awful, rotten racist people? Zoe, you've come up with it.

The new euthamism is nightmares. That's what they are. They're obviously dreaming of this horrible future in this racist wasteland. Thank you. And the thing is, all these things that you want from America, why aren't you yelling at your government to give it to you. Your country is supposed to be this fabulous country under this, you know, this, this call that you want, where you got free health care and everything's supposed to be free education and free housing and all that sort of stuff. How's that working out for you

so well where you have to come here and impose it on us to give it to you. Yell at your government. Quit yelling at us. Wake up from that dream. Come back to reality. A new law, this is much happier news than DACA. This is, I really want to end the show on a positive note. A new law may free the nipple in Berkeley, California, progressive councilman, Chris Worthington explained, quote, if a woman's nipples are fit to be seen by the most innocent and impressionable portion

of the population, I thought he was talking about me, but it is babies and toddlers, then it stands to reason that nipples are not inherently sexual and are fit to be seen by the rest of the population if that woman so chooses. Man, if that's progress, sign me up. Do I have a choice?

You certainly don't get a choice. me how I feel about them. As the only woman on this panel, I will not. We're going to have a practical tutorial at the end of this segment. So are nipples inherently sexual? Oh my. Why are you throwing a question to me first, man? Okay. I don't know if they're inherently, it depends on whose nipples they are. Like, if they're bruised, then I wouldn't find anything sexually about. But look here, this is before puberty when a kid is like a young, this young toddler. when they see these things as food. They haven't, like, gotten the hormones to start to process them as anything different.

So now, here's, you know, and biologically, listen, yes, they are inherently sexual because they're sexually specific. You know, when you have these attributes that actually define a woman defines her sex, then that actually makes them sexual. That is by definition, sexual. Thank you. You know, it's like, come on, man. You know, why do we spend money on this stuff? You know, it's like common sense. So I always tell sweet little Elisa that my back hair is very sexy, and she disagrees,

but I'm going to bring Zoe Rachel's argument to her. Paul, Paul Bois, if men can show their nipples, but women cannot show their nipples, then what do we do about transgender people? If a man thinks he's a woman or is pretending to be a woman or dresses like a woman, can he show his nipples? This seems to expose a great issue that the Berkeley City Council is finally solving. Whoa, mind blown on that one, Michael. Mind, like, a man that identifies as a woman, can he show his nipple?

Wow, I mean, I'm stumped there. Yeah, 2,000 years of Catholic theology will not answer a word about that. No, no, no, no, resurrect Thomas Aquinas for that one. I'm lost. I mean, I think if we're on the subject of defining terms, I mean, do we even have to call them nipples anymore? I mean, can't we just call them like the little pointy round things on your chest? know. The little pointy round things on their chest. Always words of wisdom. This is our show now.

Antonio, we do have to end this on you. I won't request the practical tutorial promised at the top. But is this evidence that feminism was really invented by a man, a very clever man who decided that he would get easy sex and get to look at nipples all day and not have to work that hard or pay for dinner? and is this sort of feminism what we all mean by empowerment? Oh man, you got to put empowerment in there. So I am currently reading the feminine mystique. So I guess I'm going to figure out what that means afterwards. After I read this book, I'm still 70 pages in, so I have like 400 left.

So we'll see how that goes. But yeah, all I know is that if you want to know what real empowerment is, go to empower 2a.org and you can find out. Is this mean we're going to finally get? Well, I don't know. We'll see. We'll see what we get when we get to the website. Okay, panel, thank you so much. It's always good to have you, especially Antonia, but also

Zoh Rachel and his eminence, Paul Blois. Now it is time to go back to guns for the final thought. The debates over gun control and the Second Amendment give off, like the freedom-seed spewing boomsticks they center around, lots of loud noise and hot air. Here's the argument for the Second Amendment. It protects the freedom of people from tyranny. There are endless statistics demonstrating the public hazards and benefits of gun ownership.

A homeowner protects his family, a woman protects herself against an assailant, a trained gun owner prevents a mass shooting or terrorist attack by killing the criminal before he can kill the innocent people around him. But the essential defense of the individual right to keep and bear arms that Americans have cherished since 1789 is that it puts the government's money where its mouth is and offers a blunt defense against those hypothetical but perfectly perfectly plausible oppressors who would pervert the meaning of laws and language to enslave us. Without the right to keep and bear arms, the people are ultimately powerless. The Second Amendment is the constitutional provision that protects all of the others. That's our whole show today. Come back tomorrow. We get your mailback questions in.

We're going to be answering all of the life-changing questions. I'm Michael Knowles. This is the Michael Knowles Show. Come back tomorrow and we'll do it all again.