Timcast IRL - Timcast IRL #763 Youtube Begins PURGE Of Matt Walsh Related Content, Censorship RAMPS UP w/Liz Wheeler

Episode Date: April 22, 2023

Elizabeth Wheeler is an American conservative political commentator, author, and podcast host. Tim, Ian, Hannah Claire (Timcast.com), & Kellen join Liz Wheeler to discuss YouTube removing videos mentioning Dylan Mulvaney & Bud Light, Joe Rogan slamming Bud Light, Bud Light's VP being replaced, Texas' plan to put the 10 commandments on display in public schools, & a Target in San Francisco that has all of its products in locked cases. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Discover the magic of BetMGM Casino, where the excitement is always on deck. Pull up a seat and check out a wide variety of table games with a live dealer. From roulette to blackjack, watch as a dealer hosts your table game and live chat with them throughout your experience to feel like you're actually at the casino. The excitement doesn't stop there. With over 3,000 games to choose from, including fan favorites like Cash Eruption, UFC Gold Blitz, and more. Make deposits instantly to jump in on the fun.

And make same-day withdrawals if you win. Download the BetMGM Ontario app today. You don't want to miss out. Visit BetMGM.com for terms and conditions. 19 plus to wager. Ontario only. Please gamble responsibly. If you have questions or concerns about your gambling or someone close to you, The Purchase Begun!

As many of you know, I mentioned this on Twitter and the other day, we had two videos taken down from YouTube. One was a clip about Matt Walsh's response to an employee that was terminated. The other was the entire episode we had recently done with Brandon Strzok. We don't know exactly why it was taken down. I wasn't yet given a reason, or at least I don't know, maybe got lost in the junk mail, but they haven't said anything to me other than it's been removed and you will not receive a strike. We're hearing that a bunch of other people have experienced something similar. Jeremy Boring of the Daily Wire said that

Matt Walsh had been demonetized. So it looks like the purge hath begun and it may have something to do with transgender ideology, the Bud Light controversy and Dylan Mulvaney. So we'll talk about that. The quartering and Sidney Watson had a video removed. And interestingly enough, the video that the quartering had removed, this is Jeremy Hambly, apparently was criticizing Matt Walsh for being too mean to Dylan Mulvaney. So I'll show you his tweets and then we'll talk about that censorship. So it's a fairly crazy day in terms of that ongoing censorship. But before we get started, my friends, head over to castbrew.com.

We are our own sponsors. That's right. Go to castbrew, pick up castbrew coffee. We'll ship by May 5th. It's a pre-order. Castbrew coffee is our company. You can get your rise with Roberto Jr. breakfast blend, your Appalachian nights, as well as Colombian or French roast. If you'd like to support the show, you can just buy from us when you want to get your coffee. Once we launch formally, we're going to create a subscription service so you can just, you know, regularly get your coffee delivered and all that stuff. And a bunch of other cool stuff pertaining to the launching of a physical coffee shop. We are doing, well, I'll keep it a little vague because I don't want to say too much, but construction and fitting and plumbing work is currently underway. And so we're hoping that will be set up soon. But also become a member at TimCast.com by clicking join us. Go to TimCast.com, sign up, support our work directly.

And you'll get access to the Discord server where you can hang out with like-minded individuals and talk with them about life and stuff. If you've been a member for at least six months or you sign up at 25 bucks, you can actually call into the members-only uncensored show Monday through Thursday at 11 p.m., submit questions, and potentially be one of our regular callers that we have during that segment.

It's really exciting and good fun. So smash that like button, subscribe to this channel, share the show with your friends. Joining us tonight to talk about this and so much more is Liz Wheeler. Hey, thanks so much for having me. I appreciate it. Absolutely. Who are you? What do you do?

Yeah, my name is Liz Wheeler. I host The Liz Wheeler Show. I used to work in cable news, but now I own a media company. Appreciate it. Absolutely. Who are you? What do you do? Yeah, my name is Liz Wheeler. I host the Liz Wheeler Show. I used to work in cable news, but now I own a media company. I host a podcast that you can find at lizwheeler.com or anywhere that you listen to your pods or watch your pods. A little censored on YouTube right now, just like the rest of us. You can go to rumble.com slash Liz Wheeler. You had a video taken down as well.

Yeah, yeah. Same topic. Same topic. We had two. I think this happened not last night, but the night before. Same to us. Related to Nashville and related to the Dylan stuff. Don't want to be too specific here.

I mean, we're going to talk about it, so. Yeah, I mean, it's not surprising, right? We try to be pretty careful on YouTube, honestly, because we want to be there. We want to be present on YouTube, but they're going to find a way. It's actually funny. So our channel had gotten demonetized maybe six months ago for similar stuff. And we had finally been able to,

our strikes had run out and we'd finally been able to reapply for monetization. And they had told us when we reapplied, like, okay, we'll evaluate you within a month. And it was literally like the midnight hour. It was like the day that we were able, that that month was up. So we were going to get our monetization back.

And it was that day that they took those videos down and gave us was up. So we were going to get our monetization back. And it was that day that they took those videos down and gave us a strike. So I don't think it's a coincidence, but it is what it is. You expect this. We'd like to use the platform, but it's not, we don't rely on it from a business model. Yeah. All right.

We'll talk about that. Thanks for hanging out. We got Hannah Claire Brimelow. Hi, I'm Hannah Claire Brimelow. I'm a writer for timcast.com. And I'm Ian Crossland. Very happy to be here. Good to see you, Liz.

Hey, what's up everybody? It's Kellen. Good to be here good to see you liz hey what's up everybody it's kellen good to be here uh happy friday nice mustache dude nice mustache mustache i think the lights are a little bright you want to well i'll start the segment you want to dim the lights just a teeny bit as we do this all right everybody we got this first story here from uh the quartering this is jeremy hambley and i'll show you a few of these uh stories jeremy tweeted six hours ago this is some bull ish says, the video has been removed for violating YouTube's policy on harassment and bullying. He says, this is an escalation of something I've been noticing in analytics. This is why the publican now was started. I'll make

a video now, but consider joining today. And then he says, it was a video where I defended Dylan Mulvaney, much to the chagrin of many, for how mean Matt Walsh was to him. I now regret that. And then we have this from Sydney Watson. It says, YouTube has deleted an entire video from the Quartering and My Community Notes channel for bullying and harassment. We have to assume it's because we discussed Dylan Mulvaney. This is exactly why we created the publican now and why we are so appreciative of everyone who has signed up as a member to support the effort. Gender ideology is a scourge and it's asinine. We can't call it out. So I can only imagine this will continue to get worse in terms of the purge.

And Liz, you were just mentioning you had videos taken down as well. Yeah, yeah, I did. And it was about these same topics. Like I said, I'm not surprised here. I don't think any of us think of ourselves as victims here but it is quite something to see the censorship and what discussion the left and these these these corporate overlords don't want us to be having does it ever resemble what you experienced working in cable you said you had a cable tv tv show right i did no it's it's pretty different in a cable news setting i had actually a tremendous amount of freedom didn't really have restrictions on what i could say it was before. It was largely before a lot of the transgender conversations. It's funny, actually.

A little detour here. There was a video of mine that went viral. It was from five or six years ago. And I was talking about, like, what's the limiting principle? It's the one Tommy Lee posted. And I was talking about, well, what's the limiting principle on transgender? This video went pretty viral, even though it was from a few years ago. And I remember the day that I made that because the crew that day were like, OK, that's the limiting principle on transgender? This video went pretty viral, even though it was from a few years ago. And I remember the day that I made that because the

crew that day were like, OK, that's a little hyperbolic, don't you think? And it's all happening now. But at the time, there wasn't the censorship because the dissent against it was just not quite hadn't quite ramped up, hadn't built up to the point that we're at now. So very different, very different to be independent. It's fun to be independent. It's fun to own your own company and to build your own, to build your own thing. It does make it trickier from a business aspect when you have to dodge these kinds of bullets, but I care less about the business aspect of it and more about like the mission part of it. We talk about this stuff because we care about these people, right? Not necessarily, not because it's good clicks.

I think this may have something to do with Anheuser-Busch, the removal of the content. And it's a convenient scapegoat for YouTube to go after harassment and bullying. Because it's clearly related to Matt Walsh, Dylan Mulvaney. These are some of the issues surrounding the video that Matt Walsh, which triggered it all, was when he was critical of Dylan Mulvaney, which resulted in people responding, saying, you maybe pushed it too far, Matt. You're a little mean. But that's all he was. He was mean to a person. And I think the issue is, well, let me put it this way.

YouTube didn't say anything. This story came and went. This was months ago. The story came and went. This was months ago. The story came and went. But only now that the Anheuser-Busch hit has extended into now. I think we're going to be entering soon a fourth week. This is the end of, I think, the third week of Anheuser-Busch boycott getting worse. New reporting that their sales are continuing to drop. They've started doing.

I've started getting ads from Budweiser for the first time ever and so what i think's happening is my personal opinion here is that anheuser-busch contacted youtube and said it's your fault and if you don't take this down we will stop advertising with you youtube then says okay what do we do there are big advertisers the biggest beer brand in the world let's start removing these videos i'm willing to bet Anheuser-Busch went to YouTube a while ago. And again, just my personal opinion. I don't have any insider information or anything like that. I bet they went to YouTube and said, we spend too much money on your platform to have to deal with all of these channels using that platform to hurt us. So we're going to stop

buying from you. It probably took YouTube a little while to come up with a plan. So this, to me, I think Anheuser-Busch probably went to YouTube a week and a half ago saying, look at all these videos. We're spending X dollars, but all these videos keep coming out. So YouTube probably came up with a policy. They probably had a discussion where they said, look, if we ban these videos and give strikes, we're going to lose way more money. The videos don't break the rules. You know how I know they don't break the rules?

YouTube did not give strikes to any of these channels. That's very weird. rules. You know how I know they don't break the rules? YouTube did not give strikes to any of these channels. That's very weird. That's the first time I've heard of that. So when we got two videos taken down, they say, we're just removing them, but you're not getting a strike. We got a strike, I think. You got a strike? Yeah, we got a strike. So I think Jeremy said he didn't get a strike either, right?

I don't know. That they just removed it? I'm going to double check, but I'm pretty sure we got a strike. Look, look, look. Here's here's what Sidney Watson posted. It says, we want to let you know our team reviewed your content and we think it violates our harassment policy. We know you may not have realized was a violation of our policy. So we're not applying a strike to your channel.

What that says to me, again, in my personal opinion, is that they know it doesn't really break the rules. And if they apply a strike strike they will lose more money the verbiage is we think you violated it like it should just say if we think it violates our we think it did but we don't know it's a legal protection yeah mine says we think i'm looking it up right now it says we think it violates so we're gonna protect you not getting a strike no we did get a strike it says we think about the notice so the that I got, that's what I have a copy of right here. Can you read that paragraph?

Yeah, it says, our team has reviewed your content. Unfortunately, we think it violates our hate speech policy. We removed the following content from YouTube. We got two emails. Oh, no, my team just texted me. We definitely got a strike.

Oh, wow. But they're saying hate speech in yours. Yeah, and then they defined hate speech and they said, we got an email that said exactly the phrase that I used that they consider to be hate speech. Well, don't say it.

I'm not going to. That's why I'm not going to. Why is yours hate speech and this one is harassment is my question. Well, different things were said. And by the way, it's not hate speech. It's a bad term these days. It's really freaky.

This is important though. Here's why I think this. YouTube probably sat down and said, if we apply a strike to TimCast IRL, how much money do we lose? All of it. We would leave the network. I mean, I would. It's not just the advertising. It's not just the super chats. It's that the consistently highest viewed nightly show on YouTube will immediately switch to Rumble. So we're going

to lose long-term revenue. We're going to lose market share. We're going to lose direct advertising. What can we do? Budweiser, Anheuser-Busch is furious and we're going to lose their ads. How about we just take those videos down from all these channels and then just sweep it under the rug and don't apply the strikes where we can avoid applying strikes. If you give a live show a strike, there's no live show. So that's why I think they're like, okay, let's just take them down and not do a strike because we want to make money. This says to me strictly about advertising. And I think Anheuser-Busch behind the scenes is screaming, but they know they can't say things publicly. They have dumped money into this ad about this, this Clydesdale running through the

streets or whatever. And it's because they did this after 9-11 and everybody loved it. The Clydesdale after 9-11 was a big deal. They're trying to do it again. They are desperate. Their sales are apparently down like 10% in the first two days of the boycott. So we have not yet gotten the data from Anheuser-Busch on the past couple of weeks, but I bet it's so bad they went to YouTube and said, why should we advertise with you when you keep

publishing the smears against us? When you're navigating these conversations, in my experience, like transgenderism, for instance, which is a, it's a very important conversation for everybody, people that are transgender, that aren't transgender people, we need to communicate and find some common ground. There's, you go the route of talking, you know, systemically about transgenderism and what, you know, body dysmorphia and things like that, then there's, that's one path. Then the other path is you talk about sexualizing children, which is a completely different conversation. You could be a straight person that's doing it, a transgender person that's doing it. That's another conversation when children are involved. Then there's a third part of it, which is targeting people like how Dylan got his name

brought up. And I'm not, I like, I i mean whatever i like you know dylan you know i like it but when when people bring up specific people over and over again then it starts to be like dog piling and they're like you consider harassment yeah but i'm sorry you can you harass the president by criticizing things they do publicly it's also not an individual i mean obviously dylan is an individual person but he's also a very very influential um activist political activist. And public figure, right? I mean, there's certain. Not just a public figure, but an actual political activist who went to the White House to try to get policy passed about what states can regulate.

Right, but what I'm saying is libel law is different for public figures than it is for private citizens. we have access to the internet and potentially going viral basically in our pocket at all times with our phones, people forget that you are electing to become a public figure and therefore you are losing some of your legal protections. And the squeaky wheel gets the grease. But I think this is more Anheuser-Busch. And the evidence of that is there's been conversation around Dylan Mulvaney has 11 million followers for a very long time, over a year. That's the, you know, we're on year two of the Days of Girlhood saga that Dylan Mulvaney has produced. YouTube didn't care. Until Anheuser-Busch, a major advertiser,

started getting hit in the market share and losing sales. So there actually is a reasonable business, like capitalist response. Anheuser-Busch might've just been like, we're not telling YouTube, like they might've been like, YouTube, we're not telling you to do anything.

We're just pointing out, there's really no reason for us to advertise on your platform everybody hates us there so bye it could be more than in because dylan has uh marketing sponsorships with lots of different companies crest uh sarah vay eos nobody they may have all they may have but but his agent may have gone to all his people and be like let's do do a combined communication with YouTube that we will all leave the network. Like Crest would leave, Budweiser would leave. And so YouTube's like, well, what choice? It makes me wonder who is backing his legal defense fund, right?

Because I can imagine just like Anheuser-Busch would go after YouTube, I assume Dylan also has a legal team that's trying to get as much out of this as possible. Don't forget about the Corporate Equality Index, you know, that organization that's from the human rights campaign that goes around. It's part of, like, the ESG metrics,

but it's specifically focused on ranking whether these big corporations are LGBTQ-friendly, quote-unquote, places to work. And they send representatives to these corporations to make sure, not just for privileges or actual workplace environment, but whether these corporations are doing advertising campaigns that are specifically, quote unquote, inclusive of transgender people. So I think that there's a lot of power right now behind behind making sure that Anheuser-Busch doesn't back down, especially as they're realizing that this boycott is real. A lot of conservative boycott as our bush apologizes yes yes because maybe i mean i don't think they probably would have but

i think that they underestimated the strength of this boycott because a lot of conservative boycotts in the past have been like fleeting they haven't been incredibly effective um because a lot of people don't agree but this one's very effective but it goes beyond this because uh and i'll throw to jesse kelly i mentioned i cited him several times he said it's the first time his neighbors asked him about politics yeah and i've and i've actually heard surprisingly you try to talk to people about politics you know how it goes they're gonna be like oh you're talking about now i'm out and people are like oh that bud light thing and they they know about it check this out it gets worse we got the story from the daily mail joe rogan slams bud lights pro-America commercial release after partnership with

Dylan Mulvaney after it backfired and warns firm, we don't know who you really are. He said, what did he say? We don't know who you really are. Here's another quote in here. I want to make sure I read it. They bury it. He says, commenting, it's like the effing dumbest Pro-America rah-rah. Like, we don't know who you really are now.

It's so stupid and cliche. It hurts my feelings. It's so dumb. This is a company in deep ish that was great that's from the episode with jim brewer the biggest podcast in the world and joe rogan at first was like oh who cares about this and then budweiser played this stupid and isaac bush played the stupid play and then joe was like what are you doing yeah he actually said it would be way funnier if in the middle of the clydesdale running and everything that dylan came

out and like was like hey and, that would have been amazing. That would have been hilarious. They needed to either shut up or like they could double down, shut up or apologize. But they're doing this weird, let's try and pander the people who are currently really angry with us. It's showing how much they're in chaos, right? Like people are saying Dylan Mulvaney has been dark for two weeks, hasn't posted anything. Like that's a very normal PR strategy.

Just say nothing until it dies. And Anheuser-Busch, Budweiser, they're like the worst of all of them. And this is why I think YouTube is starting to knock videos down. Because when the PR 101 doesn't work, you go brute force. They go to YouTube and say, ban them or else. And YouTube is like, let's start using force against these people and start striking them if they have conversations we don't like. I found it insulting.

Like, I would consider myself in the demographic that would buy Bud Light. I don't drink it myself like my husband would, right? And when I saw this pro-American ad, I thought, well, that's a beautiful cinematic, like, artistic piece of work, right? Like, who doesn't feel kind of the rah-rah American seeing an ad like that? And afterward, I was like, how dare they try to pander to me? How dare they try to pacify me with that ad? Don't pretend to hold these views when you've taught, when you've shown us what you really, what you really think of us and what you really want for our country

with a much larger partnership with someone whose ideology is very much opposed to, you know, these traditional values that you're putting in this ad. I, it's missing like the, the self like knowledge. You need to see these's missing the self-knowledge. You need to see these companies be self-aware if you want for them to buy their products and trust them. Don't just pretend like it didn't happen and then do a binary opposite thing. It's in some ways more insulting, right?

Because they're taking this moment that was very powerful back in the day and saying like, we'll just throw it out here because that'll make you guys shut up. That will make you guys comply with what we want. The whole thing, I don't care if Dylan has a beer ad.

I'm fine. A 21-year-old actor wants to sell beer. Go for it. But a month and a half ago, he was wearing a little girl's dress called Eloise, this girl, and pretending to be a little girl. And then a month later was selling beer. I'm like, that's where I'm starting to be. Right.

When you sell to kids, because that's like little kids. Dylan Mulvaney's audience. So again, the data we know for sure, TikTok audience, according to various reports, is on average below 21, which could mean 19 or 20. Still not of legal drinking age. And you can make arguments about college. I personally think the drinking age should be 18 because you're an adult and the government shouldn't set arbitrary standards like that.

But I'm not okay with the targeting of children to drink alcohol when you consider that Dylan Mulvaney's audience is probably much younger than that. Dylan Mulvaney's audience is probably not 20 years old, especially not 21. Dylan Mulvaney's audience, it's TikTok. It's going to be closer to 14, 15. That's my opinion.

You're saying that they knew what they were doing. They knew it would create a firestorm like this? No, no, no. They want to target young drinkers according to the marketing. The VP said we need like, I'll just put it this way. The left response from personalities was that they need

to target younger people to get a new drinking audience. They don't want to be your dad's beer. They want to be your teenage daughter's beer. Right. So they're going after people who aren't. I mean, this is cigarettes all over again. Cigarettes get them while they're young, get them hooked for life. And so they're like, drink beer, kids. And it's like, no, don't do that. Don't advertise alcohol to children. Your demographic should be adults. There's a Bud Light commercial with Miles Teller or whatever. And it's like him and his wife on hold. And it's kind of goofy, but it's targeting adults who are in their living room and they're waiting for some adultly thing clearly intended to target someone who's in their mid to late 20s or early 20s and i'm like that's fine you know he grabs two bud lights bud lights out of the fridge and he cracks them and then he dances over and

they're dancing to on hold music or whatever and i'm like sure fine but the sickening reality man is that college students have probably made bud weiser so much money from underage drinking. But, but hold on. And everyone knows it. And people are like, well, we can't say it out loud because it's illegal to sell to them under 21. But the drinking age should be 18. But it's so hard on the brain. I agree.

I think drinking is bad, but I'm also not about to tell people like how to live their lives. And if you can enlist in the military, you should be able to drink a beer. Seriously. And what's happened with the drinking age is that there's actually been a lot of teenagers who are at college 19 20 years old of legal age to to enter the contracts and join the military they get drunk and then they don't call paramedics because they're like oh that happened to a girl i knew she had alcohol poisoning actually we she did get taken to the hospital thank god and she

survived there are campuses that have specific like if call us, you will not get in trouble rules because this is such a problem. There was a huge coalition of college presidents led by the president of Dartmouth saying, binge drinking is such a problem. We need to lower the drinking age because you need to be with your parents at home when you're first being introduced to alcohol. And then you learn to drink responsibly as opposed to this culture that's like, I need to get wasted before I go to the bar because i may not be able to drink again

and i want to be that's what they do in europe yeah but your drinking age is like a lot lower in europe no that's what i mean that's what i mean like the drinking age is lower and it's not it's graduated they'll say yeah and you're like this age hard liquor at this yeah like a little watered down wine at a special occasion it's not not quite so like off limit. Yeah. People don't. Well, we like it's not a one to one correlation, but kids are allowed to have wine in church. Not like you're guzzling it. But in Texas, you can drink at the age of 16 if your parent is present. Yeah.

I was in Wisconsin, too. I think there are a couple states that have that culture where, again, like if you are at a restaurant with your parent, you might be able to drink. I don't know the legality of it, but we create a culture that teaches people to drink responsibly as opposed to see it as a substance that you're not going to be able to get. So you might as well basically kill yourself. This is a good one. We should read this. It says an opinion piece published in Bloomberg last week described the move by Bud Light as setting a new low in corporate courage. Quote, kicking a political hornet's nest for clicks and giggles before running away

is no way to elevate a brand or promote a cause, wrote Ben Schlott, the publication's advertising and brands columnist. Like, I think the important thing to point out is that y'all actually had Joe Rogan the first week. Then you doubled down in this weird way. And now Joe Rogan is he's in the fray. And he's like, OK, this is really stupid now. They let some young activist marketing VP make the weird, you know, sell the beer to Dylan, sell the beer to his audience.

And then they realize, oops. And then probably what happened was like the CEO of the company is like, we're doing what we used to do. Get the horse. We got to open the stable. Get the horse. They should have just come out and been like, hey, we're sorry for sponsoring

this influencer. We weren't aware that it would trigger such a divisive reaction. We won't do it again. Or lean into it so hard. I mean, you know, one way or the other.

Did you see the CEO's statement though right after? I think that's what primed me for being like insulted by the video is he released this statement and he's like, we didn't mean to step into such a controversial issue. And I was like like do you live under a rock like do you

not realize that that choosing this political activist based on the identity is going to spark an enormous an enormous controversy i was like you you had to know i don't believe that i don't believe the reports that say that oh this was a rogue employee or this wasn't approved like no someone in a decision-making power at a corporation like that knew about this. I say like this, it would be no different politically if they sponsored Alex Jones. It's not that Dylan Mulvaney is is just trans. Some people don't like or I don't think Dylan Mulvaney actually is trans. I think Dylan Mulvaney is actually insulting and hurting trans people. But that's a separate issue. If they if Dylan Mulvaney is a hyper polarizing figure who is either despised or beloved,

Alex Jones, very similar, absolutely despised by the left, beloved by the right. Bud Light probably shouldn't be entering the fray in politics to this degree with these kinds of personalities. And I really, I agree. I think they knew exactly what was going to happen. It's possible that some people didn't, which is equally as freaky to me. But what I mean is, I don't think they expected this level of chaos. No, yeah, no way.

I think they thought they were going to get a ton of attention. Yep. And, right. They didn't realize. They couldn't stop it in a second, though. I was saying this on my show the other day. I said, they underestimate how forgiving conservatives are. Because we're not the ones that engage in cancel culture.

Right. We just want we just in this case don't want to vote with our money. We're not saying, oh, we're going to write you off for life. If they came out and said, hey, please forgive us. We're sorry. We won't do this again. We realize that it's not in alignment with what our values have been and what your values are. Then we would all be like, oh, OK, no problem. We actually forgive you if you if you truly repent. But the fact that their CEO was just like, we didn't know that we were being this way.

But I, I, I want to clarify that people on the culture war, right? Post liberals, libertarian, et cetera, absolutely should boycott companies and refuse to,

to partake in their products. That's not cancel culture. I agree. Cancel culture is when you went, Hey, Budweiser, we just found out that 20 years ago, you made

a commercial that had an American flag in it. So we are boycotting your product. Cancel culture is when you go to someone's past. I agree. That's what I'm saying. Conservatives are forgiving. This isn't cancel culture. This is just momentary consequences for their behavior.

And so it's not it's not a forever thing. Like I would never at this point, I would I plan never to buy anything Anheuser-Busch ever again. But if they come out and apologize for it,'d be like okay sure yeah i said this in austin if they came out that friday and said we're really sorry for sponsoring this individual we did not realize how divisive this would turn out to be we won't do it again we we respect and and you know love all of our customers and those who enjoy bud light let's get back to just having beers with each other and not you know know, being politically divisive.

We're sorry. I would have got up on stage and I would have yelled, woo, Bud Light's for everybody. I'm the house. I'm buying. I would have immediately went out and I don't even drink.

Do you think they're afraid of the backlash from the other side of this? Like if you say- Whoopi Goldberg threatened them. Right. And if you say like, we won't do this,

we won't ever do this again. Like, what are you saying? Are you saying you won't have a trans person? Are you saying you won't have someone whose audience primarily teenagers? Are saying it's part of the like i think so many of these issues are one sponsor dylan mulvaney again yeah but is that enough like is is that going to seem like a direct threat to the other side of the aisle so well i i don't care i mean the other side of the aisle 20 year old 20 year olds and teenagers aren't buying bud light so they've decided to

alienate their entire market in an effort to attract teenagers you you what yeah this is what i said you have the ages of 21 to 80 okay where you're marketing beer to these people at barbecues at picnics at sporting events and they said one actually came out and made a video where she was like, we need a new younger audience. And it's like, you're at best targeting 21 to 24 year olds. So you're going to take those three years over the entire human lifespan that you're sacrificing your entire doesn't make sense. You're talking a little bit like a businessman that knows more than I think that the Anheuser

Busch people know, because you're looking at it just from a revenue marketing standpoint. I think there's more at play than just making a business decision. Impact investment. Yeah, I think that the ESG stuff, behind the scenes, they're getting incredible pressure, especially because they have been somewhat of a patriotic company or tried to appeal to patriotic people in the past. They're getting incredible pressure from these ESG systems now, these ESG metrics to be woke, not just environmentally, but on social issues.

That's why we saw all those companies like paying for their employees to go to different states for abortions, like announcing they were going to do that because that's being a good corporate citizen. That's crazy. It's super crazy. And that's the same with this.

I mean, I think this plays into it more. Have you seen the sketch where the woman asks for maternity leave and they're like, no. But we'll fly you there to abort the baby. Yeah. Like, we won't give you time off. We won't give you any extra money. You can't have the kid.

It just literally made no sense. So creepy, isn't it? It's better for us to keep you as a worker bee. What's the woman? That's really what it is. The cost of maternity leave for a corporation is greater than the cost of the abortion. So these corporations were offering to pay for women to travel out of state to get an abortion because it saves them money in the long run.

That's insane and creepy. No, it's because they really care about me. It's because they want me to be happy. They want you to be a CEO. Get out of your chair, Tim. I'm moving in. No, but I do think that with Anheuser-Busch, I'd be really curious to know what the internal conversations are like, right?

Like, I think you're right. There are a lot of outside organizations that will lobby and pressure them. But I would also like to know what the culture is among employees. Like, have they been specifically recruiting, you know, progressive LGBTQ people who are saying, if you say that you won't sponsor Dylan Mulvaney again, we will, you know, turn on you. Well, I don't know what employees do at beer companies, but, you know, become incredibly difficult. They must be getting a lot of very strange pressure from a lot of different directions.

This was Alyssa Heinershade is the woman who made the call on this whole ad campaign. And she said in her initial, in that video where she was talking about that, it was about inclusivity and we want to be inclusive. And then she said, repeated it. So like, what does this word even mean if you're using it multiple times but that was the it's like brainwashed kind of like this brainwashing of like but before we move on i want to mention one more thing well we may have breaking news on this subject so uh before we go into whatever that was uh you may want to mention it we have this tweet from clay travis someone actually just super chatted clay travis tweets bud light has fired the marketing vp who

greenlit the dylan mulvaney advertisement i'm not going to read what he said uh as the brand sales continue to tank that's a list so that's the woman i was just talking about is she the one that criticized uh bud lights brand for being too fratty but then there are that other video of her surface being kind of fratty yes 20 years ago her job this girl doesn't even like the company she works for that's a good question. Why are people like that getting jobs and making calls like this that are costing companies billions? Like who hired her who's like, this girl who doesn't seem to like it here is the future of our marketing phase. I'm also surprised she didn't get fired sooner.

But that should tell you that they are really struggling. Clay Travis is tweeting it. We'll see if we get more confirmation on that. So I wanted to clarify that there's a difference between boycotting and canceling. In no way has this become a cancel movement against Budweiser. This is a boycott against Budweiser. Canceling is when you say, don't let them on that platform. Boycott is when you say, everyone mute that account. That's different. You can ignore corporations. That's boycotting them. But when you demand that they're not allowed to participate, that's when you're attempting to cancel that's you don't want to cancel that's the bad stuff

i disagree boycott all you want that's market force but i don't like cancel a method i think it's yeah we should we should cancel absolutely but it's not free speech dude it's not canceling you misunderstand canceling always was a reference to you had um sarah silverman got fired from a job because 10 years prior she made a blackface joke. That's canceling someone. It's like you were a bad person a long time ago and you are being excised. That's what we were all complaining about. Like, are you kidding?

Like, that guy made a joke. And then, you know, Mike Cernovich came out and pointed out that James Gunn had made off-color jokes 10 years prior. And then he got booted temporarily. That was cancel culture. The left saying something like, hey, this company supports this guy currently right now. We don't like that. We're boycotting is just a boycott. The right saying Bud Light sponsored someone we don't like. That's a boycott. We need to be saying to these companies, we will not give you money if you're doing things that are bad. That's boycotting. Say, I won't give you the things, but saying

Twitter, don't let Budweiser on your platform anymore. That's a cancel move. That's boycotting. Saying, I won't give you the things, but saying, Twitter, don't let Budweiser on your platform anymore. That's a cancel move. That's the wrong way. Oh, well, I don't think anybody's doing that, though. No, they're not. This is all about boycotting. What do you call when, because I agree, the clarification,

but I think there's a third element of it, too, and that's the deplatforming. When social media companies, like what they tried to do to President Trump on Facebook, on Twitter, on Instagram, where they called his words violence or whatever they called it and then they kicked him off in an attempt to act to like cancel him that's also cancel culture not just based on something they dug up but based on the fact that they are trying to perfectly silence and i think cancel culture

can go even more extreme right you know if people who lose their bank accounts they're not allowed to use paypal like they are unpersoned from things that interact with the internet or in some way connect to social media or basically make it possible to exist in society, right? Like that's cancel culture at the extreme. I think saying like, I won't buy a product, that's a boycott, right? Saying I'm going to block this person, that's not canceling them. That's just saying I don't want to track them. But like cancel culture has become such a normal that it naturally has ramped up and can

become incredibly dangerous. For me, cancel culture is the unpersoning of someone making it so they basically cannot exist in mainstream society. Yeah. It's a violation of the equality of opportunity. Yeah. It's a smear on the United States and everything it stands for. Yeah. Versus boycotting is saying you can be in the market, but I'm, I don't want to do a market-based transaction with you. And I will encourage a hundred million people to also not do a market. And I liked what you said before. I mean, I think it's true. Conservatives sort of lack direction in boycotts. I think they are quick to forgive. And sometimes I think that's part of the thematic Christianity that follows a lot of conservatives. They believe that if you repent,

you should, you deserve forgiveness. But really, people say, I'm sorry and keep doing the bad thing. We have confirmation from Ad Age. Bud Light's marketing leadership undergoes shakeup after Dylan Mulvaney controversy. Alyssa Heinerscheid, who has led the brand since June,

takes a leave of absence and is replaced by Budweiser global marketing VP Todd Allen. So not fired, leave of absence. Wow. This is a huge move on the part of Anheuser-Busch. Ad age, of course, for everybody wondering, is NewsGuard certified 100 out of 100.

This is hard confirmation that this woman has been temporarily removed from her position. This means it is 100 times worse than what you think it is. And it looks like they brought in the big guy. Global Marketing VP, I guess, This means it is 100 times worse than what you think it is. And it looks like they brought in the big guy. Global marketing VP, I guess, would be far superior to Alyssa, who was like- Probably US, domestic.

Oh boy, YouTube's not going to be happy about this one. You see, and this is my point. There is no way they made a move this bold because you know when you're working in corporate and you've got marketing people and PR people, they're going to say, you do this. It is dropping a boulder in a lake. It is going to ripple out. Everyone's going to be talking about it.

You are reigniting the story, but they knew they had to do it. That's how bad it was. What that says to me, it is extremely likely, as I believed, as I mentioned earlier, as I believe that they went to YouTube and said, take these videos down or else. What if it was a coordinated effort and they were like, listen, for our business, we have to fire the people that did this or we're not going to recover our revenue. But at the same time, we want to serve this leftist agenda or our ESG score. So how about you remove all the criticism of Dylan Mulvaney? We remove our marketing team and it like evens out.

I don't, that makes no sense. Like there's, there's no strategy here. What the, the fact that they are removing this woman, she's taking a leave of absence. Maybe it was of her own volition, but not apologizing says a lot, which, which is where you're probably right. That they don't want to besmirch the, the good name of ESG, but they know they're reeling from it. and it'll be interesting the two moves maybe can't if they did if they did pressure youtube at the same time

to be like hey we're gonna if you don't remove this stuff and then also this then they can be like well we did both we're serving both yeah man it would have been way easier oh i'm sorry oh no i was excited to be interesting if she quietly comes back you know she's going on a leave of absence to terminate her or like in six months when they think this has come down because you're completely right tim like their sales are hurting and it's the beginning of the second quarter of the year like they need to fix this as quickly as possible so it doesn't carry in i mean i can only imagine that summer is a pretty intense sales uh time for the year right like they don't want to go into their second quarter which is probably a serious

sales quarter for them with this boycott still in place and i really just don't think a leave of absence is enough right like i don't want to advocate for anyone to get fired on the other hand she has really hurt the company if they quietly sneak her back in in june it's not going to look good it might be a legal thing it'll be interesting to watch it'll be interesting to see if people keep watching to see if she exits the company or if she's reinstated yeah and i'm sure they're like she's a female executive we can't just fire her over this like that will hurt us as well i'm scrambling to learn more about it right now but it's it's just such fresh knowledge uh i don't know much to say about it yet you know my compassion is there for this girl but still still, the market demands you're going to follow the market.

And you're responsible for your decisions, right? So this news is coming out on a Friday, obviously. PR 101, let the story die. But they tried this last week. It did not work. They're trying it again. It will not work. I'll tell you what's going to happen.

Monday morning, first thing, there will be a wave of political commentary talking about just this. The old rules don't work anymore. It used to be that by Monday, there was different news and the news outlets were like, what story should we run, guys? And the editor comes into the room and he's like, here's a bunch of stories that happened over the weekend. Here's what we got from last night.

What about that story from Friday? That's old news. Now there's too much online. So there's going to be a ton of people who are going to be like, here's what you missed last weekend. And they're going to start with the biggest story. Bud Light has, for whatever reason, either of her own volition or otherwise, she has been removed from her position.

So, uh, well, next Monday morning, we're going to have news on this and everyone's going to want to know. They need to just apologize. Bud, just apologize. Just say we're sorry for sponsoring Dylan Mulvaney. We're sorry. We won't do it again. But you got to say why you're sorry.

Yeah, agreed. I think if Anheuser-Busch came out and said we literally did not understand the political ramifications of what this person means to people in this country. We did not understand that it was a highly hyperpolarizing issue. We do not. Here's what I'd say. I'd say first, I'd say to all of our loyal Bud Light fans and drinkers, I am deeply sorry that we sponsored an individual that was off-putting and offensive to you. We didn't mean to do that. We did not realize how strongly people felt about this because we did not know the context around this story and this individual. So here's what we're going to do. We are going to rescind the sponsorship. We will strive to avoid this

kind of thing again. We just want people to come together over an ice cold brew and celebrate with each other. And if this didn't accomplish that, we screwed up. Please forgive us. Would you buy Bud Light if they said that? Yes. Really? Absolutely. I think there are people who wouldn't.'t i think they would say like if you didn't know he was a polarizing figure then you are still lying then the damage is done yeah but what they're playing right now is do nothing say nothing and hope it goes away and it's getting worse well this is this is going to be the debate in in conservative circles over the course of the next week is what to do because they fired this woman and whether the boycott leave of absence leave of

absence okay leave of absence at a corporation we know what that means but no she she may have said guys i'm stepping down i i can't be involved in this right they could have gone there and said we want you to take a leave of absence we don't know for sure and like i said what if she comes back like what if they're like, yeah, she's hanging on the background. There won't be a news story about it if she does. Right, they'll do it as quietly as possible. And then I feel like conservatives

are going to have to be like, oh, wait, they just completely took back the person who I assume had the most authority to let this happen. Like, what does that say about the company? I can speak for myself here, and I would not buy Anheuser-Busch products unless they not only issued an apology that actually said, we apologize,

but they stated that what they did and named what they did was wrong. And also, it's bigger. Not just we stepped in it, not just we didn't realize it was hot button issue, but they had to say, we're sorry for sponsoring this person. We're sorry because it violates your values.

We understand that. We ask for your forgiveness. Moving on, like, we're not going it violates your values we understand that we ask for your forgiveness moving on like we're not going to do that again yeah i'm happy to forgive them if they say that but if they just say these if they just keep doing the things that they're doing i'm i'm done yeah i want to see them specify that his audience is very young too young and they didn't realize how young his audience was and that they're that was a gross misconduct on their part. Also, it's InBev. A.B. InBev is the company that owns Anheuser-Busch. A.B. InBev owes the humanity an apology for trying to sell their beer to kids.

Someone said they saw a video saying Bud Light is being sued. They are being sued. They're being sued by America First Legal for racist hiring practices. So they just opened a can of worms on this one. I think the issue is, especially with that lawsuit, Bud Light is the easiest culture war issue for the average person. There's no brand loyalty to watered down beer. The beer for people who don't want to drink beer,

but want to drink a lot of it. There's a bunch of options for alcoholic water. There's hard seltzer. There's other light beers. I'll try not to avoid insulting the other beers that are doing fine because they didn't engage in this practice. But really, I think the issue is Dylan Mulvaney is nails on a chalkboard to many people. That's why there's no boycott right now over Jack Daniels or Coors. Other companies have done pride promotions. Dylan Mulvaney specifically is a very grating individual who deeply offends a lot of people for a variety of reasons. And I think the transgender issue is just one small aspect. I think it's the political aspect people hyper focus on.

But I think for a lot of people, it's's just the i really do think it's the narcissistic personality disorder and i would give the price is right video as an example of it yeah people were deeply bothered by dylan mulvaney on the price is right and dylan in that video is just some guy like not trans not expressing any ideology but people are saying look at this behavior it's off-putting it's it's, it's offensive, it's wrong, it's narcissistic. That carries through. And I actually think that Dylan Mulvaney uses trans people as a shield for this while simultaneously making them look bad. Like there are people that we shout out periodically who are trans themselves, who are great people that we love and respect. Dylan Mulvaney is, so long as Dylan Mulvaney

is the most prominent individual claiming to be trans, it is going to be very, very difficult for run-of-the-mill regular trans people to be taken seriously. That's something that I find deeply offensive. That Dylan, like Dylan Mulvaney, I'll say it again,

hiking heels in the forest. Yeah. And there are people, conservatives, who've never met a trans person who see that and they're like that's what this is it's like no no no no hang out with blair white blair's amazing super cool that does not represent who these people are but now youtube is shutting down people who are critical of that and it's almost like youtube hates trans people too or they're i think it comes down to, YouTube really doesn't care.

They're just like, whatever makes us money, I literally don't care if Dylan Mulvaney is the worst example of a person in media who is insulting women and trans people at the same time. If it makes us money, just take the action. Well, it's also the phrase you said, I think, is key for a lot of women. And that is a very insulting portrayal

of a quote-unquote woman right like think about the very first days of girlhood video where sitting behind the keyboard being like okay my first day of being a woman i wrote an angry email that i didn't send i cried a couple of times i all these these very misogynistic stereotypes of a woman. I saw that and I was like, excuse me, I've been a woman for 33 years. I haven't done any of that. But you know what? People who hate women accuse women of behaving like that.

And what if Dylan Mulvaney said, my first day of womanhood, I went to the kitchen and made a sandwich and did the dishes and folded the laundry. Like, what's the difference it's the same stereotype insult i mean i think part of it is like is this the type of humor you think oh i'm relating to you by also nagging on myself but the reality is you are not experiencing these things it's a similar stereotyping that bothers me when people say oh well we have this

son but he thinks he's transgender and so we socially transitioned him and it's like your 12 year old is wearing so much eyeshadow i can't see his face and tons of eyeliner like i wouldn't let my 12 year old daughter do that like you are taking parts of being female and inappropriately applying them to a situation in a lot of ways but also like the weird or like the parts of like mature female adulthood like it just doesn't make sense and it's OK in some cases and not in others. Like no woman that I've ever met, no woman that I've ever met behaves the way that Dylan Mulvaney does. Right.

And no woman would be accepted in a professional setting or taken seriously if she behaved that way. But additionally, most trans people don't behave that way. I think one of the issues that we're dealing with in popular culture is the highlighting of key individuals who are clearly bad examples. There was a video that went viral the other day of a trans person threatening extreme violence. And that's like one crazy person. You then had the Nashville incident. You have the extreme examples of narcissism from people like Dylan Mulvaney. And then you have many other people that I mentioned we know and care about who don't behave like that at all. So the issue for me is if someone is experiencing a mental illness or

mental disorder of any type, we want that person to get help. Some people have a multitude of disorders and illnesses in different areas. I'm not going to lump them all together. I'm going to say, here's an individual who is experiencing this disorder or mental illness, and they'll be treated in this way. And then you get a combination of a few who are either threatening extreme violence. I'm not going to blame the person on the left for the actions of the person on the right. You see what I'm trying to say? This distinction that you're making is perhaps between people who suffer from gender dysphoria versus people who have been captured by the ideology.

We were talking about this right before we went on air. This is what I'm speaking about at James Madison University on Wednesday. It's why the radical trans activists are agitating before I get there because I'm talking about the ideology of transgenderism,

which doesn't have anything to do with the surgeries, anything to do with the pharmaceuticals, doesn't have anything to do with the biology, nothing like that per se. It's that queer theory, which a lot anything to do with the biology, nothing like that per se. It's that queer theory, which a lot of people haven't heard about, queer theory is actually the ideological

underpinning of this movement to capture vulnerable youth. And the vulnerability might be any number of things, whether it's abuse, whether it's other, these comorbidities, whatever it might be, the vulnerability is there. This ideology comes in and says, hey, you don't feel right about something. You feel unhappy. The solution is to disassociate yourself from your previous identity and to take on this new identity and said it'll solve all your problems. And I think that the distinction that you make between people that feel a discomfort in their body versus people captured by the ideology is probably true. Exactly. Dylan Mulvaney pushes the ideology without, I think it's very, very obvious.

If we're talking about someone who's suffering from gender dysphoria, an individual who looks in the mirror and experiences anxiety and this like mental anguish over a misalignment between their perception and their body. That's gender dysphoria. Dylan Mulvaney goes on camera and yells about their body and says, look at my bulge and things like that, which when I've asked people who are actually experiencing gender dysphoria, they're like a person with dysphoria would not yell to 10 million people. Look at my male body parts because that would trigger their dysphoria. And so then there's questions about autogynephilia and autoandrophilia. But Dylan Mulvaney seems to be just an individual who desperately wants to be famous, as the example being Ellen DeGeneres and the Price is Right video. So that's even outside of the ideology. That's fame desperation.

Yeah. But I agree with you. You're right. There there was a period where many trans people were actually being canceled by gender activists. I guess I guess we refer to as gender ideology or critical gender theory or something like that. There was this period where there were a lot of trans people saying there are only two sexes. Hence, if you're trans, you transition to the other. Yeah, but the with Zs, Ms, Zr, and Neo pronouns believe there's a plethora of genders, in which case transition can be

from any gender that you made up. That's the ideological part of it. Right, which is at odds with someone who's dysphoric. Right, it's like, the way that I compare it is, you know, take it back three or four years ago

and we saw in our schools when it came to, like, the Black Lives Matter riots and the racial tension that was in our country, we saw our children being taught this poisonous stuff. Like if you're a white child that you're inherently racist based on the color of your skin, if you're a black child, you're oppressed based on the color of your skin. And we all kind of pointed to that and said, wait a second, that's not right. Like that's that's bad. We don't want our kids being taught that. And it

took a little bit of time to unpack the fact that this wasn't some random poisonous ideology, that this was critical race theory. It was the principles of critical race theory that were being taught, not being taught as CRT, but being taught with this ideological underpinning. And when we started realizing, when those of us on the right started realizing that, the left said, no, critical race theory is just teaching accurate history. It's just making sure that children know the evils of slavery. And we were like, no, no, no, no no no no critical race theory is the grandchild of critical theory which is a neo-marxist ideology that exact same thing that exact same trajectory is happening with with queer theory and with the with this um epidemic of people identifying as transgender we see this happening

in schools we're like we don't want our kindergartners being taught about sex, about gender identity. We don't want these groomer teachers. We identify that we don't like that. And we're just now as a society being like, wait a second, this is not just some random garbage that's being taught. These are the outgrowth of queer theory. It's the principles of the underlying ideology.

And that's where we are right now. I want to jump to a somewhat different, but similar story or a similar vein. This is from Timcast.com. Texas passes legislation requiring 10 commandments to be displayed in every classroom. The bill's sponsor says the 10 commandments are part of American tradition. Under SB 15115, which just passed the Senate by a 17 to 12 vote, every public elementary or secondary school must prominently display a durable copy or framed copy of the Ten Commandments that is at least 16 inches wide and 20 inches tall. The display must also be legible to a person

with average vision from anywhere in the classroom. The bill's sponsor, State Senator Phil King, said during a committee hearing on the bill that the Ten Commandments are part of American heritage and that it's time to bring them back into U.S. schools. Oh boy. Wait, this is like there is no other God before me, no false idols. I mean, the Second Commandment basically says that

Christianity is blasphemous. You're not supposed to worship people. Are they worshiping people? Well, Jesus, the Christians worship a human. And the Second Commandment... You are incorrect. That's incorrect. Yeah, you shall not make for yourself a carved image, whether it's a human and the the second commandment you're you're incorrect that's incorrect yeah yeah you should not make for yourself a carved image whether it's a human or a thing you don't worship

other people jesus was jesus was god yeah that's what they say yeah they say he's a human that was also god but at the same time so they're hypostatic nature exactly it defies it defies it defies the second commandment you're not supposed to worship other people no but he's god he is fully god and fully human at the same time so you worship fully god like it's it's the the word for it is hypostatic union because you cannot separate the two so worshiping jesus i'm catholic that's why i know this um worshiping jesus you are worshiping god he is the son of god he is part of the trinity father son and holy spirit are all one three in one so it's not worshiping a person it is worshiping god it's worth a person a person

god and spirit all at once so it is a person no no no father son and holy spirit are all three all three it's three in one it's the trinity it is god god took the form of a man to come to earth as jesus christ but you are it's not separated it's not like oh his body was human and his his spirit was god he was both fully god and fully man so worshiping jesus is worshiping god and i don't want to this is actually i want to talk about the this is a whole different podcast i want to talk about the the political uh and philosophical do it so first for those that i think we should tell you what the ten commandments are so you can understand what they're they want to put in school i love the first one one no other gods me. You shall have no other gods before me.

Two, you shall not make for yourself a carved image. Is that No False Idols, I believe? Yeah. Three is you shall not take the name of your Lord God in vain. Now, this one's interesting because what was explained to me, I think this was Prager who explained this, that a lot of people think it means you can't just say something like, oh my God, because you're using it for no reason.

But what he described, I could be wrong about if it was him or not, but someone described it as it would be like declaring war an enemy country and saying God wills it. Yes. You are taking his name to do your bidding and that's taking his name. Oh my gosh. These super churches make me think. It's also like, you know, the phrase, you know, the phrase Lord. Yeah. Lord is actually

like, not the name of God. But in the Old Testament, the Jewish people, God's people, believed that they couldn't say the name. Actually, Jews today still like, abbreviate when they say God, they put a little dash between it because they couldn't say the name of God, which is Yahweh. So that's, it was four

letters, Yahweh. And so they called it Lord as a way of saying it without saying the name of God, because it's so, he has such extreme majesty that they couldn't say the name. Let's read some more.

Because again, I'm not here to teach you the 10 commandments, everybody. But for the context of- I'll do that too. This is what they want to put in the schools. You should know this. Four is remember the Sabbath day. Five is honor your father and mother.

Six, you shall not murder. Seven, you shall not commit adultery. Eight, you shall not steal. Nine, you shall not bear false witness. Ten, you shall not covet. So this is being passed in Texas. They want this in elementary schools. I guess the question is, if they're putting critical race theory, critical theory, gender ideology in schools, personally, I don't see see any difference and so my response is going to be if you are trying to pass marxism into schools then i then okay fine you do that they do this where what am i arguing can i tell you my super based opinion on this sure okay my super based opinion on this is that this is fabulous and that they should do it and then it violates it violates

nothing about our our heritage of law here. So truly in the conservative movement, the Republican Party, there's a difference between how we view laws, right? There's like the libertarian view that's like we should be able to do whatever we want as long as we don't violate somebody else's fundamental human right. Government should get off my lawn. And then actual conservatism is not libertarianism. Actual conservatism is like in the style of Edmund Burke, right? Where it's not absolute liberty, it's ordered liberty. Ordered liberty being defined as more like the pursuit of justice.

And he defines justice because you're like, okay, well, what's justice? Then he defines justice as original justice, capital O, original justice, meaning rooted in the traditional Judeo-Christian morality. And this is not just something like, oh, okay, I'm a practicing Catholic. I'm coming in here with my religious views. Edmund Burke's philosophy is what our constitution was based on.

James Madison, the father of our constitution, quoted Edmund Burke. So my belief is that indoctrination is morally neutral. It's not good or bad in and of itself. And there's no such thing as neutrality. Either we are going to be indoctrinating or they are going to be indoctrinating. So if we don't have this in schools, then Marxism, which I would argue is a form of like satanic ideology, then Marxism is going to be in our school. So I would much rather have this.

Do you agree with Ten Commandments in schools? Yeah, I think it's great. I mean, there is an argument. So I think people misinterpret how America treats religion, right? In France, you have freedom from religion. So you're not supposed to wear religious symbols in school. There's controversy over hijab, providing kosher meals, things like that. In America, you have the freedom to practice your religion. However, and I think you're completely right, we're actually a nation that's completely intertwined with Christianity. And so it's not wrong to have the Ten Commandments in schools. I mean, you can reference it in a lot of different ways when you're teaching, right? Like, it's also such a fundamental part of our life that like when we talk about observing the Sabbath, right? Like this is a case that the Supreme Court has agreed to take on. You have this postal worker from Pennsylvania who said, you know, I'm a practicing evangelical Christian,

and I observe the Sabbath on Sundays. And when the U.S. Postal Service started working with Amazon, they said, okay, but our workers have to work on Sunday. And he said, well, I need a religious exemption. And eventually, his postal workers, where he's based, were like, we're not going to, we're going to keep scheduling you for Sundays. We're not going to acknowledge that you need a religious exemption, even though our typical work week does allow for a sunday sabbath they said this is critical to our business and so therefore we are allowed this is two judges went through and said yeah they have the right to demand that you work and deny your religious exemption well you have the freedom to practice your religion right like i think that we are so afraid of religion as a country that we don't learn how to talk about it in a way that's saying like, you don't have to be a Christian, but you need to understand Christianity to understand the influences it has on our country.

So Ian, yes or no, Ten Commandments in schools? It depends on how it's taught because there's a difference between teaching- Mounted on the walls. That's what they said. There's a difference between teaching about Christianity or Judaism. This is Judaism. There's a difference between teaching about Judaism and indoctrinating people to become Jew. Okay, wait, hold on.

Ian, a specific question. They are mounting this. They want this mounted in elementary schools. No, I don't like it. It needs context. If they're going to teach it, they need to teach about it and not just make people think this is real. You have to be able to choose to believe that this is real. But all they're doing is putting it on the wall.

Without context, that makes me nervous, man. You know, I'm neutral on it. I certainly understand why Christians and Catholics and many Jewish people probably would be like, yes, this is fantastic. We should have these values instilled to our children. And you're completely right about indoctrination 100%. I would prefer the Ten Commandments over Marxism. So if someone came to me and said, it's one or the other, I'd be like, oh, 10 commandments all the way.

But the system where they're like, hey, here's a really horrible choice. And you're like, I don't want that. They're like, okay, here's a little bit less horrible choice. Want that one instead? You're like, yeah, I guess it's less worse. It doesn't have to be either of them. This is the compromise. No, that's what I don't believe.

This is the compromise. I don't think there's anything. We're not talking. I'm sorry. Go ahead. We're not talking about the school teaching bible study they're actually putting marxism in classroom curriculum and critical uh critical race theory and critical gender theory is literally being put into math problems this is the compromise this is we're going to put it on the wall and say i'd like to see the four pillars of islam posted next but our country is not based on the four pillars of Islam. Our country is literally based on this.

Think about our laws against homicide. Why do we, as a people, recognize that other human beings deserve protection under the law, but like dogs don't or something like that? If you look at morality and think about morality, there's actually no such thing as secular morality. Secular morality is just anarchy. It's just the strongest can dominate the weak. The only reason that we have order in our country right now,

even as we are in a chaotic era, is because we have some acknowledgement at the base level that people have dignity, that people have value, and that's based on, that order is based on Judeo-Christian values.

Now, you don't have to practice those values in your personal life, but it is ahistorical to ignore the fact that our entire system our entire republic is based on that yeah is it any different than having a dictionary in the classroom right like if you're explaining hey fifth grader these are what the bill of rights are like here's something that influenced that like how is having this resource any different right like if you want to talk about how it compares to islam then yeah maybe you should bring in some text so students can study it. The truth is I think Judaism is the most based religion.

I think it is phenomenal because it's about your experience with God directly. You don't need a priest. You don't need any of that. It's you and God. I think that is where it all comes from. All of it. Christianity, Islam, it all comes from Judaism. But I'm following the founding fathers saying church and state should be separate.

I don't think they ever said that. comes from Judaism, but I'm following the founding fathers saying church and state should be separate. I don't think they ever said that. That was only in one letter that Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptists to assure them that they weren't going to face discrimination from the government for practicing their religion. But the phrase separation of church and state was never part of any founding document. And it's not part of any philosophy about keeping morality out of law. It's only about whether the government can either force you to participate in religious practice or prohibit it. And I'm pretty sure there was also, conversely, a founding father,

maybe it was Franklin or Jefferson, that said you need religion for a society to function properly. Yeah, John Adams said our country was made for moral people and no other. Yes, I see the churches capitalizing on religion. That really bothers me. He's right, though.

We talk about this all the time. So the question I've asked is, would the United States be better? Or someone asked us this, would the country be better if it was a Christian theocracy? And first of all, better, I guess, is subjective. But if you were to talk about, do we want less crime? Do we want a stronger economy? Do we want better health care? If everybody shared the same moral foundations,

everyone's lives would be better. However, I'm not saying which moral foundations. I'm just saying, if you had 100 million people that all agreed communism was perfect, guess what? It would work. The reality is communism doesn't work because no one ever agrees to that great extent. Someone's always got to run a system or whatever. That's why communism doesn't work. But if everybody had a simple moral foundation that was like the Ten Commandments or otherwise, everybody agreed that, you know, there was an afterlife, there was a God, we have to be good stewards of the earth and all that, you'd have to worry a lot less about crime. The issue is, right now, no one believes or fears that there is any consequence to the

bad things they do. So we experience more crime and corruption. Were you, Liz, were you taught religion as a kid? Yes. Yeah. I was raised in a Catholic home. And then, of course, you get to an age as a young adult where you have to decide like, okay, am I going to continue in this practice as an adult and own it versus just participate in a family? One more point about this being in schools, though, and this is really interesting if you read the history of public schools in our country, compulsory public schooling only became a thing in like,

I think Massachusetts was the first state to do it in 1836. And the reason that they did that, the reason that they had compulsory public schooling was to indoctrinate children in two things, in American values and in Protestant values. Because at that time in our country, there were tons of immigrants coming in our country. A American values and in Protestant values. Because at that time in our country, there were tons of immigrants coming in our country. A lot of them were Catholic immigrants. And the people in charge of our government at the time were very anti-Catholic.

They were very Protestant. And they wanted to form a new generation of children that understood that they weren't, they weren't, they shouldn't identify as the country that they came from. They needed to identify as American. So they had to be taught American civics and they wanted them taught Protestant values. So the purpose of our education system has actually always been indoctrination. We've just, I mean, it was just hijacked by people who wanted to indoctrinate the opposite of what it was intended. Yeah, they turned into factory workers. Let's do this.

That was like Rockefeller. Let me ask you guys, I want to read the commandments and then get your opinions on it. So let's, because they want to teach kids this, let me ask you all first. Obviously, I think the Christians in the room are going to have an obvious answer. No other gods before me. You shall have no other gods before me. Is that something a children should be taught in general? This one makes me nervous

because if I say to you, Tim, there is no other god before me, and I'm reading you the commandment, there can be a possibility that you think that it's Ian. There's no other god before the ego that is speaking the words. So that one gets misinterpreted when the guy stands up and says it out loud it's true that there is one god but it is not for it's not me it's i think that's i think it's unlikely that people would misinterpret it i think the priests stand up and take take the

credit for a lot of stuff they become the one but that's not my that's not my question my question is if you is it is it a good thing to teach a child about the one god i'm not saying to accidentally say to a kid a sentence and then walk away i'm saying should should an adult be telling a children basic philosophies around the first amendment yes on the first first commandment you said first amendment they crafted the 10 the 10 amendments you know the 10 bill of rights is kind of like a i think part of it is like yes as a christian i think sounds good to me and i could understand in a diverse society where there are different religious views you might be concerned like seeing there's only one christian god does that isolate someone else but i think the idea behind this meaning that there is one point of authority there's one

point of point of morality is a good concept to teach people right it can make them subsist um subservient to authority so you gotta be careful about that if i was a kid and i saw that on the wall and i didn't know what it meant i'd first thing i would ask is what is god but right but but declare i get it but i'm trying to clarify i'm not suggesting that i'm saying should children be taught that there is one God and no other God? Are you talking about by public schools or in general? In general. Oh, should children be taught that?

Absolutely, yes. No, no. It needs to be more than that. Because it's both one and many. And it's, what is it? And you got to explain what it is. Well, it's never going to be taught in isolation. I'm asking you, Ian, if they should teach that.

In school? No, in general. Oh, well, yeah, I think so. That's my, I like to do that i think it's our job they could also teach polytheism they could say which we should yeah no i'm saying they go to children and say did you know that zeus is atop mount olympus zeus was a guy that had electricity and he lied to people and told him he could shoot and he had sex with his kids nut job they're a big cult living up in the mountains that's that's a 20 and that's a 20

so here's the next one sorry kick it over should children in general be told not to worship false idols yeah absolutely when i completely agree i think you agree to that that was the point of your first and influence self-love yeah for sure everyone agrees yeah yeah but only in conjunction with the first because you need to know what to worship. Exactly. And that actually says that says the first and second commandments go hand in hand. I think the second commandment is actually not even necessarily a Christian. It doesn't need to be seen as a Christian specific thing.

Telling people not to worship false idols, I think is a good thing. Jewish. It's a Jewish thing. These are all Jewish. Yeah. So we all agree with that. And I'll just say, I think it's because there are bad things that will try to trick you and deceive you and you could be tricked into worshiping bad things we're trying to say be careful of those

who would trick you into worship money do not worship it bad politicians i mean i gotta interject here and say that as a catholic we look at the bible as a whole not just line by line like everything isn't everything is is contextualized both with the old covenant and then the fulfillment the new covenant and the gospel so it's not just good advice for your life it all centers around the fact that god has given us these laws in order for us to better worship him. And ultimately, and this is, I know, the religious point of view, but it's not just secular advice for your life. But I think that's an actual component. I think these are to help you actually live a better,

happier, and more fulfilling life. If I were to- How do you define those words? Like better, happier, and more fulfilling? Do you define those as like just here on earth? Or do you find that, do you define that like, okay, well- I'm saying it's both. On earth, your goal is actually keeping your eyes on eternity to live this life so that you can get to the next.

I will say, if your view is that this is to better worship God, that is true and correct. And I would also say, if you follow them, your life will be better in general. And if you're tripping on DMT and you know this stuff, you'll be better off while you're tripping. So this next one, three is interesting. It's funny that we're actually discussing the philosophy of the Ten Commandments. I'm actually really excited for this. You shall not take the name of your Lord God in vain.

I'm going to start this one because I am not Christian. I do believe in God. And my view is call it whatever you want. Call it superstitious or spiritual. I am very reluctant to curse or tempt the fates. I have, I have had many instances in my life where I have, I don't know how you describe it. I wouldn't necessarily say it's using the Lord's name in vain, but arrogance. And then I had the pie thrown in my face where I've made jokes thinking, who cares? And then experienced a thing. I've, I've had experiences in my life where

I've sat behind my computer and mocked someone just to myself. And then a week later, met them. And they were the nicest person in the world to me, just ripping my heart out. And I'm like, I can't believe I would think those things about this person. That was the stupidest. So I look at this, I'm like, call it whatever you want. I believe there is something greater than us. And I believe insulting the universe, the greater, the energy or God or that is, I stay away from that. I think it's a bad thing. I think you will be better off if you remain humble. Dude. And also-

Except that there are powers beyond you. I think God speaks to people. When I clear my mind and I ask, tell me what to do, I get a vision of what I'm doing. But if I went online and said, God commands you to subscribe to me for $10 a month, that's the vein. Absolutely. Never, never. You need to follow that the vein. Absolutely. That never, never. That you need to follow that commandment. You do not abuse that thing. I think that's one interpretation of the word vein.

I think the other part is saying like you have to set boundaries for yourself on what you're allowed to say. Like being able to basically understand what's inappropriate, what's not appropriate. You are able to better understand respect. This is basically the concept of respecting something that has more authority and knowledge than you do right and like that is actually a good principle to carry out in life so i'm just like the principle of salvation really it like it's like the ultimate humility because we are we are not worthy of even saying his name let alone living forever with him in eternity and experiencing his love right i. I think. Except for that he came to save us.

To kind of simplify why I wanted to go through these as they're talking about putting in schools is that we need to teach basic philosophy on like, I think the idea that people say we are wet, we are moist robots and there is nothing beyond life. I'm like, that's the craziest thing I've ever heard. Like any, any degree of scientific understanding, philosophical understanding, and spiritual general knowledge, like general, like I'm saying, if you're not a Christian and you just read the Bible to better understand what people think, all of these things would lead. I think any person who, who, who is an open mind and is actually trying to learn,

they would be like, there is something truly beyond us at the very least. And so you got to teach kids philosophy. I think these are all really great. This could go in a science class because you're talking about quantum physics. I mean, then. Well, let's read. Look, remember the Sabbath day. I'm fairly neutral on this. I mean, I think a day off is very important, a day of rest. I think it means something else to Christians, you know? Yeah. I mean, the Sabbath is really about like meditating on your family meditating on the philosophy of the things that you've learned like i think that the sabbath day is something our culture doesn't appreciate because we just see it as the day before monday

i'm i'm gonna stop right there and say you know what probably the most important commandment and i think everybody should should be taught it my view is that it is not some arbitrary thing about god's day necessarily. It is. We talk about Shabbat and how Jewish families from sundown on Friday until sundown on Saturday turn off all the devices, come together and be a family. That is one of the most powerful cultural tools in human in human arsenal. I was sitting in front of my computer the other night and I heard I was I just heard this frequency in my head like bam bam bam bam bam bam bam bam bam bam I was like what is that noise that's my blood pressure and when my monitor dimmed it stopped like these these machines are driving our minds probably probably affecting us in ways we don't know but my point is remembering the sabbath one of the things that's breaking apart western civilization is that we don't congregate with

our families and our communities anymore yeah and to your point and that's what the sabbath was christian communities right used to go to church together with your family with community then you'd go home and you weren't allowed to work and you're supposed to be talking to each other and thinking about the lessons that you are being taught in church through interpretation through your pastor or whatever else like it is about the moral growth of both your family and of the individual it's also the idea of dedicating that day to god like it's i agree with what you're saying that the degradation of our society is because of the breakdown of the family and the fact that even when families are together we're all on the devices that wreck our brains but that

commandment the interpretation of that commandment is to dedicate that day to god that like like i go to mass every sunday because that's not that's's, I go to mass to worship God the way that he laid out that he wants to be worshiped. Right. And that's what it means to say, okay, that day is your day. It's not about me. It's not about my rest. It's not about my enrichment. It's about you. And so I will stop everything I'm doing and worship you. There's no, there's no question about any of the other commandments. I think there's literally no argument. Honor your father and your mother. Big time. It is. I'm sorry. If you don't honor your father and your mother, time it is i'm sorry if you don't honor your father and your mother if you don't love them and care about them i understand that people have

fights and falling out and people but there's always a love there for your family then there's something wrong right with like it is it is 99.999 percent of humans who love their parents i was just gonna ask jazz jennings mother would you you expect Jazz Jennings to honor thy mother? That's a good question. The answer is, as a mother, yes. But if Jazz's mother is doing hateful and damaging things, it's not an issue of mother. You know what I mean? What do you mean by honor, though?

It's the definition of what do you mean by honor. Are you going to go out and you're going to ruin the dignity of this person that gave life to you? Or are you going to say, listen, you've abused me. And so with all due respect, I'm going to separate myself from that abuse say what was wrong and move on like i think the word honor is pretty important there because it's not a matter of like oh you're abusing me but you're my mother so i have to listen to you for the rest of my life high respect so like to acknowledge why they are the way they are you shall not murder yes that is taught in all schools and to all children and it's very important we do you shall not commit adultery at least for the time being we still have that cultural thing but now you've got the rise of polycule no no fault divorce it's crazy yeah that's reagan's fault it is you shall not

steal oh boy we're losing that one but that's a no-brainer you shall not the government needs to teach itself that one oh for sure you shall not bear false witness seriously don't lie you know and then false witness means like saying something accusing someone else falsely like that's incredibly important for our culture now like think about all of the think about like the kavanaugh stuff and all these false allegations that's a deep fix they're false witnesses totally yes and then you shall not covet i i i agree with these and you know it's not even my my perspective on them is not religious. Yours is.

Yeah. My perspective is you will live a better life if you understand what these things do for humans. Yeah. Now, simply put, from a religious perspective, you're saying it's to better worship God. Yeah. My response is, okay, maybe that doesn't persuade someone. But I tell you, if you follow these, you'll be happier, healthier with a better family,

better kids. I think having a shared moral understanding would make our society stronger. And I don't need to make you go to church if we all can agree by some basic rules. And so therefore, having the Ten Commandments in school and being like, here are some basic rules that we all agree to would be a beneficial thing. Let me show you guys this video and we'll jump to this segment. This is a tweet from Clown World. This is what Target in San Francisco looks like. Let's make this bigger and take'll jump to this segment this is a tweet from clown world this is what target in san francisco looks like let's uh make this bigger and take a look at this so uh for

those that can't tell in the immediate especially for those that are just listening every single item in the target is locked you cannot take an object shampoo razors hairspray none of it it's all behind plexiglass and locked yep all behind plexiglass and locked. Yep, all behind plexiglass and locked. This is cultural degradation. This is moral decay. And what we were talking about in the previous segment is, you know, the question of what does society be better if, what would the United States be better if everybody was Christian?

The actual simple way I'd put it is, yes, but not in my view, and I know you guys probably disagree because of Christianity, The actual simple way I'd put it is, yes, but not in my view. And I know you guys probably disagree because of Christianity, but because of a shared moral foundation that rests on respecting each other and society. I actually don't disagree with you. I mean, I have never felt like I am personally in charge of making everyone be religious, right?

It works for me. And it's important part of making myself be a good person. But I think generally the point of having a shared value system is to have a strong society, right? And I don't think the government should make you do church. But I do think that if you don't understand why our rules are set up, if you don't understand the shared social contract that we have that's based on these ideas, then you are very much likely to not participate in society in a way that is beneficial to your neighbors. I mean, if you look at this, it makes me think about those stories. Have you heard of those people who'd be like,

when my grandparents went to the store, they would just like pay and then someone would bring their groceries to their unlocked house and put them away for them. We'd leave our doors unlocked at night. What are you talking about? I would never do that. I would never just let some,

but this is totally a different time. It's a time when we were a much stronger in a shared, shared morality. Back then, everybody would meet at church on Sunday. Yeah. So if you broke into someone's house, are you nuts? You show up to church, they're all going to, they're going to turn at you and they're going to point their fingers at you. You're ostracized. So people were like, oh, I can't do that. I mean, that's, that's, that scares me. Like the, the, the negative consequences are massive. Now there's no gatherings. There's, that scares me. Like the negative consequences are massive. Now there's no gatherings.

There's no day to spend with your family. So these people are like, why do I care if Target loses hairspray? And then the people at Target are like, I also, the people who work there, I also don't care. And so then you get security guards, cops, and employees were just like, we literally don't care. And the system starts to break. It's not just the social contract too. It's. I think it's a step further than that,

because it's obviously the behavior. Like, look at that. That's incredibly eerie that we're at the point in our society that that is a thing. It's also reality. Like, when you don't have a shared moral fabric, then you actually question what is reality. And that's where we are right now with all of these things on race, on sex and gender, on right and wrong, on what justice means. All of these things, we're actually asking these existential questions that were asked in a different way at the beginning of our country. Like, what is somebody's right? What is a basic individual right? What's the purpose of government? What is wrong? What is order? We're asking all of these questions that we haven't asked in over 250 years because we lost that moral fabric because that was the thing that defined all of those terms, which allowed us to then build society on it.

I really think that it was this worship of money that creeped in with the Federal Reserve System and this obsession with banking that happened in like the 1500s, central banking and stuff. Because people, I see them worshiping money and it's a misguided love or- But if we taught the 10 commandments, thou shalt not covet, right? Thou shalt not covet having more money. Worship false gods.

Right. Oh, sorry to interrupt you. Oh, go ahead. There's so much value to having resources. That's an issue. It's not money. It's just the ability to have resources. I think a component of this is the loss of community.

It's really easy to be like, you don't need government when you have resources. I think a component of this is the loss of community. It's really easy to be like, you don't need government when you have charity. Well, yeah, everybody are good moral people who agree with each other. And then everybody's living and working. And one day they see a man

whose house burned down and he's homeless. And they say, we got to help this guy. And they all pitch in and the man shakes their hand. And then the next time a house burns down,

that guy joins in to help too. Now, neighbors don't talk to each other. Nobody likes each other. And so it's all every man for himself. And they'll loot a grocery store. They don't care. Right. They don't know you.

And philanthropic participation, volunteer work has been declining rapidly for decades in America. So we say like, oh, we should have community, you know, nonprofits or whatever intercede and help people. But like, who is running that? Who is prioritizing that? This is still a trend with a lot of fundraising, but typically women make a lot of, the majority of philanthropic giving decisions, meaning they decide where their family's going to donate money. And that's a trend that because a lot of, before women were in the workplace, they also led their family's efforts towards serving the community,

right? Whether that be through the church, through nonprofits, whatever else. Like, we have let all of this go away because we also destroyed the structure that was holding it together. Well, you know what the issue is? I think you're exactly correct. The issue is conservatives aren't good at art. So the left makes the worst possible interpretation of religion in government. And they make, what's that?

Handmaid's tale yeah and then it's just meant to to be the most evil interpretation of what a religious society is conservatives don't equally create the inverse of the benefits or the positives that could come with a a shared moral foundation why do you think people don't like each other uh but there's a lot of reasons people don't like each other some people are just they don't like each other based on looks i believe that's rooted in uh tribalist fear a human who is growing up in say the 1400s lives in a small village of 100 200 people they know that these people they are safe with humans are safe around those who are part of their community they then see another person with a different color skin. They immediately know this person

does not live where I live. They may try to take from me, steal from me, or hurt me. That's, I think, the root of where racism comes from is like human natural tribal fears. Well, we need to overcome that because that's not the case. We're all people. And I don't think someone's race is a pretty dominant factor in whether you can trust them or not. In fact, I'm from Chicago and I've only been mugged by white dudes. You know what I mean? So like I don't look at someone and be like I can know everything about the person. But that's one component.

One component is separate moral foundations. Like you think it is good to – I don't know. Let's say you have usury, for example. You come from a society where you're like, loans are really, really great. It helps the, you know, the systems thrive and grow. And then you get some leftists who are like, usury is evil that exploits the workers. You are stealing from people. Now you're at odds because of deep-rooted moral foundations.

So there's a lot of reasons people hate each other, right? Can I add a comment? Yeah. Your point on art. Do you know who used to be really, really good at art and science? The church, the Catholic church. How was Vatican II for you guys, though? I feel like you guys gave some of it up.

Oh, yeah. That's why I said used to. I think we're reclaiming some of that. Like, I'm sure there's a bunch of trad cats watching your show who like the traditional Latin mass, who want to get back to the beauty of that tradition the beauty of the artwork and the cathedrals and all of that i was just when we lost some of the religiosity the faith we lost our stronghold on on cultural excellence yeah the original culture war yeah i was just reading an article about uh a seminary in, I believe, saying that they're having to build new apartments and dorms because they are getting millennial men who want to go into the priesthood after years and years of decline.

I mean, I think there is a shift. I think largely we've talked about this. People crave some kind of structure and direction. You don't actually want to be dominated by authority. But on the other hand, people want to believe that there is authority uh in dominated by authority but on the other hand people want to believe that there is good there is evil and i think this uh this generational shift towards queer towards uh relationships that have fewer structures to like i don't really think i have to you know comply with any sort of uh social norms at all i think that is sort of the divisive part of the youngest generation.

Wokeness proves that a lot of people crave authority. They beg for it. They want to be told what to do and what to think. And wokeness exploits that within people. Some people are leaders. Some people are followers. And there's no negative to being either. Some people say, look, I just want to work hard. I want to be a good, good, provide good service to my fellow man. You let me know how I can best serve my fellow people. And that's totally fine. Some people say, you know what? I think I can help you better serve your neighborhood, your community and your world. And those are leaders. What ends up happening is you have people who I really do think many of them want to do good, easily exploited by corrupt ideologies. But

because right now you have very liberty minded individuals on the right and collective minded individuals on the left, the libertarian post post liberal or conservatives don't want to go to these people and say, I will tell you how to live your life. They want to say, let me give you the information to free you. And they say, no, I want to be told what to do. And so you're never going to. It goes back to what I said before. I know that this is controversial even on the right, but I just don't believe that there's any such thing as neutrality.

I don't think that we can create this sort of like even playing field, this vacuum. I think something is going to fill it and it's either going to be right or it's going to be wrong. It's either going to be good or it's going to be evil. There's not, there's not, the rest is just an exercise in moral relativism, but it's really just right or wrong. And so if you're looking at the good of society,

like we have, we're so afraid as conservatives of using the power of government because we are limited government minded people, right? Like we don't want to have this huge big daddy government. But because of that, we actually overcompensate and we don't take advantage of the powers in government that are that are justly given to government officials by the people. So you get leftists in office. They're not worried. They're they're unconcerned with wielding their power. And yet oftentimes conservatives don't want to do that because they're like, oh, just using the power of government, just using the power of government

bureaucrats. We've demonized so much when the left does it that we don't want to do it ourselves. And I think that's completely wrong. If conservatives want, if we want an ordered society, conservatives have to understand that we're going to have to fill that vacuum with indoctrination and with the government a little bit or the left is going to do it. This is a problem I see a lot of people on the anti-woke side. They're like, indoctrination in schools is wrong. And I thought about it. I talked about this. We talked about it a few months ago. I'm like, it actually isn't wrong. What's wrong is it's bad indoctrination. We absolutely do want to indoctrinate children with American values. Hello, children. It is good

to have free speech. It is good to have freedom of religion. It is good to have a free press. It is good to have the presumption is good to have freedom of religion it is good to have a free press it is good to have the presumption of innocence that's indoctrination but what would happen we rely on the parents to teach the kids so by the time they get to the school it's not the teacher that has to teach the kid that it's not shouldn't be the teacher's job send their kids to school and they're like two they said they spend like an hour a day with their kids families even even even well-intentioned familiesed families, if you put your kid through the traditional tract of daycare, pre-preschool, whatever it's called, like TK, pre-K, kindergarten, they're fully formed by the education system. That's the problem. If the parent isn't teaching

the kids these 10 commandments or right and wrong or things like that, by the time they get to school, they don't know. So they'll just listen to any authority. And maybe these people, these libertarians are like, I don't want to be that guy because I know it's not right to take advantage of you. And someone else is like, I will. Don't worry about it. That's why when it comes to the neutrality question, which I think you're correct on, Ten Commandments or Marxism, I'm like, man, I would much rather have the Ten Commandments than Marxism. And I'll take it. I agree that there's no neutrality, true neutral, because I think what's happening is if it's a scale and you've got like good and evil and then the middle, you've got neutral. It's always moving.

So it's moving so fast between the boat that it looks like it's in the middle because it's oscillating so quickly. So you can kind of find a balance between good and evil within yourself. You know, we have to kill animals to eat them that's if you ever look an animal in the eyes before you kill it like that's a pretty evil thing i disagree well what if it's your cat like i mean it becomes your cat why would you kill you exactly what because you wouldn't because you would think it would be evil but but you could kill your cow so like we just kind of accept that certain evil violent then let's say like peace and violence we have these

two things and then in the middle there's neutral and and but it's like we're always a balance of of both but if you can get the balance in order then it you can kind of seem neutral i think but you're still both you're still going to be one or the other at all times i i guess i look at it a little bit differently i look at it as it's a constant tug of war between good and evil on that spectrum and so the closest the closer we can get it to permanently being up at good, then when it does have that fluctuation, it's still not quite as bad as dipping all the way down to evil. Yeah, like killing a cow is not evil. Killing a cow for fun to torture the animal is evil. Killing it to eat is not right. That's the distinction.

Humans have had to justify that killing animals is okay, because that's how we survive understand it which makes which means it literally is yeah it's fine to us but you know yes is it to god god doesn't want us to do factory farming i'll tell you that i mean the bible says it is yeah i just dominion over animals i asked god if he would if it would judge me and it said for factory farming you'll be judged i think that's a highly biased and uh ill-informed position maybe maybe because you need you need like so what i what i would say to that is i think you've I think that's a highly biased and ill-informed position. Maybe it was wrong. Because you need, like, so what I would say to that is I think you've probably seen a handful of shock content videos that make you believe farming is done in a certain way. But before you can make a statement like that, you need to actually go to one of these so-called factory farms and actually investigate for yourself whether or not what they've told you on the internet is true. Have you seen the videos of them, like, picking up the little pigs and smashing them on the

ground because they won't stop making noise? Is that like showing a video of a murderer and saying all humans are murderers? Well, I'm just asking, have you seen that video? I've seen them. And those people are bad people. Have you seen the pools of blood and feces that pool up and pollute the environment outside? I've also seen videos of people of various races doing bad things. And I don't blame every person of those races for the actions of an individual.

Showing me a video of one guy bashing a pig does not make me think all farms are evil. Factory farms, not all farms. Farming is cool. Factory farming. And what does factory farming mean? It's when you got them locked up in a house and you're shoving antibiotics in. And you could be referring to three farms. That's my point.

So you need to figure out. Industrialized farming where you've. Have you ever gone... Cap. No. And that's my point. And they wouldn't let drones fly over those things. Instead of taking a strong moral position on something you haven't investigated...

I've investigated it from a distance, but I haven't been one. But so, like, I could pull up a video where it's like the polar bears are dying, and the environmentalists show you 100 videos of polar bears that are gaunt looking, but they're lying all the time. What they do is they take a really old polar bear on his deathbed, which is normal, take a video of it and say,

this poor polar bear is starving to death. They're tricking you. That's what National Geographic did. You didn't make that up. That's a real thing that happened. Remember that very popular photograph and video of the gaunt polar bear? It was just an old polar bear.

It was an old polar bear. They knew it was dying. They blamed it on climate change, but it was just like, no, the thing was was like aged and they don't tell you that polar bears can swim like ridiculously far distance they're almost aquatic mammals my point is this i agree with you it's bad when you see a video of a guy torturing animals and stuff and i blame that person for torturing animals i don't know if it's indicative of all large-scale farming it's the antibiotics that they use in mass.

They'll hit things with antibiotics before they're sick, just so they don't get sick. And then that makes people sick. But that's not torturing an animal. That's like a human error. You know what I mean? They'll have like mastitis on the cow nipples because they hook them up to machines and they just 24-7, they're just, I don't know how many hours a day. Have you ever gone to a dairy farm?

No. I've been to like eight and I've. Have you ever gone to a dairy farm? No. I've been to like eight and I've never seen that. Which ones? I went to California. I went to three different ones. I've been to a few, well, I went to a bunch throughout California. I've been to some in, I think, Texas. I don't know if there's a beef, that might be beef cattle.

So we've, out here, the farms don't have any of that and we've been to like three or four of those so my shout out to all the organic farmers out there but this is real people don't people don't understand this like i was confused by this when i went to the first dairy farm ever in california and there was no fence and the cows were all eating and i said what if the cows leave and the farmer goes where would they go and i was like well i don't know like what if they just like wander off and he goes but where and i'm like a random direction and leave and he goes but there's no food there and i'm like are you saying cows won't leave and he goes yeah why would they leave the food's right here and i was just like and he was like you ever hear the same till the cows come home

cows aren't gonna go wander off and die in the woods, bro. He didn't say bro. But like, that's the idea. Like you think cows are so dumb. They're going to be like, might as well just go die. They're not like looking to take a vacation. They're not going to like hit the Oregon Trail and try to like build up civilization. I heard there's great surfing if I just keep walking.

But so what he pointed out was the milking stations, the cows choose to go into. Because they're uncomfortable. Right. They build a bunch of milk up and the cows are stations, the cows choose to go into. Because they're uncomfortable. Right. They build a bunch of milk up and the cows are like, and they walk in and the machine then milks them and the cows walk back out and start eating again. And the one thing I could say is probably sad or cruel is the taking of the calf from the mother. Oh my God.

It's brutal. But I also don't think it's evil. I think lions eat animals. Cats eat animals. The world as it is, as nature is, is that... Is it evil when a rabbit eats a flower? No, it's destructive. It's not evil.

I don't think the word evil is really even that valuable these days. I actually wouldn't even agree that it's destructive. The rabbit eats the flower and then turns the flower into more rabbits. That's creative. It destroys the flower to create, yeah. But it's more creation. Creation and destruction, you know. Or does the flower serve its ultimate purpose by feeding the rabbit and creating more rabbits?

That is, when people like animals are here for me to eat, I don't. Otherwise it would just wilt and die, and then it would just go back into the soil. And actually some of the seeds actually evolved specifically so that through the digestion of the animal, it sprinkles the seeds around. Meaning many of these plants actually do want to be eaten. I mean, fruits exist for a reason that the plant will drop something that is full of sugar so that something will eat it and carry its seeds and help it propagate yeah man i'm concerned with factory farming high use of antibiotics feces and blood contaminating the environment i i get all of that secrecy but i

think i'm concerned that's propaganda. I'm with you on the antibiotic overuse. I think that there's been a lot of, there's been a lot of studies. We were talking about this before we went on air. I'm pretty, I'm pretty based on, on big food and big pharma. And I think our overuse, our society's overuse of antibiotics is like wrecked our guts and caused a lot of chronic health conditions. And that because there's incredible profit movative on both sides, like from big food and then big pharma to like circulate this,

like problem solution, problem solution. Like I agree with you on that. I don't know a lot about the factory farming stuff that you guys were talking about, but just the widespread use of antibiotics to prevent problems. Like that's objectively a problem, right? Yeah.

All right, let's go to super chats. If you haven't already, would you kindly smash that like button, subscribe to this channel, share the show't already, would you kindly smash that like button? Subscribe to this channel. Share the show with your friends if you really do like it and become a member at Timcast dot com by clicking join us and support our work. Let's read what you got. Jake Moore says, hey, guys, you should look into the auto key card federal case that ended

today. Basically, people were convicted of trafficking machine guns. Said machine guns were metal cards with drawings on them. Yep. So the guy's name is, I think it's Matt Hoover, and he had a YouTube channel,

and they had these metal cards with drawings on them. If you took those things and you cut out those drawings, stencils, and then did something with them, it would turn the gun into a machine gun or something.

So they said selling them, in fact, was selling conversion kits, which is illegal. And then, like, I guess the parts were also bottle openers or something like that. Like, it technically could be a bottle opener, but could also be used to convert a weapon. This is insane because they were selling basically metal cards with drawings on them. And they called it a conversion starter kit so the question then is if you post an image of that online are you posting a diagram to construct a like where's the line well the government uh i think it was like eight women four men said yep you did it you're going to jail crazy that's actually a huge huge problem because you can't sell a piece of metal

with lines drawn on it that's so weird i'm concerned with creating a black market of information let's just never forget that the director of the etf was like i'm not a firearms expert or like this is what they do that's what you testified this week like remember when the 3d gun blueprints went around online and it was like literally just a blueprint a piece of paper and they were like no you can't you a piece of paper. And they were like, no, you can't, you can't let that circulate. The market's still huge.

It's just the media is not talking about it anymore. And the 3D printers are better now. Yeah. It's what Ian said. It creates a black market of information.

It doesn't mean that people who want to use it aren't going to be able to find it. It means that law-abiding people are going to stay away from it. And it's a law you can't enforce, which makes a mockery

of the system that makes the law. All right. Brandon Allen says, so much long blonde hair on Tim cast tonight. I like it. Especially Ian. You should see Tim take the beanie off. Then again,

it's like, he's like a mermaid. You guys ever watch it? I'm sure time when Finn, he wears, yeah, he takes it off and big golden blonde hair comes up. Let's see what we got here.

Um, as a federal, he says, if Milo is actually there, ask him if he's ever been to Transnistria to see his creepy Daily Stormer friends and it's really just about

the age of consent. Oh, yikes. Milo was supposed to be here, but he couldn't come. I don't know why. So we had him booked, but I don't know. Second information,

he had something with his eye where it was like... I was going to tell him I was going to call myself Ian Milanopoulos. Yeah, that's what it it was his hair is not as long and blonde though so i feel like this was better yes this is definitely better graffi says that ufo needs to be peckable at some point what do you mean like we should put a ufo in the chicken coop it'll just pop off it'd be so funny this podcast is supported by talk. When my husband came home from his military deployment, readjusting was hard for all of us.

Thankfully, I found Talkspace. Talkspace provides professional support from licensed therapists and psychiatric providers online. Military members, veterans, and their dependents ages 13 and older can get fast access to providers, all from the privacy of their computers or smartphones. Aging and Older Well, my husband and I started seeing a couples therapist through Talkspace too. Talkspace works with most major insurers, including Tricare. Match with a licensed therapist today at Talkspace.com slash military. Go to Talkspace.com slash military to get started today. That's Talkspace.com slash military. David Toronto says, not everyone is deserving of love, Ian.

Hmm. That's an interesting question. Do you think everyone's deserving of love? I think the answer is actually yes. Oh, of course is deserving of love, Ian. Hmm, that's an interesting question. Do you think everyone's deserving of love? I think the answer is actually yes. Oh, of course, yes. I think yes. Even like, it's tough because I know there's some really depraved and evil people out there,

but I would refer to God's love. Yeah. You know, maybe not humanly, but something beyond, you know. Self-love, you know. Yeah, self-love. There's lots of different types of love. I don't think everyone's deserving of trust, and i think people mix up love and trust right like you can love someone and know better

than to trust you can also love someone and send them to prison loving someone means that you like respect their dignity like human to human love i mean means that you respect their dignity and their rights it doesn't mean that you let them get away with stuff or like them like like and love are very different things but i i look at it this way. Let's say someone is an evil murderer. He targeted children, killed kids. I can certainly understand humans saying, I will not give love to you. But would you think that that person is still deserving of God's love? Yeah. I mean, the example, if someone's on death row like people pray for death row inmates all the time that is love praying for them it doesn't mean that they

should be let out it doesn't mean that they shouldn't suffer the consequences of their action like but that is love i think that's very different than being like friends with someone or even liking someone like you can show someone love god's love because like in the whole christian worldview right like none of us are deserving of god's love and he loves us anyway and that doesn't mean that we aren't bound to follow like rules and consequences but that kind of like we order our society after but yeah i think people are all people are deserving of love right on all right let's see we got trash panda says stand your ground don't buy bud unless they apologize but if they mean to enter the culture war let it begin here oh i i i will take an apology that if that statement

they put out if they include it at the beginning we are sorry for the sponsorship of dylan mulvaney i just say okay yeah i'll buy some bud right now i love dylan i love that he's culture jamming and pissing people off i love it he is he's a master if it wasn't targeting children i might agree oh i can't stand no that should be be condemned every step of the way. I like culture jamming. I like people who, as I say, figuratively throw a pie. I think Elon Musk is a master of it, but

you got to leave the kids out of it, man. Let kids be kids. Let them grow up. Let them learn. It's tough because kids are watching this right now. So you just got to be judicious and I don't think it's a big conversation. It's tough when you're alone and you have 100 million followers when it's just you and i don't think this is a big conversation stop when you're alone and you have 100 million followers when it's just you and you can't relate to anyone let's uh let's read some more what do we got uh scott smith says tim and crew don't be surprised at the next moving

goal post tech tech uh techopoly policy no dissenting advertisers here's some monopoly monies towards free domistan thank you sir do you mean no uh dissing advertisers. Here's some monopoly monies towards Freedomistan. Thank you, sir. Do you mean no dissing advertisers? No dissenting advertisers. It sounds like you're saying you can't advertise that you're upset with YouTube. Whereas I think you mean no insulting or dissing advertisers. No insulting advertisers. That's interesting. I loved it when Michael Bloomberg sponsored my channel.

Yeah, he was dumping so much money into YouTube. This was the 2020 cycle. He was in the primary in 2019 or whatever. And early 2020. And people, was it 2020? I think, I don't know. When was it? Yeah, he ran in 2020.

Yeah. And people were like, Tim, I'm seeing a whole bunch of Bloomberg ads on your videos and I don't like him. And I'm like, I'll take his money. I don't care. Dude, there's Bud Light videos. Bud Light ads all over your videos like right away yep where are the rfk jr ads it's all i want to know we gotta start sharing his stuff rfk jr v vivek ramaswamy

ramaswamy as tron trump would call him d99 did says tim needs to watch the anime dr stone humanity gets fossilized for 3 000 years and rebuilds from scratch with modern day knowledge. Speechless. I've seen it. I've recommended it. It's really cool. It's this really smart dude. Humanity gets fossilized. Some people don't. Thousands of years later, everyone's kind of like tribal level intelligence. But this one dude is super smart. And correct me if I'm wrong, because I haven't seen enough of it. But he basically, I don't know why they got fossilized. Maybe that's been revealed and you guys know they like turned to stone but he was so smart he like did something that as soon as he turned to stone it triggered the events by which it would defossilize him because he's a genius

anyway the story is he's like okay we're gonna make a cell phone here's what we got to do and then they talk about all the things you have to get in order to make a cell phone he like makes vacuum tubes and glass and it's it's really cool it's like a science show for kids but it's how how would you make something if you were in the middle of the woods you know what's that movie where they are like frozen for 100 years and then everyone's really stupid and they wake up in theocracy i feel like there's a similar correlation between these storylines would you put yourself in cryostasis liz to wake up in a thousand years no i'm not living for this life i'm living with my eyes on eternity or at least that's what i try to do yeah and people

need to realize this too if you if yeah would you do it no i got too much to do now maybe if i was older here's what would happen imagine if someone from the year 1800 appeared right now in this time they would not know how to communicate they wouldn't know how to move from place to place they'd be going around asking for a horse and people but we don't have any it's like well how am i supposed to get around cars what is that and how does it work i have no idea how do i learn about what's going on in the world the internet i do you have a newspaper no we don't so if you went uh 100 200 300 years in the future you'd be like i need to get online and figure out what's going on and there'd be some kid going online what if they took you to an underground bunker and there's all these dudes they're like we are from the future and we need to put you in cryostasis

because we need you in a thousand years would you do it i don't know dude they if if it'd be really hard to convince me that was reality so probably not i'd be like i don't know you we know you're gonna say this i don't trust you that's why we have this and you'll be like what is whatever it was more i just i don't think there's any way to actually convince someone that something is that fantastical is real they told us he was gonna say that that's what the history books say he said he was gonna say and they wouldn't be able to do anything about it all right let's read some more killian ch Chapman says, my favorite beer was Modelo before this stunt.

I will admit that I didn't realize that Modelo was AB product, but after I figured it out, I haven't had it since. Well, I think it's that Anheuser-Busch owns like half of it or something like that. I'm not entirely sure, but I think Modelo is partially owned.

Whereas like Anheuser-Busch has products they literally own. And you want to look it up real quick? I'm pretty sure it's half owned i think that's the issue all right cody scofield says i would exclusively buy bud light if they gave out an apology commercial frame by frame just like the bp south park commercial oh hands down if they apologize like a good strong apology like dylan mulvaney we believe is like over the top and it was wrong of us to do this we're sorry we think kids should be kids we shouldn't have like and they really hammer it on i would this house would be an anheuser-busch house we would we would buy all

their beers for all of our guests and be like they did right by us if they simply apologize i will buy some beers it looks like modelo is owned by InBev. 100 or half? It's the parent company. Oh, okay. Well, there you go. Worse than I thought. That's the company that owns Budweiser. All right.

What do we got? I'm surprised they didn't have Dylan Mulvaney sponsor their seltzer, right? Something that made more sense. Something that almost made sense. I'm not sure I would be okay with it because again the of the audience's age but like still why did you sacrifice your name such a nutty thing to watch i just don't understand how this conversation went down mark uh giadetti says tim team up with jeremy sydney liz and other creators and take legal action against youtube about taking down the videos we viewers will pay the legal cost it's not about winning the case it's about publicity i don't i don't know if i

agree with that statement actually i think actually there's an argument It's not about winning the case. It's about publicity. I don't know if I agree with that statement, actually. I think, actually, there's an argument to be made for winning the case. We do not break the rules that YouTube has. We have a contract with YouTube. YouTube has come to us. We have come to them. And we've agreed, if I provide X, they will provide Y. We make content that appears on YouTube. YouTube sells ads against that content. It's a mutual partnership contract like any other business contract. YouTube told us, however, if you do these things, then we will take action against you and negatively impact your work relationship with us. YouTube sent a notice to Jeremy and Sydney saying, we think this violates our policy, so we're taking it down. Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. Hold on. If I have a contract with you that says you will deliver me oak and not birch, and then you come

to me and say, you know what? I think that might be birch. So I'm not paying you. You can't do that. You have a contract. You will get sued. So there is a strong argument to be made that YouTube must either act 100% in alignment with what their policies are or not at all. That is to say, YouTube must definitively come out and say outright, yes, this did breach the contract. Here's why. And the reason why I think they don't do that, we saw it with Alex Berenson when he sued Twitter.

They told him, here are the parameters by which you will be banned. And then when he got banned outside of those parameters, they were in breach of contract. He won. If they come to us and say, overtly, you did breach the contract, I can then argue, prove it in court because we have a contractual agreement to make money for each other. And you are in breach of contract now. And then they'll have to justify it. They'll say, yes, we can prove it. The answer is they can't prove that we did anything wrong. We didn't. We were talking about what someone else said. We did not break those rules, but they need to remove the content because Budweiser's mad. I think they're in a dangerous territory where they're opening themselves up to litigation. It would be really interesting

to enter a suit in that capacity because there may be a temporary injunction on removal of content in that period. Meaning if Jeremy Hambly files a lawsuit against YouTube saying that this is a breach of contract, a judge may say, until the resolution of this case, you are blocked from further removing content from Jeremy Hambly. That could be interesting. Yeah. Yeah. Until the resolution of the case.

That'd be super interesting. Because that's what our notice said. It said you may be in violation. they they intentionally want to be vague just like they're intentionally vague with their standards like i do the same thing i don't i'm not trying to be bombastic i'm not trying to to violate their terms of service i understand i don't agree with the terms that they set that doesn't mean that i'm going to go in there and violate them because i don't agree like i know what their terms are i try to work around it but but it's not even that it's like when talking about these issues in particular the spirit of the rule the intent of the rule is they don't want someone coming on and being extremely in like insightful to call someone a

derogatory slur or or or deride them intentionally to cause pain no they would prefer that they're insightful in right in the correct way. And so, but the way I refer to it is be academic, right? When we make an argument about gender ideology, it's not because we hate anybody. It's because we love them. When there are kids who are suffering from something, we want to help them in the proper way. So when you look at what happened in Europe, they abandoned the child sex change surgery and puberty blockers because it was hurting them. So out of a place of love, we're saying we need to stop hurting these kids. We've seen the evidence out of Europe.

They shut down Tavistock. The Scandinavian countries have abandoned this. It clearly is causing more harm than good for the sake of the betterment of these children. And for these individuals, we want them to get better treatment. If YouTube strikes you for that, now they're in breach of contract, hands down, hands down. So I think anytime someone gets a strike, they need to file a lawsuit immediately. File a lawsuit and just say, look, we have a contract. You've breached it.

If the court agrees that we are wrong, we accept those. It's up to a judge to decide. But imagine a world, we're in this world right now where when you sign up for YouTube, it's a mutual contract. YouTube needs our content in order to sell ads. We need their ads to generate revenue. We need their platform to host our content. It's a mutual agreement. For YouTube to just say, we're going to breach your contract outright, good luck. That's not how the business world works. You can't do that. I haven't read the entire terms. Do they have a clause where it says they can ban anyone at any time for no reason yes but i i don't believe that actually is uh fly it just seems so illegitimate the reason it's in

writing it seems ridiculous so that was the issue with alex berenson i think it was because they said here's what constitutes a violation of our rules at that that point, it sort of, I could be wrong, but I believe that nullifies that we can do whatever we want whenever we want. Because there's an expectation among the individual that the working agreement does not mean you will arbitrarily ban someone. It means you will only be banned for a reason. And then they have to specify what that reason is. One of the reasons Twitter would often say you're banned for blank was because they knew if they gave a reason, they could be challenged in court more easily. I don't think not giving a reason is going to fly.

I think we saw Alex Berenson won. He got reinstated because of it. I mean, isn't that why they use these terms like hate speech and harassment? Because they can just define that on the fly as anything they want. So they can actually target people based on their opinions and their ideology or their dissent from the prevailing radical leftist ideology.

And they can just say, oh, we've decided that this is harassment because it hurts somebody's feelings. We've decided that this is hateful because we think your views on sex or gender are not what we think they should be.

So we think it's targeted at someone individually. It's intentionally vague. But I got one for you. If the videos where we highlight what matt walsh says constitutes a violation because we play what matt walsh says if a video of donald trump making a statement constitutes a violation because a news outlet i think this happened to the hill arising they showed a clip of donald trump talking who talked about the election 2020 so they took the clip down that That's really interesting because David Pakman had Mike Lindell on his channel and Mike Lindell

said all of the exact same things. And there was no enforcement action proving YouTube is breaching its contract with the hill rising for this removal by allowing some people to display that same content and others not to. So it's time to start filing those lawsuits to, to be like, look, I don't hate YouTube. I want you to be better, but YouTube, if we have an agreement and you breach that, I'm sorry, that's not legal. That's a civil tort violation and it needs to be adjudicated. It's, it's, it's not going to be, be solved until people actually file the paperwork. And if it turns out legally we're in the wrong, oh, well then so be it. But you have to file in a court and have a judge decide.

We'll see what happens. Alright, what do we got? Let's grab some more superchats. Garhant says, Please Tim, send Ian to summer Bible camp. This is the last superchat you will ever get from me. Look me up in a... I'm a whale.

I'm atheist but ian's ignorance on faith is so cringe it's so jerkish you need a button to tell tell him to court insulting people you know perhaps a little heart harsh garhant but i i do think ian you often have a bit of invective in your speech when you're talking about religion tell me more about that well i think when you bring it up you you bring things up in a way that seem to be intentionally insulting to Christians. Instead of being academic and asking them, you say outright, you're worshiping a false idol.

Jesus is not God. Instead of saying, I never flipped over one of Joel Osteen's tables. Sure. But I'm saying like, that's what Jesus did. He went into the church where they were selling things and he flipped a table over because he was like, this is not about money. This is about God. Maybe the appropriate way is to say, okay, I'm not a Christian, but you're Catholic. How do you explain to me the difference between

worshiping the human of Jesus and God? Because I don't understand, right? That would be a more respectful way to approach the subject in which you're not familiar, as opposed to saying, no, you're wrong. You know what I mean? i'm not saying that example specifically i think you're right it probably like the humility of me just becoming a student of religion would be way more effective i think i wasn't insulted by you i mean if you want my perfectly honest analysis i thought you didn't know much about what about the ten commandments or much about christianity so it was like the absence of information that you were making a uh um a conclude drawing a conclusion that was just kind of wildly incorrect but i didn't i didn't feel animosity and that i just felt like a little

ignorance about the topic i think we're having kurt cameron on at some point i could it could be totally wrong about that and i don't want to say that because like he's such a big famous guy and i'm kind of like maybe i shouldn't say that unless i know for sure but i'm really i'm hoping that's the case like i don't know that'd be interesting i normally don't like to mention guests but i think he would be he would be one of the best but let me just double check and is he bringing candace camera that's what i was wondering i just want to know let's do it part of being ignorant is like if you're in a conversation with someone and you're ignorant and you're humble about it it never really bothers the other person because they can tell. And it's like, let's just talk about it and we'll learn together.

But when people are listening and they can't respond, it's not, then they'll be like, God, that ignorant guy, I'm not able to say that. Just listen. And I can't because he's on TV. And so I understand the frustration from people on the other side of the screen. I actually think it's one of the nicest things that we have totally lost in our culture to be able to sit down and be like, well, listen, our worldview is pretty different, right?

Like me being a Catholic Christian, you not. That changes the way that we view almost every situation from each other. But to be able to actually sit down and have a conversation, that's what's been completely lost in our culture, not just religiously, but politically. Where like, you know,

I'm going to James Madison University instead of the people, you know, who disagree with me coming and saying like, he is not. I don't know why I thought you may have manifested. Can you hear us? We need you to come on the show now. Now, maybe he will bring your sister. I want to talk to her about the Hallmark Channel.

I'll just I'll just say this right now. I thought I thought we may have booked him, but like Kirk is probably like someone's heading up. Are you going on Tim? So he's like, I have no idea what you're talking about. But hold on. Just just just just just to to wrap that up he's not on the schedule i wish he was on the schedule kirk cameron we desperately need you to come so that you me and ian can sit down and you can explain things to ian beautiful let's do a culture war podcast in the day and then if you want to stick around we'll come on the show

on friday night and talk we should we should bring your sister because got stuff to talk about with her and bring your sister candace i love you full house one of the best shows of all time because of you oh yeah she's she's a delight um no my thought was just totally throwing you off by your random calls no i'm just doing like a hard hard transition there um i appreciate having conversations i think like listen like i said i'm going to this college campus and instead of people coming and saying like coming up to the microphone, there's a literal open mic

at this event. It's a public event, open to anyone. Instead of coming up and being like, Liz, you say X, Y, Z, and I think you're wrong because of A, B, C,

and, like, trying to destroy my argument. Like, come and try to destroy my argument. Like, we should be having these debates. But we've gotten to a point in our culture where

they say that my opinion is violence, that it's harming them, and that they're unwilling to even engage. Like, I think this is the most fun thing ever to be able to sit here and be like, yeah, we mutually respect each other. We're having conversation about very different worldviews. Let's understand. Let's argue. Let's even tell each other like, no, you're totally wrong. And here's why. And still

no animosity. Like that's actually what makes a civilization because everyone's not going to be of one mind on every issue. But talking about it is like great i got i got a good one milo hoffman says you are arguing about the wrong thing public schools should not exist government has no more business running our schools and they do running our churches we need separation of school and state agreed yeah i'm not against that but in the reality that they do currently exist how do we do with them i do like i agree though by the way i know that this is like even beyond what base conservatism is. I said this to my I said this to my producer the other day. I was like, pretty soon I'm going to come out and say we shouldn't even have public

schools and all the conservatives are going to try to distance themselves from me. And five years from now, they're going to be like, oh, that girl was right. Because, I mean, what are they doing? They're just they're just indoctrination centers, but indoctrinating bad stuff. So Lothair Mordred Shirk Media says, Tim, I loved your content, but I view Marxism and Christianity as hypocritical and very destructive. I think Marxism is. I actually think my view of Christian, I'm not a Christian.

And my view of Christianity is, let me just, I'll tell you the same old story I've told a million times. Sodom and Gomorrah, if there's but one righteous person, right? That is the root of the presumption of innocence. So my view of Christianity is that we have, our founding fathers in this country, crafted a set of morals and guidelines rooted in Christian morals and ethics that we all basically agree are really, really good. I think you got to watch out for charlatans.

You got to watch out for people who are like, I'm a good Christian. And they're actually like evil narcissists who are trying to accumulate power. But Marxism is just inherently bad. And the radical theories, critical theory, critical gender theory, they're all really, really bad, divisive. They breed hate and animosity. And the moral framework of Christianity is actually something most people would agree on, even Bill Maher. He may not know. I'd love to have the conversation with him. But like I mentioned, the presumption of innocence literally came from the Bible.

Blackstone was inspired by this, Blackstone's formulation. Ben Franklin said it later. You don't have to believe in all intents of Christianity to recognize the moral framework there has benefited us greatly and created individual rights, the pursuit of happiness, the self-governance. I mean, tremendously amazing things. It's natural

law. What you're talking about is natural law. Like, when I said Edmund Burke's philosophy underpinned our Constitution, the Constitution was built on British law, right? Like, on English common law, which was rooted in natural law. Yeah, I think- We have to get back to that.

It's what Prager called cut flower. I think he called it cut flower politics or ideology. I always get it wrong, but he basically described, you have this beautiful flower and you snip it from its roots and hold it and show off how beautiful it is. And then in a few days it's dead

because you've cut it from its roots. And our roots come from this Judeo-Christian moral framework that I think are beneficial. I don't think that mindless collectivism is a good thing. I think you can find that anywhere. I think you can find good churches and bad churches. I think you can find charlatans in Christianity who pretend to be good, moral, pious individuals when they're actually just trying to steal from you. And then I think people often will look at the worst and assume that of all people.

So I don't like to do that. I like to judge people as an individual. Someone who is Christian, that doesn't inherently instantly mean I think they're a good person. And I would love to have you on the show, Joel Osteen. I mentioned flipping a table over and using church for money, what Jesus did in

the temple. So like, I know you have a multi-million dollar giant mega church where you make, I don't know how many hundreds of millions of dollars per year, but I still want to talk to you about God. Well, right on. I think it would be cool. We should definitely try and reach out to Kirk Cameron's people and do a culture war podcast discussion, maybe even Seamus. So we'll wrap there. If you haven't already, would you kindly smash that like button, subscribe to the channel, share the show, become a member at TimCast.com. You can follow the show at TimCast IRL. You can follow me personally at TimCast. Liz, do you want to shout anything out? Yeah, thanks so much for having me. You guys have been great. You guys, if you're in the area, the event at James Madison University on Wednesday,

the 26th is at 6pm. can go to lizwheeler.com to get your tickets support if you can't be there in person watch but subscribe to my show if you would too at lizwheeler.com or wherever you listen to your podcast thanks so much for having me this has been great yeah it's been cool to have you on I'm Hannah Clever-Emmel I'm a writer for timcast.com you should go to timcast.com click on the read tab

you can see all the work from me from Chris Burtman from all of our awesome journalists if you want to follow along with the news on social media you should follow at timcast news on twitter and instagram it's excellent if you want to follow me personally you can find me on instagram at hannahclare.b and twitter at hc brumlow thanks so much guys thank you i you follow me ian crossland.net at ian crossland anywhere on social media i'll be uh take human action tour.com take human action tour.com i'll be there apractiontour.com. Takehumanactiontour.com. I'll be there April 29th.

That's next Saturday in Austin. So I hope to see you there. Liz, thank you for talking about neutrality. This is going to be, has me thinking deeply because I've been stuck in this oscillating evil good mind, but I think you might be right

that you can oscillate above. So thank you. Thank you. I'll be thinking a lot about that. Yeah, this is great. I really enjoyed it. And if people want to follow you on Twitter, it's Liz underscore Wheeler. It is. It is. Liz underscore Wheeler. All right. Hey, I'm Kellen.

I do post-production for Timcast and fill in for Surge on Fridays. Follow me at Kellen PDL. And this was a good one. I always like when the religion stuff comes up. Yeah, I have fun. All right, everybody. Thanks for hanging out. We'll have clips throughout the weekend and then we'll see you all on Monday.