Will Cain Country - Dave Rubin Hits Back On DEI, PLUS Has UConn Solidified Itself As A True Blue Blood Basketball School?

Episode Date: April 9, 2024

Story #1: Should men continue to infiltrate women’s sports as claimed by National Championship winning women’s basketball head coach Dawn Staley? Story #2: Is it racist, as said by Charlamagne tha God, to criticize DEI? And is it ok to wear black face as suggested by actor Billy Dee Williams? A conversation with host of The Rubin Report and creator of Locals.com Dave Rubin. Story #3: Is Morgan Wallen going to jail? Is UConn now a blue blood basketball school?   Tell Will what youthought about this podcast by emailing [e-mail] Subscribe to The Will Cain Show on YouTube here: Watch The Will Cain Show! Follow Will on Twitter: @WillCain Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Is Morgan Wallin going to jail? Is Yukon now a bluebud? Is it okay to wear blackface, as suggested by famous actor Billy D. Williams? Is it racist, as said by Charlemagne the God, to criticize D.E.I. Is Caitlin Clark to be torn down by Sue Bird? and the stars of the WNBA, and should men infiltrate women's sports as suggested by the head coach of the national champion

South Carolina women's basketball team, Don Staley. One, two, and three. You don't want to miss it all. With the host of the Rubin Report, Dave Rubin. It is the Will Kane show streaming live at Fox News.com on the Fox News YouTube channel, the Fox News Facebook page, always on demand at Apple or on Spotify by just hitting subscribe. Or if you prefer to watch the Will Kane show, just hit subscribe on YouTube.

The link is right under this live stream. And you can catch not only exclusive interviews like that with Dwayne, The Rock, Johnson, Stephen A. Smith, Dave Portnoy, Tony Robbins, or Jordan Peterson. But you can also watch the Will Kane show in YouTube shorts. You can watch it in its entirety in past episodes. You can watch versions of Off the Rails. with Will and Pete. Just hit subscribe on YouTube to the Will Kane Show. Success. Lived up to the hype. My personal rotten tomatoes review on the total solar eclipse, a hit. I live in Dallas, Texas, right in the zone of totality. And let me tell you something, it lived up to expectations.

Maybe that's not cool, but it's true. My wife and I stood outside, as did Violet, the fall Doberman, and we waited. Now, if you weren't a part of the country that got partiality, if you got 70%, 80%, I would understand today if you say bust. But if you lived in the zone of totality, I'd be surprised if you say it was a non-event. The light got weird. You put on your glasses. You watch the moon cover the sun. And then in the moment of totality, it's pitch black. It's total darkness. And the coolest part is that you could remove your glasses and look directly up at the sun, and it looked like an image out of Lord of the Rings. It looked not like a donut, but like an emanating ring, the ring that everyone is searching for, that Gallum has a hold

of. It's just a ring, a thin ring of light up in the sky. It is truly otherworldly. Now, I saw commentators saying it puts you into some humility and context at our place in this greater universe. I have to admit, I had no such deep thoughts. Mine were simply, wow. Violet thinks it's a non-event and isn't this cool. And then when the sun reemerged, to me, the weirdest and coolest part happened. And I don't know if anybody else in totality experienced this. And I don't know if I was blinded by staring at the sun and my other sense is simply enhanced. But the backyard was full of beautiful smells.

It's like the flowers responded to this weird celestial event and pollinated. It smelled wonderful like flowers. And by the way, you know me, green thumb, Will Kane. I loved it. I thought it was awesome. And I thought it was just one of those things that happens every, I don't know, two decades that you can experience. I didn't think it was the result, along with the recent earthquake in the Northeast, along with the hatching of yet another cicada brood, I didn't think that it was the result of climate change. But that's because I'm uninformed and don't watch the view.

I give you Sonny Hosten. all those things together would maybe lead one to believe that you know either climate change exists or something is returning let's quakes I'm not at the mercy of climate change it's on the ground it can't I don't think that it happens and the eclipse

they've known about the eclipse coming because eclipse has happened now you're in a bad spot you're in a tight spot Tommy if your voice of reason is Joy Beyer If you're getting fact-checked by Joy and Whoopie, you've lost the plot.

The weird thing about this is Sonny Hosten is probably the smartest person at that table. And with some experience and personal relationship in my past of knowing Sunny was also the nicest person, one of the nicest people that I've experienced behind the scenes in media. So how does somebody nice and smart end up saying? things that are so incredibly dumb and saying these dumb things and this perhaps i think is the greatest sin with a purity of condescension she had nothing for those facts corrections she had nothing for the fact that earthquakes have no relationship to climate change it wasn't penetrating her talking point just like recently when she was confronted with facts on race with Coleman Hughes, the author of a new book who appeared on The View, her response is overwhelming condescension.

It is the kind of condescension that comes from someone who believes not that they are right, but that they are popular. See, I think Sonny, nice and smart, has been captured by what she believes to be popular in the channel of the river, the mainstream current. But what What she doesn't realize is that the current has flooded and is running out of control. This is the conversation we had yesterday regarding what I think is a big moment for a big star like Dwayne the Rock Johnson to reject the poisoned channel of the river that is the mainstream. With Sunny Austin, you see someone still floating into toxicity. She thinks that what she is saying is not right, but she thinks that what she is saying is something that has an audience. She thinks that what she is saying is popular.

She thinks that what she is saying is mainstream, even as the channel of toxicity pushes you into insanity. And I consider today and say, we need better voices. We need more independence. We need more backbone. We need more thoughtfulness in mainstream media, but we don't because I think we've arrived at the point of exposure. We're not simply Dwayne the Rock Johnson, but normal people standing on the banks of the river go, hmm, I don't like where this thing is headed. In fact, let's dive into that as we explore how women, quote unquote, support women. Story number one.

The men's national basketball championship was last night, the NCAA championship between Yukon and Purdue. And Yukon is once again your national champion. The first back-to-back national champion since 2007. It is probably a safe bet that Yukon has arrived into the club of Blue Bloods. In fact, let's break that down just a little bit later on the Wilcane show. Where's the line? Where's the cusp?

Who's in the club? who's out when it comes to Blue Bloods. But Yukon is your national champion. It'll be fascinating to see where the ratings come in for the men's championship, because it's almost certain to come in less than the women's national championship game, which took place on Sunday. On Sunday, Iowa lost to South Carolina in a game that got something like 18.7 million viewers. It's the highest rated basketball game.

NBA or NCAA, men or women in four years. And it's driven by the Caitlin Clark effect. Caitlin Clark, the star of the Iowa Hawkeyes, is incredible. I struggled with the appropriate adjective and landed on something that is overwhelming. She's more than incredible. She's a phenom. She is a generational talent.

She is original. She is unique. She commands eyeballs in the same way. Tiger Woods. Caitlin Clark has demanded this year with her play that people pay attention to women's basketball, but she has been met this past weekend as she attempted to climb the final peak of the mountain with a weird antipathy from women. Sue Bird, Diana Tarasi, Lynette Woodard, the greats of women's basketball seemingly

rejected Caitlin Clark. Lynette Woodard, who had the previous record for most scored by a women's collegiate basketball player, said she still holds the record. She rejected Caitlin Clark since that time, by the way, Lynette Woodard realizing that she's floating down the toxicity of the channel of the river, looked over to the bank and said, I better climb out. She apologized and said that Caitlin Clark is the great, that she is the record holder. But in the moment, Lynette was saying something that was being echoed. She was reflecting a temperament among WNBA stars and women's basketball players of rejection of Caitlin Clark. Diana Tarasi and Sue Byrd have talked about taking someone else if you were starting a franchise in college basketball. A lady Husky from Yukon over Caitlin Clark, which is insane.

It's insane. It's insane business-wise, capitalism-wise, ticket sales-wise, TV ratings-wise. But it's also insane basketball-wise. and it makes you wonder why what's going on why this rejection of katelyn clark and i'll give you two potential reasons one jealousy just pure common not very notable because a fundamental condition of humanity pure jealousy it's an odd thing to hear that kind of jealousy from an industry that is constantly complained they don't get the same treatment as men talk about that they have to fly commercial, talk to the fact that I have to fly Spirit Airlines, while the men fly private

and make big checks, and the women have to live the life of relative poppers. If you don't want to fly spirit, embrace Caitlin Clark. If you want people to watch women's basketball, embrace Caitlin Clark. But the second potential reason is uglier. It is tribalism. It's twofold. Caitlin Clark's not part of the LGBTQ community. And that's a very big community. in the WNBA. She's not part of the club. She's also not part of the club in that she is white and that race is part of the rejection and criticism of Caitlin Clark. I think that it is undeniable that we have seen that when it comes to criticism from Cheryl Swoops or anyone else among the many who have failed to acknowledge the greatness of Caitlin Clark. Because Caitlin Clark is white, she has not been embraced by so many black commentators and former players. Now, you could point out, well, Tarasi and Sue Bird are white. But there is an overwhelming pull, a desire to, again, get into what they perceive to be the channel of mainstream, to be popular. And anti-whiteness makes you cool even if you are white.

Caitlin Kark's race, I think, is a very plausible reason why, inexplicably, seemingly, she has received criticism and rejection from fellow basketball players, former and current players, of the WNBA. And I think it's another example that shows the canard, the ridiculousness of girl power. Women supporting women. Here you have women tearing down women. And that's not the only example.

Outkicks Dan Zee used to work on the Will Kane show on ESPN. Now it works for Outkick. And he went to the press conference before the national championship game. And he asked South Carolina head coach Don Staley how she felt about transgender athletes, men pretending to be women playing in collegiate sports. Here's was the answer.

One of the major issues facing women's sports right now is the debate discussion topic about the inclusion of transgender athletes, biological males, in women's sports. I was wondering if you would tell me your position on that issue. Damn, you got deep on me.

I, I'm on the, I mean, I'm under the opinion of, of, of, if you're a woman, you should play. If you consider yourself a woman and you want to play sports or vice versa, you should be able to play. she did not want to be answering that question you could tell with the pause the false starts she did not want to be answering that question and why she couldn't figure out the middle of the river she couldn't figure out the mainstream she couldn't figure out the popular answer and she landed on insanity she landed on the destruction of women's sports you know when i first saw this you know i know dan i like dan i thought you know If I were Don Staley in that moment, I'm leading up to a national championship game,

I probably would have answered the question like the Iowa head coach did. Dan asked the same question of the Iowa Hawkeyes coach. And she said, I'm not focused on that right now. I'm focused on preparing for a national championship game. She wanted to say it's an important topic, and we should address it at a later day. But now I'm focused on winning the national championship. And I think that would have been a perfectly acceptable answer. But the answer by Staley in that moment is not, because it is the end.

It is the destruction of women's sports. It was applauded by Sue Byrd, and it's weird to see, star of the WNBA, Sue Bird applaud the destruction of women's sports. Because make no mistake, make no mistake. An average men's player dominates the women's game. Dominates. Now, I think it's so fascinating that people jumped all over this. Clay Travis was attacked for asking the simple question,

should men be allowed to play women's sports in the entirety of the sports media complex i don't know jeff perlman's of the world he's an author others saying you know that clay is um i don't know a bigot or he's divisive but what is divisive in asking that simple question that people refuse to answer what's divisive is destroying women's sports but this is the quality i guess they think that now is the quality of the mainstream that you will say no no no if you want to be enlightened if you don't want to be a bigot. Men should be able to invade women's sports. And by the way, it's only been 33 women in NCAA. I mean, 33 men who've invaded women's sports. You know what? That's too many. That's 33 too many. And it's a matter of time before an northeast

directional school or southeast Oklahoma State fields enough men on a team to dominate the women's sports and then we'll see the opinion, the real opinion of Don Staley. But this again is the quality of what you get from those that are celebrated as smart and those that are celebrated as popular and those that are pushed forward as the mainstream. You get Sonny Hosten, you get Don's Daily, you get Sue Byrd, you get Jamel Hill. Jamel Hill recently criticizing Dwayne the Rock Johnson's statement to us here on the Wilcane show that he wouldn't endorse Joe Biden. And then today, focused in on a segment on Jesse Waters, where Jets owner Woody Johnson

took a political stance. Here, watch. And I think the world be a safer and better place. There'll be less crime. He's extremely compassionate. People don't know that. He's extremely funny. I think people are starting to appreciate his sense of humor.

And he just impressed all of us once again. And I think, yeah, the overwhelming thought was, yeah, this is just the beginning for us. Everybody in that room was ready to step. step up hard. That's Jets owner, Woody Johnson, endorsing Donald Trump. And the response from Hill is, oh, but players aren't supposed to talk about politics. It's just, it's low quality to the point of dishonesty. So first of all, people aren't the same.

And you understand the difference between an employer and employee. Every single one of you watching, every single one of us talking understands the difference between an employer and an employee. No NFL owner has said that an NFL player cannot make a political endorsement. No one has said that. They've never said you can't have a political opinion. What they said is you can't do it on the field. What they've said is you can't do it on the job.

What they said is you can't do it in the NFL. And there's no amount of hypocrisy here that you can point out that makes anyone believe they can't. tell the difference between an employee and an employer. And by the way, the people that push forward that equality and hypocrisy, childish observations at all time are the goal in every single situation, don't live that way. Trust me when I tell you that way.

They see themselves as stars, they put themselves above others, they say things that others can't say, and no one actually believes it. It's simply childless, and it's simply saying something that you think, again, is swimming down the middle of the river, and the middle of the river is polluted. It's not popular. it's definitely not smart, and it's increasingly, this is the hopeful point, it's increasingly

less mainstream. Let's break it all down. Plus, is it racist to criticize DEI with the host of the Rubin Report? Dave Rubin, next on the Will Cain Show. From the Fox News Podcasts Network. Hey there, it's me, Kennedy. Make sure to check out my podcast. Kennedy saves the world.

It is five days a week, every week. Download and listen at Fox Newspodcast.com. or wherever you listen to your favorite podcast. This is Jason Chaffetz from the Jason in the House podcast. Join me every Monday to dive deeper into the latest political headlines and chat with remarkable guests. Listen and follow now at Fox Newspodcast.com. Or wherever you download podcasts.

We're just asking questions. Anti-Semitism and censorship. And is Dave Rubin racist? as said by Charlemagne the God for criticizing DEI. It's the Will Cain Show streaming live at Fox News.com on the Fox News YouTube channel. And always on demand, just subscribe Apple, Spotify, or on YouTube. He is the host of the Ruben Report.

He's also the creator of locals.com. He's on X at Rubin Report. And he's joining us now on the Will Kane show. It's Dave Rubin. What's up, Dave? Will, can we have your guys on the fly? Just put racist under my name? Would that be possible?

Do they have that kind of technology over there? I don't know what's going on. I think they have a keyboard as they run the show. I'm going to save you and me, them calling that Ottawa. So the point is Charlemagne the God, host of the Breakfast Club, a very influential morning show in New York City, and a contributor to the Daily Show, did a thing on DEI last week. He was notable, Dave, in that he was criticizing DEI as not accomplishing the stated goals of DEI. But in it, he used you, he used Jesse Waters, he used a few other people as examples of how the right is. criticizing DEI, but sort of under the hood, what you find lurking is racism.

Yeah. Well, first off, I refuse to call anyone the God. So his name's Leonard. So Lenny over there at the Daily Show, which is apparently, I guess, apparently it is a daily show or it isn't. It's a little unclear to me. John Stewart hosts it, I guess, once a week, but then I guess they have a bunch of other people that do it the other days. He was hosting. And you're right. It's interesting about this Lenny guy because he kind of gets it about DEI because he opened the segment by basically saying it doesn't work and it has not gotten the fruits that they would have liked, which apparently means that you should just have black and lesbian and trans executives in all of these companies and all of that. And then at the same time, he also said

that here's a bunch of people. He showed a clip of me and Jesse, as you pointed out, a couple other Fox hosts, basically criticizing DEI. And he said, oh, what they're really doing is just masquerading for their racism. Now, call me old school will. I am of a certain age. I think we're ballparking in the age range here. But I come from a time when not caring about skin color made you not racist and being obsessed with skin color made you racist. There was a guy, I always forget his name.

He was big in the 60s, Martin something or other, and he would give speeches about how he didn't want his children to be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. That is actually the reverse of where Lenny and some of these people have. ended up. So yeah, it's a complete farce. And by the way, I should tell you, Will, I'm pretty sure that our producers are coordinating behind our back because your whole intro there is exactly

what I did on my show today. So you got to, you keep that guy. That's what I'm saying. You're doing fine work. I got to get more original. You've already done that an hour or two before me. I've got to get more original. We're sharing a brain. People do say we look like as well. So now this is a real problem. I've never been called, I've never been called a knockoff Dave Rubin. I've been called a knockoff Clay Travis, a wannabe Colin Coward, a wannabe Skip Bayliss, and a Costco brand Tucker Carlson. But even though I probably

have the most physical resemblance to you, I have not yet been called a knockoff Dave Rubin. That's funny. Costco Tucker Carlson. Like you could get a couple Will Keynes in a bag, you know what I mean? You get the cream of Tucker Carlson, but Will Kane comes in a three pack of shirts, you know? That's right.

Kirkland brand Tucker Carlson. Kirkland. Yeah, exactly. Hey, so listen, man, you're doing a lot of good stuff, and you're in the middle of some very controversial stuff on the right. And, you know, this is one of those things. I think we're in a weird place where there is a divide on the right, but there's also a divide between what online right is, Dave, and sort of like, you know, what's really happening out there in the real world and what people are talking about. And I think it's hard for people. I really do who do what you and I do to understand that not everything happening on next is what's happening into the minds of your average normal American. To that note, I want to address a couple of things you've been involved in.

So Ben Shapiro did a monologue. He didn't name names, but he was definitely criticizing the right for indulging in a style of rhetoric and discourse of, we're just asking questions. And you kind of gave it a thumbs up or a cosine. What are you saying? What do you think is the risk here of the style of thought of we're just asking questions? Sure. Well, first off, I just want to say, well, to your credit, you introed that beautifully because I think there are way bigger problems than what sits between, say, Ben, Shapiro and Tucker Carlson. Most Americans are not worried about that. There are ideological differences between

those guys on foreign policy and a bunch of other stuff, but that's not really what the problems of America are. And one of the things that I've tried really hard to do, particularly in the last couple weeks, and maybe I've failed at it at times, is that I really want to heal this stuff because with everything that you laid out in your intro there about the woke and the gender confusion and now the neo-racism and what the and what the Biden administration is doing to our borders and foreign policy and everything else that is the stuff that we all should be worried about the little stuff as it pertains it's not even little let's say but as it pertains to knick-knack fights between these guys is just so irrelevant for the average person so look

there is a i would put it this way without throwing anyone under the bus specifically I would say that when a society is sick, there is a long history of that society turning on the Jews. Where Jews flourish in societies, societies do well, because that means that minorities and Jews are usually sort of the token minority in civilizations. If Jews are doing okay, then the society is doing okay because there's a certain amount of tolerance and openness and acceptance of the other. When things start getting wacky for Jews, usually those societies, don't last much longer. So the thing that now seems, we've seen what identity politics on the left

has done to the Democrat Party and how it's destroyed so much of the basic fabric of American society. Now there are little embers of it on the right, and I would prefer to take those, to quash those, to put some water on those. So for example, I will use names in this one because you mentioned Ben and Tucker,

it's like Ben has repeatedly laid out what his positions are as it pertains to Israel and foreign policy, and Tucker has laid out his positions. The difference is that Tucker has basically said that he despises Ben Shapiro. I think his word was despises because he wants his children, in effect, to die for Israel.

Ben has never once, he repeated it on my show in this studio last week, called for American troops in Israel. I was just in Israel for a week. I didn't hear one person across the political spectrum call for American troops. What they want there is they'd like a little diplomatic cover because they're getting hit every which way.

And yeah, they do need munitions to fight this war with an army. I mean, Hamas is not just a terrorist group. They are a full-on army that has been armed to the teeth for a long time. But nobody wants American troops there. It will end up like the American Marines in Lebanon in the 80s. It will just not end well. So I would like some of that sort of miscommunication to be cleared up.

Ben has repeatedly said he's willing to discuss this with Tucker. If I can help facilitate that, I will. They don't need me for that, but I certainly would try to help if I could. Well, so here's the thing. So I know that people listening, and I know that people in general, they like to talk about personality conflicts. It's entertaining. And that's not why I'm bringing this up.

I'm not interested in Ben versus Tucker. I'm not interested in Ben versus Candice. What I'm interested in is only it insofar as it reflects, perhaps a real divide in America, not just on X, okay? And to your point, I think you make a very good point historically. You're historically correct about the way societies for millennia, yeah, millennia, have responded to Jews. I think that I believe in the balancing act, David,

And it's not because I think the, you know, wishy-washy, the truth is. No, no, no, I don't, that's not what it is, but I have come to believe that there are so many things you have to balance. And what you're saying is true. I also think there's some truth in that right now, there's a risk that any criticism of foreign policy or Israel, and I'm not accusing any individuals of this. I just see that, like you talked about identity politics, accusations of anti-Semitism have become, in some places a shield against what can be legitimate dialogue, debate, or criticism. And this is happening on the right, you know. So while you put out identity politics on the left, I think we're going to have to strike

some kind of balance or get to some honesty here on on acknowledging these things that are happening and also having open dialogue that doesn't descend into accusations of anti-Semitism. Absolutely. So I can give you a good example of this. So Thomas Massey is the most libertarian member of Congress. I consider him a personal friend and he's been on my show many times. He wants to cut foreign aid to absolutely everybody, Israel included. In no way would I consider that anti-Semitic.

He has laid out a very specific position that he holds as it pertains to foreign policy and how the American budget. Just real quick. Yeah. While you don't, he has been accused of it. To your point on Massey, Massey has been accused of anti-Semitism. Of course. Well, first of all, well, yeah, I mean, the internet is a place where people say whatever they want.

But I'm trying to show you an example where I, where me personally can have a difference of opinion with someone. Now, look, if you told me right now, we're cutting the American foreign. foreign budget, uh, foreign aid, 25% across the board. We're not singling out anybody, but we're cutting in 20, we have enough problems here. We're cutting it 25%. I would be fine with that. By the way, every dollar, I will, I know you know this, but every dollar that we quote unquote give to Israel, we don't give to Israel. It has to be spent in America, which is a very perverse system. We actually, and Obama did this. He was the one that changed the way our foreign aid to Israel went out.

They have to spend it in America. So it's really a subsidy to the military and complex in America. So now America has a vested interest in keeping Israel at war. That is a huge problem. It's a bigger problem for Israel than it is for America. It's not like we're just sending them cash like we gave to Iran, right? We gave them $6 billion of cash. Remember, it's fungible. They can do whatever they want. With Israel, we quote unquote give them the money and then we spend it in America so it helps our industries here. Now, you could be, to me, that's bad for Israel and it's bad for America because we're just funding too much war. And then, by the way, we help fund the Palestinian Authority

that literally pays people to kill Jews. So there's very few clean hands in this thing. But my broader point on Massey was that, of course, you can have a policy disagreement with somebody and understand it's not because they're a racist or an anti-Semite or whatever else. Now, it is the Internet, and people are always going to say all of those things.

But I would say more specifically to some of the people that you've mentioned here, if you're running around out of nowhere, suddenly claiming Israel is, you know, committing genocide or lying about some of the history of the area, intentionally confusing your audience and everything else. When, by the way, because our mainstream media has failed us to the extent that people are turning to anyone online to get something true, then that's where the problem is. I'm happy to lay out any of the history if you want to hear it, but yeah. Well, do you think beyond Israel, okay, beyond this issue, so when I asked you about the we're just asking questions style of discourse I actually wasn't even

just leading you into a discussion of anti-Semitism or Israel I'm I wonder do you think you talked about misleading your audience do you think there is a problem on the right like the left wants to censor right and there's a good there's a good chunk of conservative influencers who are I think I'm comfortable saying this who are and I'm not who are pretty cynical in putting out things that are at least at the very least sloppy. And I'm not talking about on the issue that we've been discussing. On any host of it, I saw it with Maui. Okay. I saw it with Maui. Like a whole rotten narrative was put out when it came to Maui that was pure BS about blue roost and laser beams and direct energy weapons. And a lot of it came from the right. And so like, well, it's just,

we're just asking questions. Do you think there's a problem on the right that's actually feeding in to this censorship idea? Well, there's a problem because of the way business operates. Let's remove any going after anyone's intentions or thinking anyone is a hater of this person or this group or anything else at a purely business level there's an issue here Tucker Carlson is no longer with Fox he now has his own network I like Tucker so this is not a knock on Tucker he has his own network would he love as a as a guy that's running a network to take out the daily wire and to take out the place that you work Fox of course the answer is yes he would love to take all of your audience and monetize it and create a new network

that is the number one thing in, let's say, right-leaning or conservative media. So is he willing, would he be willing perhaps to go down roads that maybe even he wasn't as comfortable with to attain that? I'd have to ask him specifically, but I think the answer is probably. So Ben Shapiro at the Daily Wire is a big fish, and everyone's kind of going for the big fish right now. Fox is a big fish. Everyone's going for the big fish.

and there are different reasons that everyone kind of wants to do that and i don't think they're purely nefarious in terms of being hating someone because of their religion i think some of them are kind of like pretty obvious business decisions well i'm not comfortable going as far as you did first of all like i know a lot of those individuals that you just named and and i can never know someone's motivations and i'm not criticizing you dave but that's why i'm not saying i don't know if i don't know someone's motivations, if I don't know someone's motivations, I don't, I hate it when people do that to me. You're doing this because of X or Y. You don't know me or why I'm doing something, you know, and what I actually believe, not you, Dave, the proverbial you, right? Because you've never

impugned my motivations. But the left is constantly impugned my motivations. And it's my least favorite thing. But I do think, and again, this is beyond the individuals discussed, incentive structure on the internet is leading certain conversations in directions in pursuit of eyeballs and traffic okay but what's interesting about this Dave is I think we're actually

and you you know so much because of your involvement in Rumbles and local there's actually I think we're starting to see like eyeballs in traffic that don't create true audience with real value is kind of worthless Dave like it's just like attention seeking

what you know so what I've been calling that lately is I think there's a certain set of people. And again, I'm not, and I, maybe I misspoke or you slightly heard wrong. I'm actually not going after Tucker when I say that. I'm just trying to say as a business person, if you were creating a competitive product, you would go for the number one guy, right? Like if there's a, if somebody selling the number one toilet tissue, then another guy comes out, you're going to try to get his market share. That's just how it is. But I would say in relation to what you're talking about now, what you're really talking about is that the internet, because it has so opened up everything, there's always a fringe, and then

there's a fringe of a fringe and a fringe of a fringe and a fringe of a fringe and a fringe of a and there's always an audience there. So you're going to have people constantly chasing all of these things. We also live in a time where the actual truth, because mainstream media has been so derelict in its duty, has been so blown apart and we agree on so little that people are looking for anything that roughly sounds right wherever they can find it. So then I think what has happen now is there's a series of people, and I'm truly, truly not going after anyone specifically here, but there is a portion of people who basically are what I call energy chasers. And if they see some weird, shiny thing in the corner of the internet, and that will get clicks, which generate

revenue and everything else, they will go there. And then they can actually shift the entire conversation into something that has very little to do with exactly where you started, which is the problems of most people and how most people want to live in this country and that's why I'm really trying not to be part of that and even when I had been on

right after the Candace thing if you watch the whole interview I went out of my way not to attack her I think you've talked about Tucker here I'm not attacking Tucker I'm just and I'm trying to do that and maybe I'm failing at it

maybe there's no way to be part of any of this and then not be part of the meta problem but I think it's worth a shot I appreciate your sentiment you said you want to be a bridge builder And, you know, and I appreciate your sentiment. I think you've characterized it well.

It's like an energy chaser. And I just, again, I don't like interpersonal. It's not that I don't like interpersonal conflict. I'm happy to like look someone face to face and debate hard. I don't like the soap opera part of all of this stuff. But I do think underneath the soap opera, there is something going on. And a lot of it, if we're being honest, is happening on the right. Like the energy chasing you're talking about that thing, it's happening on the right.

Well, the best resolution for what we're talking about specifically here is that Tucker and Ben sit down. I know Ben has agreed to do it. I know they've texted about it privately. Ben said that on my show. And because it is Tucker that in my estimation has misrepresented Ben's opinions, I've never heard Ben represent Tucker's opinions. It's incumbent on Tucker to have that sit down. There is no reason that Tucker Carlson and Ben Shapiro shouldn't have a sit down hash this out. And then Dave Rubin and Will Kane will figure out something else.

to talk about in a couple weeks. Well, I haven't talked about it up until now. Yeah, and I, and I, the only reason, again, I'm just, I've said it for the third time. The only reason I am talking about it is because I want to explore deeper things and I think there is something deeper on the right. Yeah, I'm with you. We're kind of toying into this idea of, I think in some ways we're allowing the whole censorship regime to point and go see, see.

And when I say we, I mean, that's the loose collection of right that represents, as you pointed out twice now, so importantly, on the internet, which is the internet. is like you get everything you find you want to find on the internet and that's the way we both believe it should be by the way neither of us would believe in censorship okay you got to go in just a moment so I want to ask you one quick story or quick topic that's totally divorced from what we're talking about because I think you'd be interesting on this uh Billy D Williams was on Bill Mars podcast and he said that he thought there's nothing wrong with actors doing blackface he pointed a Lawrence Olivier doing Othello he thought it was funny and

Bill Maher was kind of blown away. Like, you'd be destroyed today. You'd be, of course, Bill Maher is accurately diagnosing reality. But the question is, should it be reality? Or is Billy D. Williams right. Like, the nature of acting is acting. So if you want to, like, playing another race is part of acting. First, well, I got to tell you, when I lived in L.A.,

one of the best things that ever happened to me was going to a jazz club vibrato and seeing Billy D. Williams at the table next to me and walking up to him and saying, thank you, Lando, for a. everything you did for the galaxy, and I bought him a drink. That is one of my great joys in life. That's number one. He didn't even take the drink, but I offered to buy him a drink. Look, this is going to get me in trouble, I'm sure, too, but of course he's right.

The thing about acting is, do you know this, well, they're not actually doing the thing. Tom Hanks actually never went to space. He was never stuck on that island. They are pretending to do these things. Most of these actors really can't do much of anything. And you might pretend Robert Downey, Jr., pretending to be a black guy in tropics. Thunder, which somehow he's escaped the horrors of. There are plenty of people who do blackface like Jimmy Kimmel or Sarah Silverman, who dated for a while, who do it with actually more of like

an honestly racist undertone to it. But a gay person should be allowed to play a straight person. A straight person should be allowed to play a gay person. I don't know that you really need white people playing black people. But once we start putting these artificial constructs on art, which is what movie making and television stories are supposed to be. Once you start doing that, you degrade the very definition of what art is. And might I hypothesize, Will, that that's why we don't have that much great art right now.

When was the last time you heard a great new song? It's not like it used to be. When was the last time you watched a great new movie, a great new TV show? Yeah, a couple of things trickle through every now and again. But I have a good friend who was a multiple-time Emmy Award-winning I don't want to say actor or actress in Hollywood, but one or the other. And he or she told me that basically you cannot do anything anymore because the second

you get in that writer's room, instead of them talking about what's the best story, what are the most original characters, et cetera, et cetera. It's, oh, we have to have a trans writer and a black writer. We have to talk about our feelings for three hours and everything else that you laid out in your monologue there. It takes away from the intention of whatever or the purpose of whatever the company is or the art is or anything else. And we will be left with not much of anything and we'll all just have to watch the same stuff. We watch it in 1985, which for me isn't that terrible.

So the left worries about the destruction of democracy at the hands of a totalitarian, a single man. When we live in a world where we're seeing the destruction of art and everything else, including truth and justice, destroyed by committee, destroyed by representation. in the room at a table where no one, where everyone has plausible deniability on the evil they create. Because, hey, it was decided upon by a committee. Always great. Ruben Report, Locals.com, Ruben Report on X. Hey, thanks for making the time, Dave, and always enjoy the conversation.

Anytime, Will. All right, here is Dave Rubin of the Rubin Report. By the way, would Sean Penn get to play, what was the name of the movie? He played a mentally disabled guy. I am Sam. Would he get to do that role today? Would Tom Hanks get to do Forrest Gump? You know, I don't know that the answer is yes. I don't think Robert Danny Jr. would get to do the character he did in Tropic Thunder. I think that wouldn't get made for sure. And we can acknowledge it in the past. Yes, when Hollywood cast Italians as American Indians, yeah, maybe you were just looking for the darkest skinned actor you could find to play off an American Indian. And it wasn't all right and good. It was bad. But we, as a pendulum, him always swings. We overcorrected in the other direction where you can only play something

that shares your exact DNA background. Like you, in other words, you can't pretend. In other words, you can't act. All right, coming up, is Yukon now a blue blood? Where's the line? How many programs are in the club? And Morgan Wallin has been arrested. Will he go to jail? That's next on the Will Cain show. This is Jimmy Phala, inviting you to join me for Fox Across America, where we'll discuss every single one of the Democrats' dumb ideas. Just kidding. It's only a three-hour show. Listen live at noon Eastern or get the podcast at Fox Across America.com. Morgan Wallen throws a chair off a six-store balcony rooftop in Nashville, Tennessee, and he's been arrested on felony charges. Will we see him in jail. Morgan Wallen.

Coming up in just a moment here on the Will Cain show, streaming live at foxnews.com, the Fox News YouTube channel, and the Fox News Facebook page. We do not have Morgan Wallen coming up. I just realized this the way I said that. It sounds like in just a moment, I'll be bringing in the biggest star, or the second biggest star in country music. I followed an Instagram account called Country Central, and they did a March Madness-style bracket. Morgan and Wallen and Zach Bryan were in the final. Zach Bryan won the country music March Madness bracket. Wallin was runner-up. Not unlike Purdue, who lost last night to Yukon, Yukon with their second back-to-back national championship. And that brings us to our brackets here on the Will Kane show.

Let's bring in tinfoil pat, two a days, Dan and young establishment, James, for a quick update on our bracket. Now that the tournament has finished, who got... I'd rather not. Not who got first. Who got last? Well, there's a pretty big discrepancy between first and last. I'll tell you that, just to start off.

So we got last, we got tinfoil pat. Sorry, bud. You got zero points in the Sweet 16, the Elite 8, the final four, and the national championship game. That's very impressive and more impressive than the pro. So he was eliminated by the Sweet 16? He was basically all his teams were gone by the Sweet 16. Zero points.

I don't mean like a... A few close to zero? I mean, actually zero is the number. It takes a lot of guts. A lot of guts not to go straight chalk. I mean, I'm real proud of you. You know, it's just, it's a real feat there. So, Pat, is this, is this like your whole philosophy of conspiracies, like, it takes a lot of guts to end up wrong?

I'm running a lot on a lot of those, so you got to take someone, you know, you lose some and win some. Well, we'll try something else with you, another sport, you know. And Dan, I'll do better in fantasy football them, you know. Yeah. Dan, what was tinfoil pat in the nation? What percentage did he end up in the nation? 7.6% in the nation. So he's in the bottom 7% of Americans that picked brackets. Yeah, he can get over the top 10%. Oh, man. I've been doing this for a long time. Brackets and stuff like that. That's the lowest I've seen. But it's okay. We won't kill you anymore. My bad.

Where's it go from Pat? Will Kane. It came in third place. You had some points. You were in the 48th percentile, 48th percent. Okay, below average. Yeah, because you had Auburn winning. That really killed you. Yeah. So it turns out that Don Lemon and Roland Martin and others who have called me a mediocre white guy are wrong. I'm a below average white guy. That's true. You would not have passed in school with this grade, but that's fine. Right. They changed the rulings now. So I think like a D is actually over 45%. That's soft. That's soft. Not for Will.

All right. So coming in second, coming in second as myself, I had 1120 points. I had 84.6% is where I landed. I did okay. It's a big jump from my 48. It's true. There was a big discrepancy in the bottom two and the top two. But I had Yukon winning, so that counted.

But there's still just no. competing with Establishment James. He had 99.1%. He had Purdue and Yukon going to the championship game. He killed it this year. Wow, 99.1%. The virtue of being establishment, going chalk, turns out the elite always win. Congratulations, young establishment James. Speaking of elites, always winning, let's talk about Morgan Wallen, who was arrested in Nashville, Tennessee. Morgan Wallen reports are, was told that an ex-girlfriend of his is getting married to someone else.

He responded to that, allegedly, by taking a chair and throwing it off the six-floor rooftop of Eric Church's bar in Nashville, Tennessee. The chair flies to the ground, six stories down, and almost hits police officers. They arrest Wallin. There are pictures of him down on the street on Broadway, talking to police officers, white jeans. That's deserving of its own segment. And he is arrested on charges that include felony. He could be charged with felony reckless endangerment that could accompany up to six years in prison, one to six years in prison. The question is, will Morgan Wallen go to

prison? And I think that we all know the answer is no. He won't go to prison. And we can say it's because he's a celebrity. We can say it's because he's a star. We can say it's because he's rich, but the answer to why Morgan Wallen won't go to prison is because of me. It's because of you. It's because of us. It's because he's Morgan Wallen. You know, we often talk about why the rich or the famous aren't subject to the same justice system that everyone else is. And by what Wallen did is incredibly dangerous. I mean, if that chair from six stories up lands on a person, you're talking about serious injury to death, but it didn't. And I'm fairly certain we will not see the book thrown at Morgan Wallen. Unsurprising, right? But why? Unsurprising. Rich,

celebrities, famous. Don't sit and live in the same justice system as everyone else. So why? Well, the answer I do think is you and me. You know, think about the way this is going to be calculated in Nashville, Tennessee. And I don't know for certain. I didn't look it up before the show, but my assumption is the district attorney in that county is popularly elected it's a democratic election morgan wall i just said to you is like perhaps the biggest country music star in the country he means big business in nashville but more than that he's incredibly popular if you're running for office does that help you or hurt you get elected to throw the book at morgan wallen i think we all know the answer the nashville police department while i'm not publicly elected

reports to a mayor who is democratically elected and do they want that kind of negative attention and you know unpopularity and the answer is no and so not unlike politics is a a game of popularity every step of every calculation this isn't a celebration or a condemnation it's just a simple diagnosis of reality is who does that serve throw in the book at morgan wallen and the answer not the police, not the DA, not the mayor, not the justice system, not you, not me, because we wouldn't want it. You might be in the comment saying that you want equal justice, you want a system. But the truth is, Morgan Wallen's record sales are up today.

This is who we are. We don't want him to be treated like the other guy that throws this off the balcony. We don't want the book thrown at Morgan Wallen. And that's just, not right, not wrong. That's just the way it is in the world. Speaking of elites, Yukon now, I think, safely in the group of Blue Bloods in NCAA College basketball.

Yukon won its sixth national championship, putting it on par with North Carolina, tied for third behind UCLA with 11 in Kentucky with 8. And Yukon, I think, you'd say, is the youngest member of the Blue Blood Club. All six of those national championships coming since 1999. Under three different coaches, Danny Hurley, Kevin Allie, and Jim Calhoun. Completely different styles of rosters.

And different than others. You know, Kansas isn't, you know, some private school in the Northeast. But different than others, like the traditional concept of Blue Bloods is kind of defined by schools like Duke, who, by the way, Yukon just surpassed. at fifth. Duke, obviously also, a blue blood. So different than others, Yukon is in the, I mean, I know those of us in the rest of the country think of Connecticut, the entirety of it as snooty. Yukon isn't snooty. Connecticut's pretty rural in a lot of places. I mean, in fact, it doesn't even have some huge metropolis, Hartford, New Haven, Greenwich. These aren't

like huge metropolises in Yukon not seen as like an Ivy League type school, a public institution, playing in the Big East was full of Northeast private schools. But here they are now, unassailably, I think, the newest member of the Blue Blood class. And the question then is, where does it cut off? UCLA, in, but hasn't won a national championship since 1995, and before that, 1975.

Almost a dormant Blue Blood. Kentucky, in, last national championship in 2012, they have eight. North Carolina, in with six. Yukon, in with six. Duke in with five. By the way, all five are there since 1991. So here's the real question. Is Indiana, with the risk of upsetting Dan Dockich? Is Indiana still a blue blood? Hasn't won a national championship since 1987, also has five tied with Duke. I think we all believe Kansas is. Kansas has four, but they've spread that four out from 52 to 88 to 08 to 2022. What about Villanova? Is that the cut line? But is it above or below Villanova?

Three national championships, 85, 16, and 18. I think it safely goes five deep. UCLA, Kentucky, North Carolina, Yukon, Duke. I think you have to put in Kansas at six. I think you begin to have a debate with Indiana, but history probably wins out with five. And then the real debate begins with Villanova. how many schools are blue blood you can let us know at will cane show or at will cane on x

or on facebook or in the youtube comments um wherever you get the will cane show will can show at fox dot com by email love including you in the program so make sure you contribute to the comments share this show with your friends and i will see you again provided you subscribe next time on the will Kane Show. Listen ad-free with a Fox News podcast plus subscription on Apple Podcasts, and Amazon Prime members, you can listen to this show, ad-free on the Amazon music app. I'm Janice Dean. Join me every Sunday as I focus on stories of hope and people who are truly rays of sunshine in their community and across the world.

Listen and follow now at Fox Newspodcast.com.