The Michael Knowles Show - Ep. 279 - The Shutdown Is Working

Episode Date: January 14, 2019

New polls show public support for the Wall growing during this government shutdown. Then, Julian Castro announces his bid for 2020, the leftist media celebrates more child abuse, and finally: do conservatives care too much about the Constitution? Date: 01-14-19 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

New polls show public support for the wall growing during this government shutdown. How will those new numbers affect Democrat strategy? Then a future also ran announces his bid for the 2020 Democrat presidential nomination, Julian Castro. The leftist media celebrates the child abuse of a new drag kid. And finally, do conservatives talk too much about the Constitution? I'm Michael Knowles, and this is the Michael Knowles Show. So much to get to today, but first before we get to any of it. We need to thank Ring, our wonderful sponsor.

Ring's mission is to make neighborhoods safer. Today, over a million people use the amazing Ring video doorbell to help protect their homes. I love Ring so much that I have now given Ring to friends of mine, and you'll know like all your cool, hip friends have it, because it really works, it's phenomenal. Ring knows home security begins at the front door, but it doesn't end there. So now they're extending the same level of security

to the rest of your home with the Ring Floodlight Cam. Just like the amazing ring doorbell, floodlight camera, is a motion-activated camera and floodlight that connects right to your phone with HD video and two-way audio. It lets you know the moment anyone steps onto your property. You've probably encountered this when you are trying to burglarize someone's home. You step on their property, the light goes on. You run away. You can see and speak to visitors. You can even set an alarm right from your phone. With rings floodlight cam, when things go bump in the night, you will immediately know what it is. Whether you're home or away, you could be inside, you could be at the office. You could be on a beach in

Puerto Rico like Bob Menendez. The ring floodlight camera will let you keep an eye on your home from anywhere. Save up to 150 bucks off a ring of security kit. When you go to ring.com slash knolls, KNOW L-E-S. Ring.com slash Knowles, Kno W-L-E-S. What is it? Ring.com slash Knowles, K-N-O-W-L-E-S.

Just like Beyonce. How's this government shutdown going for you? Is it okay? Are you surviving? Are you all making it through this awful, terrible? Yes, you are. Statistically, you are making it through the government shutdown. and great new news for conservatives and people who want to build the wall coming out of this shutdown. You probably missed it because all of the headlines right now are talking about how increasingly

people blame President Trump for the shutdown. They blame President Trump for the shutdown over Democrats. This should come as no surprise. President Trump took credit for the shutdown. He was in a meeting with Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer and he said, yep, I'll own the shutdown. I would be proud to shut down the government for border security. So all the headlines saying, this is really bad for Trump. He's being blamed for the shutdown.

He should end this shutdown soon. Whenever the Washington Post is telling you to do something, it is a safe bet to do the opposite. And that's what we're seeing here. Because the hidden number, other than who they're blaming for the shutdown, blah, blah, blah, is Washington Post is showing this. During the government shutdown, support for building the wall is increasing. Right now, support for building the wall is up. 42% is the number of Americans who support it. That's up from 34% last January. Now, 54% still opposed building the wall, but that's down from 63% last January. So it doesn't matter

where the people are. It matters where the momentum is headed. If the momentum is headed in the direction of border security and building the wall, that's a bad sign for Democrats. And actually, the numbers are even better when you look at registered voters. So among registered voters, support for the wall is 46%. That's four percentage points higher. than among the population broadly. Now, also, nearly half of those polled, of wall opponents, believe that Democrats should compromise to end the shutdown. So all of this taken together, the bad news for Trump is they blame him for the shutdown.

But the bad news for Democrats is their position is weakening. So according to WAPO, ABC, CNN, Americans blame Trump for the shutdown. But people don't care about the shutdown. There was this poll that was taken a couple weeks ago, a week and a half ago, by Rasmussen, which showed that 6% of Americans said that they had been seriously affected by the government shutdown. 21% of Americans didn't know that the government was shut down. That's two weeks into the shutdown, already one of the longest in history.

Now it is the longest in history. People don't really seem to care about it. The problem for Democrats is not even the PR. It's not the PR of the shutdown so much. Speaking of PR, Democrats right now are sunning themselves down in Puerto Rico. If you've just eaten or you have a weak stomach, do not close your eyes right now when we put up this photo. Senator Bob Menendez was photographed on a beach in Puerto Rico, shirtless, gawking at some woman's bikini right in front of her. He just looks like he's lost in this cloud of, oh, this woman.

And Bob Menendez, this is a bad look for him because federal investigators are fairly confident that he paid underage prostitutes in the Dominican Republic. so now he's in Puerto Rico he's sort of right next door a really bad look but that's where they are they're down there sunning themselves in Puerto Rico yuck I'm very glad I didn't have breakfast before today's show the reason it's not a PR problem

because they're not going to be blamed for the shutdown even if it shows the government's shut down they should be in Washington trying to make a compromise and they're there sunning themselves on the beach that's not the issue the issue for them is more tactical when it comes to the policy because while they're sipping their mitis and Bob Menendez is

gawking at young bikini-clad women, the numbers are moving in the direction of building the wall. We know already the vast majority of Americans support ending illegal immigration. They support border security. Actually, it's even bigger than that. The majority of Americans support reducing legal immigration from its current rate of 1.2 million people per year down to about half a million people per year. That's more than a 50% reduction even in legal immigration. So this immigrant issue has always been a huge winner for Republicans and for President Trump. That's why President Trump staked his

presidential campaign on building the wall and on border security. Now, even when they pulled Democrats a year ago, they pulled them on whether giving amnesty to dreamers, the DACA people, illegal aliens who came to the United States below the age of 18, if

that should be a priority for a Democrat Congress, even the majority of Democrats said, no, that shouldn't be the priority. People care about other issues. And so, So illegal immigration has always been a big winner. Reducing legal immigration now seems to be a real winner. But until recently, building the wall was a loser issue for Republicans. What does this mean?

It means that the American people contain multitudes and maybe they're confused about public policy. But while Democrats have been sunning themselves in Puerto Rico, those numbers have moved and they're not moving in a good direction for Democrats. So right now, the American people, I think, are also realizing how much government they won't miss. Democrats were hoping, they were praying that if the shutdown dragged on now to the longest in history, people would say, gosh, we need our IRS. Oh, I miss my IRS. Oh, please bring me back my IRA. They would say they would miss all of this government. The country is going just fine without all of the non-essential government workers. Now, it can't go on forever, but it can go on for a pretty long time.

As Ronald Reagan said, you'll be surprised at how much government you'll never miss. So I hope the Democrats stay in Puerto Rico. I hope Bob Menendez has the time of his life, that poor girl, she has, She's in my thoughts and prayers. The smart Democrats know that it benefits them to end this shutdown. And you can see Mika Prasinski trying to turn up the pressure on MSNBC. I would take it a step further and worry that we look weak and that this is the moment that anybody with ill-will has to act or to get further than they have been able to get in the past as it pertains to us on the international state. So Mika now, she's not using the talking points that appeal to Democrats. She's not using, oh, the poor illegal aliens, oh, the federal workers.

She doesn't use those talking points. The talking points she's using here are, we look weak. Our enemies are going to attack us. We're going to be physically harmed. She's using talking points that appeal to Republicans and that appeal to President Trump and that appeal to President Trump's base. She has to do this because they're trying to turn up the pressure on President Trump make it feel

as though his own people are cracking, his own Republican caucuses are cracking on this issue. It doesn't seem that they are. A couple little sounds in the Senate. Lindsey Graham wants President Trump both to invoke a national emergency to build the wall and to end the shutdown. There are some little fissures,

but not a lot, and it's because as it pertains to public policy, Republicans are winning this. As it pertains to image, President Trump is taking the hits. Sure. But he's made a whole career out of taking the hits. There's no such thing as bad press to President Trump. And so he's taking a personal popularity hit.

That will recover. People's memories in this news cycle, in this 24-7, 2019 news cycle are so short. It doesn't matter. The old conventional wisdom was you would have to pay for a government shutdown at the ballot box. The old conventional wisdom was, regardless of who started it, Republicans get blamed for government shutdowns. and they lose elections because of it. We found out that wasn't true in 2014. In 2013, Republicans shut down the government.

Ted Cruz shut down the government. In 2014, Republicans took the Senate. It doesn't really matter anymore. Politics has changed since the 90s or the 80s or whatever. It doesn't really matter. So I think it's really shrewd of the White House. Let Trump take the personal popularity hit. Let the policy gain in popularity

and will end up in a place where already you're seeing certain Democrats saying, well, maybe we could have some border security. Well, Chuck Schumer used to support the wall. He voted for the wall. It's only getting better. And time is still on our side. You can't wait forever on this government shutdown, but the Republicans still do have time on our side.

So they should hold firm. And if it means invoking a national emergency, finally to break it, fine. But I see much more pressure right now on Democrats than I do on Republicans. They're also, the Democrats you'll notice, are also eager to change the subject from the shutdown. So they thought for a while, they were focusing on it. Before Christmas,

you remember, it was all about the shutdown. This is going to be our big talking point. The Trump shutdown, they called it in the Oval Office. And then it didn't, when it didn't matter so much, when it wasn't a matter of, you know, really moving poll numbers on approval ratings, all of a sudden they start talking about other things. Here's Brian Stelter wondering if we're not talking enough about Russian collusion. I was watching Good Morning America this weekend. they led with snowstorms and scares at malls and other stories and not this and I just keep wondering if if the public is ill-served if we don't make it really clear what the stakes of this story are how can a moraines not lead with this drama I guess is what I'm saying I think I think plenty of

times we lead with it with this drama and we lead also with what is becoming the looming question over all of this and even Fox reporters are now asking this question of some of of their sources. Are we, I think we're just, have you even heard of Russian collusion? I don't even, I've never even heard of it. I wish the mainstream media would cover, who is Bob Mueller? I mean, what, are you saying President Trump and Russia? I don't know, I've got to look more into this.

We will talk about this much more because obviously a ridiculous pivot, but a necessary one for Democrats. But first, let's talk a little bit about select quote. Oh yeah, baby, a new sponsor and a terrific sponsor. If you're like me, then you need to protect the ones you love with life insurance, especially if you live a wild life as I do. Life insurance can pay off a mortgage. It can help send kids to college. It's peace of mind. If you think you can't afford it, chances are, select quote, can help you get it for less than a dollar a day. And it's really important. You don't want to, without going too much into it, you know, myself, other family members have been left in the lurch because people didn't have life insurance policies.

It's really the responsible thing to do. And adults should just have it. That's why, you know, the older you get, the more it costs. That's why you should lock in for a rate for up to 10 or 20 years. Now, when you're younger, it makes a whole lot of sense. Select Quote comparison shops up to 10 highly rated companies, including Prudential, Banner Life, and Mutual of Omaha, and others, helps you find the best rates.

Select Quote could find a 35-year-old man, a half-million dollar policy for less than $19 a month, or a 37-year-old female, a three-quarter of a million dollar policy for under $22 a month. is a no-brainer. Less than a dollar a day, far less than a cup of coffee. This is really important. I actually hadn't bought life insurance for a long time. I'm really glad I did. It just gives you peace of mind, and you don't want to leave your family and loved ones in the lurch. I'm very, very pleased that I have life insurance and you should too. Let's select quote, save your time and money.

Get your free quote at selectquote.com slash Knowles, KNOW-E-S, selectquote.com. slash Knowles, K-N-O-W-L-E-S for your free quote. Don't put off protecting your family another day. Selectquote.com slash Knowles. Get full details on the example policy at selectquote. Dot com slash commercials. Your premium could vary depending on your health, issuing, company and other factors,

not available in all states. Just had to let you know that. So Brian Stelter thinks we're not talking about Russian collusion enough. According to NewsBusters, the Media Research Center did a study. Between June 1st and September 30th, Russia received more airtime than any other topic on mainstream news. And guess how much of it was slanted negatively toward President Trump?

I'll give you a second to think of it. 97%. It's not quite 100. Maybe I would have guessed 100%. 97% is the number. Of course, they talk about Russia all the time. But they're desperate now to move off of this issue of border security because they're going to lose that issue.

And the Washington Post, CNN can run as many scare headlines, as they want, about how President Trump is taking the blame, about how the border wall doesn't yet have 50% approval. It will have 50% approval if we keep focusing on it. If politicians keep focusing on it, and if the media keep focusing on it. So great, keep it coming, guys. Give us more shutdown. Give us more headlines about the border wall and border security. The trouble with, if they pivot to Russia, is there's not a lot of there there. And even ABC news is admitting this. What I am getting is that this is all building up to the Mueller report and raising expectations of a bombshell report. And there have been expectations that have been

building, of course, for over a year on this. But people who are closest to what Mueller has been doing over interacted with the special counsel cautioned me that this report is almost certain to be anti-climatic. That if you look at what the FBI was investigating in that New York Times report, look at what they were investigating. Mueller did not go anywhere with that. that investigation. He has been writing his report in real time through these indictments, and we have seen nothing from Mueller on the central question of, was there any coordination, collusion with the Russians in the effort to meddle in the elections, or was there even any knowledge on the part of the president or anybody in his campaign with what the Russians were doing?

They haven't laid that out yet in the indictment. George Stephanopoulos, the former spokesman and communications director for Bill Clinton, He's saying, well, no, not yet, not yet, but maybe they could. But Jonathan Carl is a very serious journalist. And by the way, that wasn't a clip from The Daily Wire. That wasn't a clip from CR TV or the Blaze TV. That wasn't a clip from Fox News. It wasn't a clip from any right-wing source.

That was ABC with the former Clinton communications director sitting there in the anchor chair. And they're saying that sources familiar with the Mueller investigation are pointing out there isn't much there there with regard to Russian collusion. So you've got now these. big issues, the two issues dominating the news, the Mueller investigation and the government's shutdown slash border wall. And everything you see in the headline says this is really damaging to Republicans and conservatives and Donald Trump, when you dig in just slightly below the surface, it doesn't really seem to be. The poll numbers seem to be in our favor. And everything we're hearing about the Russia investigation seems to be in our favor as well. Bad news for

Democrats, especially as they look toward 2020. And I know, I know you're going to remember where you were on Saturday afternoon. I know you probably came home, you wrote it in your diary. I remember exactly where I was when the future also ran Julian Castro admitted that he was going to, or announced rather, that he was going to run for president. And I just, I remember where I was when a guy with the name of Castro decided that he was going to win the state of Florida and win the presidential election. Here is his very, very sad presidential announcement. We have always been in our best, but we're united by something bigger. And in this journey, in the days to come, together we will show that hope can be bigger

than fear, that light can be bigger than darkness, and that truth can be bigger than lies. And as long as we work for it, tomorrow will always be better than today to let's go work. Bavonos! Good is better than bad. Forward is better than backward. Yummy is better than icky. Undelay, undelay, amigos. Give me a break.

What a pathetic announcement that not a soul cared about it. Does this guy stand a chance? I know we were saying that about Donald Trump in 2015, 2016. Does Julian Castro stand a chance? He is, on the one hand, leaning in to Latino identity politics. So he's got a little accent over the A on his logo. he ended his announcement speech by saying, Vamanos, I don't know, I think he speaks English

because he spoke in English for the first part of the speech. Then for some reason he ended it in Spanish, I couldn't quite tell you why. He is playing into this identity politics, but then the entire stuff of his announcement speech was just this boiled over poor man's Barack Obama platitudes. I mean, it was just nothing. It was all that sort of,

good is better than bad. Hope is better than fear. We're going to, you know, like, okay, we did that once. We did that with the guy who's way better at it than you. Nobody wants a poor man's Barack Obama. You need to offer voters something. So Julian Castro's announcement, basically, I don't think changes the field. I mean, he's running for vice president.

He's not running for president right now. I don't even know if he's showing up in the polling, in part that's because he doesn't have a lot of name recognition, and also because he's just not that impressive. He was the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development for a minute, and he was a mayor. Like, okay, all right, when is the county executive going to run for president now too? Is the dog catcher going to? It's really sad. What it shows us, though, the reason his announcement actually matters is it shows us that everybody and his grandmother is going to be running for the Democrat nomination for president in 2020.

And actually, we had another person that nobody expected and nobody expects to become president announced over the past week. A Democrat at rep Tulsi Gabbard on CNN's Van Jones show. Are you gonna run for president of the United States and do something about it? Do you think she should? Do you think she should? Are you? I have decided to run and we'll be making a formal announcement within the next week. Whoa!

What? So you don't, you actually, I mean obviously they set this up beforehand, but the way, you can even hear it in the audience's reaction. Van Jones sets it up, he says, well, you're complaining about it, maybe you should run. You're going to run for office? Then she sits there and you expect her to say, oh, I don't think so. Not yet. Okay, you're fine. Because she's like nobody's ever heard of her ever.

And then she says, yes, I am going to run. And you can almost hear the gasps of surprise in the audience. Like, oh gosh, now I guess I have to Google this person to find out who she is. However, saying all of that, it doesn't look like she's got a great shot. She's a congresswoman from Hawaii. I don't think Hawaii has ever given us a president, member of congressman. usually get elected president. That all said, she is a much more interesting candidate than Julian Castro. She served in the Hawaii Army National Guard, so she's got military experience.

She's held various positions on different issues. Here is on same-sex marriage before it became mandatory in the Democrat Party to wholeheartedly embrace redefining marriage. She said, quote, to try to act as if there's a difference between civil unions and same-sex marriage is dishonest, cowardly, and extremely disrespectful to the people of Hawaii who have already made overwhelmingly clear our position on this issue. As Democrats, we should be representing the views of the people, not a small number of homosexual extremists. So that was her view not that long ago. Then, all of a sudden, 20-12 rolls around, Obama endorses gay marriage, Joe Biden endorses redefining marriage, and all of a sudden she turns around and says she endorses it too.

This is going to come back to bite her. So she checks off a lot of the intersectionality boxes that will help her in this inevitable race politics primary. She's the first Hindu ever in Congress. She's got religious diversity going for her. But they're already slinging dirt on her that she's homophobic. This is already coming, and it's not coming from Republicans. It's coming from either Liz Warren or Beto O'Rourke or Kamala Harris or Cory Booker or blah, blah, any of the other thousand Democrats who were already in the race.

This is going to be really ugly. You see this all around. You see this actually in Oscars politics. As the award season is coming to Hollywood, all of a sudden movies that everybody liked and thought were really nice, Green Book, Bohemian Rhapsody, there was no controversy. All of a sudden, now that they're winning Golden Globes,

you're seeing smear campaigns against them, how they're awful, they're racist, they're this, they're that, they're sexist. And you're going to see the exact same thing. in any competitive campaign season. And 2020 is certainly no exception to that. They're going to get her for being homophobic. I don't know what they're going to get Julian Castro on yet.

Probably they won't need to get him on anything because no one knows his name. But now Liz Warren is already stepping in it too. She was up in New Hampshire, and she was asked a question by a wonderful troll of a reporter asking her if she supports renaming Columbus Day Indigenous People's Day. She should have pretended not to hear the question and moved on.

This is not a winning issue for Chief Laiwatha. And yet what does she say? She says, my feeling is why would we not want to honor indigenous people? These are the people who in Massachusetts reached out and helped the first settlers, helped them survive those first harsh and rugged years. I'm in favor of honoring. I think that's a good thing to do to honor my people. That you know, she didn't say that part.

Really bad issue for her. She is sort of a joke. She's being mocked by the reporters in front of her. This happened when she announced that she was running. She was mocked by a reporter who said, who, what do you tell to voters who like you in your policies, but think that you're unelectable because you're a fraud? She's being mocked roundly.

I don't see this getting better. She's had years to come up with an answer to these questions. She hasn't. So she goes in weak. Castro goes in very weak. Gabbard is going in weak. Who are the others? Joe Biden.

Joe Biden's brother says that he's definitely going to be running. Everybody is running this time. But again, he's a plagiarist who's run for president multiple times now and lost. He's kind of out of it. He's going to be very old if he's going to be reelected for the first time. Who else? Bernie Sanders is a thousand years old. They're already accusing him of running basically a bizarre sex ring on his campaign.

You're seeing a lot of dirt being slung at him from the Me Too movement. Who else? Beto is pretty green. They haven't figured out how to attack him yet, but I'm sure they will. What this all goes to show, gets back to our first point we made in the show today. All of the headlines, all of the generic headlines seem to show that things are going very poorly for the Republicans and specifically for Donald Trump. With regard to the 2020 race, a generic Democrat almost certainly would defeat President Trump in a 2020 election. I'm fairly confident of that.

If we got generic Democrat, capital G, capital D to run for office on a ticket with generic Democrat number two, they probably would beat Donald Trump in 2020. The problem is there's no such thing as a generic Democrat. There's just no such thing. So can President Trump beat Julian Castro? Yeah. Yes, he can. Can he beat Tulsi Gabbard? Also, certainly, yes.

Can he beat Joe Biden? A little tougher? but yeah, probably. Can he beat Beto O'Rourke? We'll have to see. We don't know a ton about him. He's a good campaigner. But I think probably,

I don't really see Beto connecting in Pennsylvania. I don't really see Beto connecting in Florida or even Michigan. I don't know. So the generic news for Democrats is great, but you've got to get down at the particulars. We're going to get into the particulars in a little bit, even with regard to American history

and the Constitution on this day in history. We've also got to cover the new drag kid that Democrats are pimping out and needles at Starbucks. But first, I've got to say goodbye to Facebook and YouTube. I'm sorry, if you're on DailyWire.com, thank you. You help keep the lights on. You keep Cofafe in our cups. If you're not, it's $10 a month, $100 for an annual membership.

You get me, you get the Andrew Plavin Show, you get the Ben Shapiro show. You get the Matt Wall Show. You get to ask questions in the mailbag. You get to ask questions backstage. You get to watch another kingdom. You get everything. Most importantly, you get the Leftist Tears Tumblr. This is so important because the next time that Liz Warren is,

is having a beer on camera with her husband. And the next time that the entire internet roundly mocks her, the next time she cracks open that beer, she's going to be drinking the beer, but she's going to be expelling Leftist Tears, and you're going to need this Leftist Tears Tumblr. It's the only FDA-approved vessel for salty and delicious leftist tears. Go to DailyWire.com.

We'll be right back with a lot more. All right. One of the most disturbing stories that I've seen in a long time is the new Drag Kid. I guess it's the most disturbing story since the last story, but a drag kid. This is parents putting their little children, seven, eight, ten years old children, dressing the little boys up as girls, having them parade around for lecherous men and do little dances. This happened with this kid.

They call him Desmond is amazing. Now there's a new kid, a 10-year-old Canadian boy, Nemis Quinn Malonsohn Golden. He was featured in a very troubling piece in Huck magazine. It was just talking about his life as a child, drag queen. and it gets even creepier than some of the other ones because he posed for a photo with a drag queen named Violet Chochie who is this guy who won season seven of Rupal's drag race who in the photo was naked.

So they're now pimping out this kid, this 10-year-old little kid, they dressing him up like a girl and they're having him pose with naked men for the amusement of their sick and perverted audience. This child's parents should be in prison.

At the very least, they should be in prison, the key should be thrown away. At the very least. This photographer, Jonathan Frederick Turton, should be in prison. This is sick pedophilia. This is sick child abuse.

If this were happening, not on the pages of glamorous leftist magazines, but in a housing project somewhere in the Bronx, that kid would be taken away from his parents. Kids have been taken away

from their parents by the state, for good reason, for a hell of a lot less than putting him out in sexualized women's clothing and having him pose with naked men for magazine photos. This is sick, sick pedophilia. And now there is a backlash. There's a backlash. I see it on Twitter. You see it from the Commentariat all over magazines and blogs. They're saying there's nothing inherently sexual about drag queens. First of all, yes, there is. Yes, there is. I'm from New York. I'm from New York. I grew up in New York. I've hung around the village plenty.

I've seen, you know, I've gone by drag bars. It is inherently sexual because the idea of a drag queen is a character, a sexualized, cartoonish idea of what a woman is and of what femininity is. It isn't simply femininity. You don't see child drag queens wearing pantsuits like Hillary Clinton. They're wearing feathered boas. They're wearing sequenced dresses, and it is a sexualized act. The other kid, the other drag kid whose parents are abusing him, was recently found dancing at a gay bar with men throwing dollar bills at him. But you're going to tell me that that's not sexualized?

Of course it is. And you know what is certainly sexualized? Putting that little kid in women's clothing and having him pose next to a grown naked man, who himself is pretending to be a woman. That is child abuse. And I know that we as conservatives, we often talk about the overreaches of the government and the overreaches of the government telling us how to raise our kids, how to come into our kids' lives and our family's lives. This is an example of where the government could come in and do a lot of good. Those kids should be removed from their highly, horribly abusive parents. Their abusive parents should be prosecuted, should be convicted, should at least go to prison for a very long time.

And these kids will have better lives. The one, Desmond is amazing. His abusive parents said that when he was two or three years old, he began to explore different identities. He's two or three years old. He was exploring the rug when he was crawling around saying Google Gaga. He wasn't exploring anything. These sick pedophile freaks are imposing this on their children and ruining their lives.

Look, children who put their kids into show business generally are ruining their lives because it's a really awful industry. You wouldn't put your kids in the coal mines when they're seven years old. and you probably shouldn't put them in front of a camera either. But even that is one thing. Even that can lead to a career. It usually is a destructive life, but that's one thing. But to put your kid in this sexualized sphere for the edification and the amusement and the pleasure of sick pedophile men is rank abuse.

And it's going to ruin these kids' lives. They never had the choice to decide that they wanted to be drag queens at 2, 3, 4. They don't have the choice to do it at 7, 8, 9, or 10 either. It's a great irony of leftism right now that we're told that consent is everything. We need informed consent about everything. If you're going to kiss a girl, she's got to sign a notarized contract in order to do it. Oh, and also, dress up your 8-year-old kid who obviously cannot give consent. Dress him up in dresses and have perverted men throw dollar bills at him at a bar.

That's a good idea, too. It's this paradox. There are these contradictions within leftism because leftism does not have any coherent philosophy. It is an ideology that is primarily attacking tradition. It is attacking our tradition, our civilization, and the West broadly. We'll get to that a little bit later on this day in history, but we should never fail to point out when the left contradicts itself because it doesn't care about logical coherence. It doesn't care about logical coherence, and it doesn't care about these little kids' lives. It just cares about attacking tradition

and attacking big daddy at the top of the imaginary patriarchy that haunts their fever dreams. Really disgusting stuff. And I hope that lawmakers are listening in Canada and the United States. And I hope law enforcement is listening in Canada and the United States. And I hope you take these kids out of their awful abusive environments. And I hope that you throw these awful parents in the clink and throw away the key. Another terrible idea that's going on right now in society is Starbucks.

Starbucks now installing needle disposal box. and some of its bathrooms. This is after a 3,700 signature petition from co-worker.org. You remember a little while ago when Starbucks said that everyone is welcome in the store, you don't need to buy a product, you don't need to be a customer, if we don't let vagabonds in to live here and do drugs, we're racist somehow. So shock, surprise, surprise, it turns out that Starbucks has turned into a homeless shelter, and when you go into the bathroom now,

employees have been stuck by needles that have been left over by drug addicts, potentially exposing them to hepatitis or HIV or anything else. So now these coworkers are saying, we don't want to step on needles while we're doing our job at the coffee shop, figure out a way to stop this. Starbucks has two choices.

They can either kick out vagabond drug addicts as they should, or they can install needle disposal cartons in the bathrooms, which is what it sounds like they're going to do. And the trouble is, Starbucks, because it's such a prominent industry leader, can set the tone in other places can follow suit. This is broadly reflected in our debate on criminal justice reform, and I know a lot of right-wingers are in conflict on this question.

Should we let a lot of criminals out of prison? Is that compassionate, or should we not do that? Should we try to lock up criminals and be a little harsher on crime? The answer is be harsher on crime, period. There is nothing compassionate, nothing compassionate. about Starbucks allowing drug-addled vagabonds to come in and further damage their lives and further inject poison in their veins and give them incentives to do it by giving them a place to dispose their needles. There's nothing compassionate about allowing their employees to be

possibly exposed to HIV and other diseases just for coming in and working at a coffee shop. There's nothing compassionate about having customers who tend to be sort of millennial yuppies just in there writing the next great American novel or something, there's nothing compassionate about having them in that disgusting environment. There's nothing right, there's nothing just, there's nothing moral about that. Throw these people, first of all, throw them out of the Starbucks shop. But then broadly, what do you do as homeless populations increase? Tent cities crop up all over Los Angeles, where I live,

and all over San Francisco, it's gotten so much worse there. Feces in the street, truly. What is the solution? you can either give them incentives. This is why the left doesn't understand economics, so you've got to really make it simple for them. You can either give them incentives not to do drugs and defecate in the street,

or you can give them incentives to do all of those things. If we took all of these people and offered them a choice, said you can either go to a shelter where you can't do drugs, or you can go to prison, that would clear up the problem. Rudy Giuliani basically did that in the 90s in New York, and it turned New York into Disneyland. It turned a disgusting crime-ridden city into a relatively quite nice place to live. Throw them in prison.

If you throw them in prison, they will sober up, I promise you. This question, a debate constantly among conservatives is the drug war a good thing or a bad thing. And you see the kind of divisions among conservative thought, which I celebrate. It's a good thing that we have intellectual diversity on the right. The left certainly doesn't have it. But the drug war is a good thing. It's a necessary thing. It's not the ideal of the libertarian, stateless society or whatever fantasies are put forward by political theorists, but we are in the midst of a horrific opioid epidemic.

We see that policies where we encourage people to have new needles and live on the street and defecate wherever they want do not help the problem. They exacerbate the problem. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, and it's a moral confusion that we're suffering from. that we only see this very narrow, perverse idea of compassion, and we're not realizing the awful damage that we're doing to society broadly. I've also got to talk about this day in history, speaking of the road to hell being paved with good intentions. Because two days in history, two days in history.

On this day in history in 1942, Japanese internment policy went into effect. This was from Franklin Roosevelt. This came through proclamation number 25. 37 and it's sort of misunderstood. The way that Japanese internment first worked is that all foreign aliens, illegal aliens, or resident aliens from the Axis nations, Germany, Italy, and Japan had to register with the U.S. Department of Justice. Following this, there was the Alien Registration Act of 1940. Then finally, in 42, there was the Executive Order 9066, which authorized

the physical removal of all Japanese Americans. Even if you had as little as one 16th Japanese ancestry, you could be physically forcibly moved into an internment camp. The reason I bring this up is because it's not brought up very much in American politics. And the reason it's not brought up very much is it doesn't look very good for progressives and Democrats. So every crime committed by anyone who could vaguely be called conservative is constantly rehashed, dating all the way back to the Crusades. We constantly hear about that.

You don't hear terribly much about Japanese internment. The reason is this. When conservatives and Republicans point out that Democrats have an awful history, a party history of misery, from slavery to Jim Crow, to disfranchising people, to lynchings, on and on and on, they say, well, that was before the parties switched. Those guys were, they were conservative Democrats. They weren't progressive Democrats, and it's blah, blah, blah. And they sort of get away with this silly argument. You can't get away with that with Franklin Roosevelt. Franklin Roosevelt invented our welfare state. If Franklin Roosevelt wasn't a progressive, who was a progressive?

Franklin Roosevelt is one of the presidents that Democrats and progressives hold up as one of the greats in history. Him and Woodrow Wilson and Lyndon Johnson. Those are the three big ones for progressives. But Franklin Roosevelt is the one who issued Japanese internment. This is historically a big problem for Democrats. They can't get around it. We should point it out because the logical conclusion of leftist, big government, socialist, governments taking over the industries, the logical conclusion of that is that they can control you,

they can move you, they can take your property, they can take your livelihood, they can take where you live and move it to someplace else. I've been writing a lot about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. and the dangers posed by socialism. And you always hear, oh, well, socialism, it's fine. Stop demagoguing. So what's the big deal? You get free health care.

As Ronald Reagan pointed out, the government big enough to give you everything that you have, everything that you want, rather, is big enough to take away everything that you have. And nowhere do you see that more clearly than in the leftist progressive legacy of Franklin Roosevelt. We also have to talk about speaking of political philosophy. On this day in history in 1639, the first constitution in any American colony came to be the fundamental orders in Hartford, Connecticut. And this was a binding compact. It was a frame of government. The reason that I bring up this obscure colony constitution is because it really shows us an important aspect of what we conservatives should think about when we frame our political philosophy with regard to modern politics. I think conservatives talk too much about the Constitution.

I do. I know that will sound controversial. I love the Constitution. I think it's one of the greatest documents ever written. I can't love it enough. However, I think we fall into this trap as conservatives of only focusing on this one document on the Constitution. We say it's written in the Constitution, therefore that's the be-all and end-all,

that's the beginning and the end of the country, and we have to follow it, and if we don't follow it, we've gone terribly wrong, and why aren't people following it? And come on, guys, don't you remember, it's right there written on the, why aren't you doing it? And we get very frustrated by this, because at least half of our country broadly disregards the Constitution regularly. The Constitution is not the beginning of our country. It's not even the first Constitution in the history of our country. That's the beautiful thing about our country, and that view is the essence of conservative thought. Our country didn't spring into being magically in 1770s.

or 1789 or 1787 or 1791, it doesn't, or the 1800 president, it doesn't. It happens organically. It happened through evolution, not just revolution. And even the American Revolution was a fairly conservative revolution. We kept so much from the English system of government. We got rid of the king, we booted him out, but we kept so much. And that society had been built organically, not just since 1775, but since 1620, since the Pilgrims arrived on the Mayflower. since more settlers arrived in the new world, since more Englishmen arrived in the new world,

and created colonies and formed colonies, and those colonies worked with each other variously, and ultimately came together, not because of the proclamation of some rationalist theorist sitting in an ivory tower somewhere, but through the people of those colonies and their representatives, working together to form and fight for specific goals, to form together to fight the French and Indian War, to come together to fight certain onerous taxes passed by the parliament, King George, to fight certain onerous regulations that they didn't like. It came together through evolution, not revolution.

This is the heart of what Edmund Burke talks about and what Russell Kirk talks about and what the conservative tradition in the post-war conservative movement really talks about. I put a question up on Twitter last week and I said, for all the conservatives, how would you best describe your views? And I gave a few options. Obviously, there are a lot of others. I said, would you say you're traditionalist, you're a libertarian or classical liberal, you're a neo-conservative, or you're on the religious right? And I think broadly that those four categories describe the different types of conservative out there today. And by far, people said classical liberal or libertarian.

And traditionalists came in a little smaller. I think we've got to recover some of that, because that is the essence of conservatism. We're conserving something. And we're not just old fogies. We're talking about a tradition, which is actually not the old thing. It's the newest thing we have because it's endured throughout the ages. It transmits wisdom from our earliest ancestors in ancient Greece. It transports wisdom from throughout the ages that we can still access, which by trial

and error has been helpful to us, and which by prescription we can possibly. understand in the future. You know, the two virtues which I think define the conservative over the leftist are prudence and humility. Prudence, which we get from ancient Greece, which we get from Aristotle, being wise in our judgment, taking care of whole contexts and say, well, we should maybe be a little cautious here, this is a good, okay, this is fine, being prudent. And then humility, which is an innovation of Christianity. Obviously, conservatives, are much more humble than leftists. We don't think we're going to construct the utopian society.

We don't think that our ideas are the only ideas in the whole wide world. We don't insist that everyone toes the party line, or if they don't, we're going to shut them up. It's kind of funny to brag about how humble you are. It sort of undercuts your argument. But the conservatives just demonstrably are much more humble.

And when we have a humility, because the beginning of wisdom is fear of the Lord, is an awe, and is a wonder, and is a humility, when we have a humility, not just to the other people living today, but to the democracy of the dead, to our forefathers, to the people that we should be grateful for, forging our country, not in one's big moment,

but over generations and generations and generations, that gives you an historical wisdom that will not just let you look back in history, but will allow you to look forward with a little bit of prescription and a little bit of wisdom to see how we should craft our country in the future. All right, that's our show.

We ran out of time. We've got a lot more to get to, though. So we'll do it tomorrow. In the meantime, I'm Michael Knowles. This is the Michael Knowles show. I'll see you tomorrow. The Michael Knold's show is produced by Robert Sterling. Executive producer Jeremy Boring.

Senior producer, Jonathan Hay. Our supervising producer is Mathis Glover. And our technical producer is Austin Stevens. Edited by Danny Domeco. Audio is mixed by Dylan Case. Production assistant Nick Sheehan. Hair and makeup is by Jesua Olvera. The Michael Knoll Show is a Daily Wire production.

Copyright Daily Wire 2019. Hey guys, over on the Matt Wall show today. We're going to talk about a pastor who lost his job. because he took a biblical position on sexual morality and gender. I've got a few things to say about that. We're going to talk about it. Also, I want to discuss the habit that some Christians have of proof texting, which is cherry-picking certain biblical passages to support their heretical and erroneous views. It's a very dangerous practice, and we're going to talk about all of that today over on the Matt Walls show.