Will Cain Country - Is China Taking Over American Colleges? (ft. Steve Cortes & Jonathan Morris)

Episode Date: February 24, 2026

Story 1: The outrage continues over President Donald Trump's joke when addressing the Men’s U.S. hockey team. Will brings in The Crew to discuss why certain women’s sports divisions, like hockey and soccer, garner significantly less viewers than their male counterparts, while commanding all the attention in other fields such as gymnastics and figure skating.Story 2: America is home to some of the world’s most prestigious and competitive universities, but shifting admissions trends have made it increasingly difficult for American students to secure a spot. Steve Cortes, Host of 'Steve Cortes Investigates,' joins Will to examine how a surge in foreign student enrollment is reshaping the admissions landscape, breaking down what sparked this shift, the potential national security concerns it raises, and the broader impact on opportunities for America’s youth.Story 3: FOX News Contributor Jonathan Morris shares the story of how an alliance between President Ronald Reagan and Pope John Paul II helped bring down the Iron Curtain, as documented in the new FOX Nation Special, ‘Reagan and the Pope.’Subscribe to ‘Will Cain Country’ on YouTube here: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Watch Will Cain Country!⁠⁠⁠Follow ‘Will Cain Country’ on X (⁠⁠⁠@willcainshow⁠⁠⁠), Instagram (⁠⁠⁠@willcainshow⁠⁠⁠), TikTok (⁠⁠⁠@willcainshow⁠⁠⁠), and Facebook (⁠⁠⁠@willcainnews⁠⁠⁠)Follow Will on X: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@WillCain⁠ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The joke infuriating the left. The joke, tearing apart America, the joke that is causing division over the most unifying moment in the last couple of years in America. The great sports victory of the U.S. men's Olympic hockey team and their attendance at the state of the Union. Their call with President Trump. and what it really says about what we all know deep down inside when it comes to women and men in sports. Plus, Chinese takeover of American universities on Wilcane Country. It is Wilcane Country streaming live at the Wilcane Country YouTube channel, the Wilcane Facebook page, the Fox News Facebook page.

Here for you always on demand by following on Apple or on Spotify. Steve Cortez is going to join us today to talk about a new documentary over the Chinese takeover of American universities. Plus, Jonathan Morris on Reagan and the Pope, now streaming at Fox Nation.com. But it is the joke that is dividing America. It's the joke that is infuriating the left. And it's the joke that's poisoning, a unifying moment of the 26 men's U.S. Olympic hockey gold. It is the joke said by President Trump in his call. to the locker room.

Watch. Listen. I must tell you, we're going to have to bring the women's team. You do know that. I must tell you, says President Trump. We're going to have to invite the women's team as well. Of course, the 26 U.S. women's Olympic hockey team also taking gold in Milan. Now that joke today, two-a-day stand 10-foot.

Pat is causing insanity. It's causing division. It's causing typical American culture war fights over politics and this time infused within the Olympics. And Dan, as our resident correspondent from the left, you can tell us with certainty that the Brooklyn brunch crew is really upset over the joke from President Trump. Oh, yeah. They think it's disgusting. It's misogynistic, sexist and all the things that are not good towards the women's team. So, yeah, they're very upset about it.

And it's gone everywhere. Sally Jenkins, former sports columnist for The Washington Post, a lady whose name I do not know over at Barstool recording videos and making posts on X, all over mainstream media outlets, the sexism of President Trump, and the disrespect to the U.S. Women's Olympic hockey team. Now, let's dive into this today. We're going to talk about it throughout the program because I think it leads to some very fascinating. conversations, conversations which began on our pre-meeting call, Tinfoil Pat, two a day, Stan, and Big Dog, Ron, and continued after I hung up my call because my wife overheard us talking and had a lot to contribute to this conversation. My wife, who was a Division I athlete, a swimmer, at Pepperdine. And we had a really interesting and honest conversation. And so let's start for a

moment with a bit of honesty. The thing that President Trump is so good at, saying what we all know to be true, regardless of how it lands emotionally. And here are two truths that I want to explore in this conversation today. Women's sports are generally not as good as men's sports. And no one invites the world's dark champion to the White House. What I mean by that is, no matter how good you are at something, no matter how much domination you exhibit, some feats of human accomplishment are not as popular as other feats of human accomplishment.

And the men's hockey gold is being celebrated more than the gold from the U.S. women in hockey. What I also mean is that sports are, inherently almost but not always masculine. Let's explore both of those. And we're going to start with the one that was actually a moment of contention on our morning call. It was made by tinfoil Pat and I'll let him make it. And I pushed back, Patrick. I pushed back based upon my other truth. I've thought a lot about it since then, since our conversation. And I want to give you more credit for something that sounds incredibly crass and turns people off. But if I really

think about it psychologically is true. And it is your contention, Patrick, that women's sports are inferior to men's sports. Yes. I don't think it's debatable. I mean, the fact that, you know, 15 and under boys soccer teams can beat the women's U.S. national team in, you know, in a game, pretty convincingly. I mean, like, the best women's hockey team probably isn't standing up to bantoms. And just a fact, you know. And, you know, we keep elevating. We've been elevating the WMBA and kind of keeping that up. But, like, there's a reason that it's been propped up by the NBA for so long until, you know, the Caitlin Clark phenomenon.

And so your contention is because it is an inherently inferior product, it's never going to attract the audience or the respect or the celebration as an accomplishment in men's sports. Yes, exactly. I mean, like, it's not as good. And not be as obviously, I think the word that you're gravitating towards is not be as inherently entertaining. It will not be as entertaining and therefore not as celebrated and therefore not as popular. Okay, I thought a lot about this, Patrick, because I made the argument to you in our morning call that you don't need to pass qualitative judgment on something that is quantitative. You don't need to say that women's sports is inferior to me.

men's sports to show that the audience just doesn't gravitate numerically in a quantitative way data available to us. It's just not as popular. But there's something more to what you had to say that really made me think. And that is this. Sports by its very nature, almost but not all, throughout its entire history has been masculine. You know, the Olympics, the original Olympics, was was populated among men. It was a competition among men. Sports, on the average, on the whole and across the long arc of history are the province of men. Now, let me give you an example that I think is pretty interesting.

I was thinking about this the other day. I saw a video on my Instagram reel of some young social media guy talking to the host of Paramounts, Champions League soccer studio show. Those guys are awesome, by the way. It's Kate Abdo. I think her last name is Scott now, Kate Scott. It's Micah. Micah's so awesome.

He's the Charles Barkley of the set. I just can't remember what Micah's last name is. And of course, legendary Tyrian Re. And they ask, hey, if America, the age-old question that we've always asked, if the best athletes in America played soccer, would the United States dominate at soccer? and they all dismissed it and laughed and said no and tiara henri who was like in the world of soccer like the voice of god he speaks very bluntly he was like i won't even entertain the question

and it got me thinking about that not that age old debate but it got me thinking about the women's team the women's soccer team that dominated the world in the 1990s and early 2000s and those women were amazing and they were great athletes and they accomplished something incredible but we need to be honest about something they also accomplished that in a field that was not that competitive globally. The rest of the world did not accept women playing soccer as quickly as the often insulted United States of America, the sexist and misogynistic United States of America.

We accepted the premise of women playing sports before anybody else in the world, and we got a head start. And if you'll notice today, our women in soccer do not dominate the way they did 20 years ago. Now, Germany is catching up, Brazil's catching up, England is catching up. Some years ago, I had some friends from the soccer world in New York moved to England. And they had two sons and a daughter that played soccer.

And one of the reports that came back was, man, you'd be surprised how, like, it's not that cool for Zoe to play soccer. Like, in that culture, women playing sports was frowned upon. It's socially not acceptable. It's seen as masculine. It's not a feminine thing to do to play soccer in England. I do think that's changing. I think it's changing not just in England, but in Brazil, in Spain, and all across the world. And as a result, they're beginning to catch up to women's soccer.

We don't dominate like we used to because we had that head start. The point in bring that in is we had the idea of women's sports is a fairly relatively new phenomenon. It's like 100, 150 years old to really embrace the idea of women in sports. Over thousands of years, it has been the province of men. And so in sports are inherently masculine. And Patrick is right. In most sports, when women do something that is also done by men, hockey, water polo, soccer, tennis. The product is not as high level as when it is done by men.

Here's what I think is fascinating. There are sports where the eyeballs are going to. to women. Yeah. Where people do like to watch women do it as much or more so than men. And this is, I think, where it gets really fascinating psychologically. Let's name them. Ice skating.

Figure skating. Right? Yep. Figure skating. Lins. I would bet that the women's ratings is higher than the men's. Gymnastics. Probably ratings are on equal footing.

If I'm having to bet, I bet women's gymnastics rates higher than men's gymnastics. My wife made the point, she was very passionate about this, volleyball. She thinks women's volleyball rates and draws eyeballs and is attractive to the casual viewer at a rate that is higher than men. I made the joke, it's because of what they wear. She said, no, it's not. Track and field. But she made another argument.

We'll come back to track and field. When I think about ice skating and I think about gymnastics and by a different calculus volleyball, the reason those sports rival men's is they offer something that is uniquely feminine. It is when women do something that men cannot do, that then people gravitate towards watching what they see as a superior product. Okay, so figure skating. Women figure skaters are not as athletic as men figure skaters.

They can't do the number of twists in the air, the axles. They can't do all the stuff that the quad god can do. But they can't, Dan. They can't physically, athletically do everything that's done by the quad god. But that, in the end, isn't the only calculus to figure skating. It's not all about athleticism. It's about grace and beauty. And women are more graceful and beautiful creatures than men.

And they can do things in that realm that men, in a way that is pleasing to the audience that cannot be matched by the men. Same with gymnastics. Women can't do all the things in gymnastics that men can do physically, athletically. But there's an element of grace and beauty to gymnastics that rewards women and their discipline over the men. My wife made the argument. I hope she doesn't mind sharing her argument with the world, but volleyball also offers something, although different, that men cannot replicate. And I think she's right. Have you ever been to a women's volleyball game? Like one of the cool things

about a women's volleyball game, and it really is truly cool, is the culture of women's volleyball. It's like super, super supportive. Like every point lifting each other up, loving each other. And it's infectious to the point of infectious to the audience. And men aren't like that. Yeah, we celebrate each other and these hockey bros are doing their hockey bro thing and we all love it. I have two boys that played some club sports at a very high level. And I'm going to tell you something about men's soccer world.

It's negative. It's not awesome. It's mercenary style. Most club sports are mercenary style. lacrosse is mercenary style they're all competing for spots with one another they're teammates but they're competing against one another they downtalk each other there's a lot of negativity and it's kind of not attractive in the end i don't know about men's volleyball but i wouldn't be surprised if it also has some of those same characteristics where women in volleyball do

something that men don't do well with one another and that is use support and encouragement as a way of actually elevating the entire sport so long and short of it is. My argument, Patrick, while I pushed back on you this morning, is if I look at the women's sports that do really well and attract an audience, it's where they do things better than men uniquely to their own characteristic and traits. And when they do things that are just like the men and adopt the culture of the men, it is not as quality as the men. And therefore, people will never respect or celebrate or watch it as much as they do the men. And, And so this is all about President Trump's joke in the end.

And there's going to be a second part of this analysis in just a moment, if you'll stick with us. Because I want to talk about why the world's dart champion is invited to the White House. But the long and short of what I'm saying is President Trump is playing on a joke that everyone not just intuitively understands, but operates accordingly. They behave this way. Women don't watch the men sport in the same way. Men don't watch the women sport in the same way. They don't. This is a truth.

You can call it good or bad. One last thing on this point. If I were on that women's hockey team, would I feel insulted? Yeah, I might. And I totally get it. And what the women have done is so awesome and what they've accomplished. I totally get how they could feel. Why is the whole world talking about the men?

They're not talking about the women. I would get it. But the analysis doesn't stop at your feelings. Okay? You can't force other people to feel the way you want them to feel. As a guy who played a sport that the world does not give a damn. about in water polo? I understand. Nobody shows up at the games. Am I going to sit around and blame them? Am I mad at them? Am I going to blame it on waterism? Like, what is my excuse?

They just don't like it as much. My boys play soccer. The crowd at the high school stadium is not as full as it is for the football game or the lacrosse game. And am I mad? I wish it were. I totally wish it were. But am I mad at the student body? No. Because it just is the reason it is. And you can go, well, why? Well, society is gross or it's sexist or it's soccerist. You know, why are they all lacrosse fan? Man, in the end, people like what they like and we're exploring why they like it.

But all the Sally Jenkins of the world and the, you know, ESPN, 9 out of 10 commentators, you're caught up in making the world feel the way you want them to feel. instead of understanding why it is the way they feel. You want to brush it off his sexism. But Patrick, and I hate to say this, has a point. There is a reason that the NBA has much higher ratings than the WNBA. There is a reason that we watch the NHL and not what is the name of the women's professional hockey league. There is a reason why we watch the MLS and not the NWS.

sell. So I think this is part of it. It's not that we don't respect the accomplishment of this women's hockey team. But in a thing that is inherently, almost always, but not always, masculine, you're going to have the culture and the eyeballs gravitate to the highest quality of the masculine discipline sports. Let's take a quick break, but we'll be right back on Will Cain Country. This is Ainsley Earhart. Thank you for joining me for the 52 episode podcast series, The Life of Jesus. A listening experience that will provide hope, comfort, and understanding of the greatest story ever told.

Listen and follow now at Fox News Podcasts.com or wherever you listen to podcasts. Welcome back to Will Kane Country. We'll continue to analyze this and why the world's best dart champion doesn't get invited to the White House. But Steve Cortes is a contributor all over the place. He's the host of Steve Cortes Investigates. He's got a new documentary out called the China's college takeover, talking about the number of students at American universities coming from,

in this case, China. But Steve, you know what's something that I'm really interested in? And we're going to get into China. But I'm really interested in the entirety of the American university system taking foreign students. I have to think, and they may not think this, Steve, but I have to think at the expense of the American student. Absolutely. Will, we are stealing opportunity. We're robbing opportunity from young Americans at the schools that we fund.

And by the way, this is an important point, including the private ones. As a matter of fact, the most selective elite private schools like Harvard actually get far more taxpayer subsidy than due to state schools. So we're paying for all of them, whether or not you have anything to do in your life with a university. You're paying for it. And we are paying for hundreds of thousands of spots to go to international students. And on top of that, one of the largest cohorts of international students, thousand of them, in fact, come from China, come from the existential enemy to the United States. So there's an added national security risk regarding the masses of Chinese students who come here.

So yes, I'm saying overall far too many international students. And I make this point in my documentary, I think something like a one or two percent cap would make sense. At most of these selective universities, the Ivy Leagues and equivalence, it's more like 25 percent minimum. at some of them like Columbia University in New York, it's closer to 50% international. We're educating children from kids from all over the rest of the world, not Americans,

especially at the schools that are the hardest places to get into. So I think overall should be capped at 1 or 2%. And for Chinese students, I believe the number should be zero. Okay, hold on. Coming back to Chinese. Harvard is 25% foreign student

and Columbia is 50% foreign student? That's correct. And University of Illinois. That's insane. Let's get out of the Ivy League. University of Illinois, which I profile in my documentary, right in the American Heartland, a school that literally is in the middle of cornfields, an outstanding school, by the way, one of the best STEM schools in America, University of Illinois.

6,000 Chinese nationals are studying at the U of I. And outstanding kids, outstanding young Americans who get fantastic grades, who have all the credentials you could ever want to get. They take all the APs, they get a 36th on the ACT, They have a 4.4 grade point of average. They do the extracurriculars. They live in Illinois, and they can't get in to the University of Illinois. But 6,000 Chinese nationals are there.

So many Chinese nationals that they actually have broadcast football games, fighting the Lai football games, in Mandarin Chinese. Ha! It's all so insane. You used a word that I want to follow up on. I think you said subsidized. I think you said we were paying for these foreign students to come here. argument that I've always been told, Steve, is that one of the reasons that American universities,

not just Harvard or Illinois, but the University of North Texas or Texas A&M, pretty much any American university, public or private, is interested in foreign students is they pay full freight, that the universities want students to come over and pay the full tuition room and board, where American students get grants or financial aid or scholarship, they're getting and making the bulk of their money or a good chunk of their money on foreign students. You use the words, you know, I think you used the word subsidize. You said we're paying for foreign students. But isn't the argument that economically the universities need these people paying full freight from other countries?

Well, yes, it's a great question. They do not need them. Now, many of them do pay full freight. But believe it or not, there's actually very generous financial aid packages from these schools for the foreign students. That's how much they actually want foreign students. And they want to replace Americans and take spots away from American young people. Now, the foreign students can't get federal financial aid. can't get things like federally subsidized loans.

That is true. They're not eligible for those. However, the universities have chosen on their own to be very generous with the foreign students. And we are subsidizing all of these universities. As I mentioned, Harvard is an ostensibly private school. It gets more aid than any other school in America in terms of taxpayer subsidies.

Outright grants, as well as all kinds of tax exempt privileges. A lot of these really wealthy, selective schools like Harvard, let's face it, they're basically hedge funds who operate a school on the side. They're tax-free hedge funds, unfortunately, with $50 billion endowments. They don't need a dime of our money, yet they're incredibly good at feeding at the public trough.

And then they turn around and educate kids from overseas, including the enemy of the United States, the Chinese Communist Party. Because remember this too, all of these students who come from China, by definition, they are connected to the CCP through their families, through their parents, because the kind of wealthy elite kids from China who can afford to come to the United States,

All of them have some degree of interconnectedness with the CCP. I want to come back. One more question before we dive into China. Why then? If it's not economic, if it's not financial, or at least not totally economic or not totally financial, why are American universities, which I think it's a pretty common-sensical position to hold,

that American universities, funded by taxpayer dollars, should be supporting American students or in prioritizing American students, perhaps even exclusionary to American students, why? Why are they taking too many? foreign students? No, it's a great question, Will. So outside of finances, and this is a very cynical answer, but I think it's the truth, and it's certainly what I learned researching for my documentary,

is that a lot of these faculties and these administrations, they are not patriotic in any sense, Will. They don't like America. They don't want to promote America. They don't view their mission as being a patriotic public service mission in educating citizens of this country. And so frankly, they want to dilute the student body. I think also many of them, realize that the student visas lead to work visas. So for example, if you're here on a student visa, you automatically get a visa called OPT. And if you are in STEM, that means you can work for three years minimum after you graduate. So not only you're replacing American students at these selective universities, you then are replacing American young people in the job market. And often

that OPT then leads to a green card, which can eventually lead to citizenship. So in many ways, it's really a side door also to mass legal migration into this country. And I think a lot of these universities, frankly, that's just their agenda. They don't prioritize Americans. They don't have pride in America. They're not patriots. And so frankly, they're more than happy to provide this entree, to provide this lane for foreigners to come to the United States, not just as students, but perhaps for life. Well, as a curiosity, just as a quick aside, is OPT, so the student visa rolling into employment visa, is it capped?

Is it regulated? Is it controlled by the government? There's supposedly an H-1B visa work permit cap. I believe the cap is 85,000. Before you talk to me about students, I'm just curious. Is there a cap on OPT? No, there is not. And again, it's automatic. There's no cap.

Everyone gets at least a year. And if you're in STEM, which almost all of these Chinese students are, if you're in STEM, you get three years. Okay. What's interesting about that, Steve, is that universities are exempt from the H-1B caps. So you could bring in all these students. They roll into OPT, which rolls into Green Card,

and this is a totally uncapped form of mass migration. Yeah, that's exactly right. And again, they shouldn't be taking the student spots in the first place, right? These students, University of Illinois should exist primarily for the citizens of Illinois, by the way. Secondarily, then, should be educating other Americans who are not from the state of Illinois. And then if there are going to be international, as I said, I think one or two percent would make sense. Okay, if you want to bring in true geniuses and you want an international flavor and sort of diversity to your school,

okay, that makes sense as long as we keep that number really, really low. And again, I would argue that from enemy nations, from Iran or North Korea or China, that number should be zero. So while we're talking to Steve, I've got a map up in studio here at Will King Country. The show's international student enrollment by state. you can see that New York and California are your primary states with foreign students enrolled in universities, then followed by Texas. Then after those top three, you're looking at Illinois, Florida, Pennsylvania, Michigan. Universities with the largest international student population. This shows NYU at number one at 27,000.

Northeastern in Boston, 21,000. Columbia, 20,000. Arizona State, 18,000. University of Southern California. 17,000. You heard Steve reference Illinois, about 15,000 international students within the student body population. So Steve, let's talk about China now. Let's talk about the concern over Chinese students uniquely or in particular among these foreign students. Yes. So there you have an added national security risk. A lot of very sensitive research, by the way, goes on at these universities,

including for the Department of Defense. Universities, thankfully, have always been at the forefront of scientific research, including in matters that are critical to our national security. So it makes no sense, just broadly it makes no sense to educate our enemies, to educate their children, to send them back to China so that they are better prepared to make China stronger, wealthier, as an adversary to the United States. But then on top of that, there's a very real risk of espionage, of saboteurs.

By the way, this isn't just my theory. recently three Chinese nationals who were students at University of Michigan, this just happened, were arrested, charged with espionage. They were trying to sneak bio-weapons into the United States that were capable of poisoning our food supply, of attacking American agriculture. You know, I mentioned Illinois at another school in Illinois, Illinois, which is in Chicago, a Chinese national was convicted, was arrested and convicted of espionage spying on the defense establishment in the United States. He's actually will, believe it or not, he's back in China now because he was swapped in a prisoner exchange between the United States and China. That's how important he was

to Beijing, this young man, that they wanted him back and they were willing to trade American prisoners to get him back to China. So we know factually that there have been some spies, there may be many, many more, of course, that we don't know about right now. What are they doing here? But inviting in 300,000 Chinese nationals into the United States every year to go to our best universities to have access to some of our very best technology. It just makes no sense. Again, mainly because we're displacing Americans. That's my primary concern. But on top of that, the national security risks to me are just untenable. This does not make sense for us. And again, we're paying for it, Will. Is there a, what is the best counterargument, Steve? Like, I would

imagine that President Trump might actually disagree with you, because I hear him give voice and rhetoric to we want to attract the best of the best. And so I would imagine the counterpoint is something like we need to bring over the world's smartest people from across the globe into the United States. It's good they roll into OPT or working in America. What we're doing is raising the bar for the entire country on the quality of our brain power and our output. Yeah. No, and listen, this is a rare instance, by the way, where I'm not on the same page with President Trump. And I think most of his base, frankly, is not on the same page with President Trump, at least if they're educated on this issue. And I hope that my documentary is going to do that for a lot of people who weren't aware.

But President Trump mainly uses the financial argument and says that a lot of these schools will end up in trouble if they don't have foreign students. And to that, I say, okay, if that's the case, if your model is actually that dependent on foreign students, then it's just a bad model. It's a poisoned model in the first place. And perhaps some of those schools should go out of business. By the way, I think a lot of American universities aren't exactly doing great things for our society. And we should think about what their business model is like. but when you're talking the selective schools and the Chinese students overwhelmingly are coming here to go to our most selective schools. They don't come over here to go to a second rate or a third tier American school.

So they're going to the Ives in Northwestern and Stanford University of Illinois. All of those schools have massive endowments. They would be just fine financially if they took out the foreign students, but they might have to change their behavior in some ways. And maybe some of their ten-year-old professors who make a few hundred thousand dollars to teach two classes per semester will have to take some pay cuts. Maybe they'll have to spend less money on some of the frivolities at these universities. But they should have to make those decisions. They should have a model that works catering to American students primarily. And I would argue almost exclusively.

Yeah. To that point, this is a story that's cropping up right now, Steve, the University of North Texas in Denton, Texas, outside of Dallas, Fort Worth, is claiming a severe $45 million structural budget deficit for the current year because of the federal crackdown on international student visas. in related funding shortfalls. They are saying that they are plummeting from 6,200 to 3,400 students this year

from international students. So almost a 50% decline. And the loss in revenue is roughly $30 million in missing tuition revenue. An additional $32 million in state funding has been cut that exacerbates the gap, and they're crying poverty.

They're crying that they're going to, I don't know, go out of it. of business, the University of North Texas. I do wonder, to your point of the business model, when the demand for college has probably never been higher, the number of people going off to college is probably never been higher in American history. The price is hyperinflationary. It's never been higher. The endowments, I would imagine across the board have never been higher. Why, again, to the business model, do we need international students to keep this thing afloat? None of that seems to make sense in the math. Correct. And again, look,

Will some of these schools end up in trouble? Probably, I don't know that that's necessarily a terrible thing for our society, quite frankly, because I think a lot of American universities probably most don't really serve the public interest right now. Again, these are not the institutions that used to be. These are not your parents and grandparents universities. They don't view themselves as patriotic institutions that are here to uplift our society and to sustain and grow the next generation of American leaders. That's just not how they view themselves any longer.

Many of them are indoctrination academies, quite frankly, teaching a lot of toxic nonsense and trying to make young people feel guilty about who they are as Americans. So it wouldn't, you know, I don't think it would be a tragedy to see some of them go out of business. But again, if the business model cannot be sustained on using American young people as your primary customers, then there's something very broken about your business model. So I'd have to get into University of North Texas. I guarantee you I can identify all kinds of places where they could cut tremendously on unneeded spending. and still sustain themselves with almost all of their students being from Texas. And the ones not from Texas being other Americans, but I'd have to get into those specifics.

And again, for the selective schools who have mammoth endowments, they will be in zero trouble. They could bring in no tuition, and they could still operate for decades to come, the Ivy League schools and the Stamford's, for example. I mean, they literally will, could operate for decades and bring in no revenue. That's how much they have in their massive, mammoth endowments right now. And to your point, the analysis of China even goes far beyond that.

Why would we do this for somebody who is at best arrival at worst, an enemy of the United States? The documentary is called China's College Takeover. The host is Steve Cortes, and he's the host of Steve Cortes investigates. And it's good to have you on the show, Steve. Hope to see you again. Don't be a stranger. Hey, Will. Thanks so much. Appreciate it. Let's take a quick break, but I want to continue this. What I think is a fascinating analysis of the outrage over the joke President Trump made about the men's and women's hockey team. When we come back on Will King Country, welcome back to Will Kane Country. We're breaking down the absolute latest in outrage over President Trump's joke in his call to the U.S. men's Olympic hockey team.

All right. I want to bring back in ten-fold, Pat, two at A's Dan, for just a moment. I want to pick up this conversation, which we'll string throughout the show on colleges, or rather on sports and the U.S. men's and women's Olympic hockey team. And Ellie was in here just a moment ago. See if we can get Ellie to come back. Ellie, who works here at the Wilcane show in Wilcane Country, played sports in high school, softball, I think a lot of different sports. And I saw you nodding along, Ellie, as we were talking about, you know, the culture of different sports and what lends itself towards women, men, what's popular, what's not popular.

Where is Ellie, Ed? What is she in the bathroom? Her office is 10 yards away. Go ahead. All right. I saw you nodding, but I imagine you had some disagreement. No, you don't. Go ahead.

Speak into the microphone. Let's see if this works. Go ahead. Speak into the microphone. Is it on? I don't think it's on. There we go. Does this work?

It's Ed. Go ahead. Hi. I don't think I have a lot of disagreements. Oh, Father Jonathan Morris is in with this, too. It's part of this Olympic debate really quickly. I see Father John. Let's keep him there.

What's up? What's up Jonathan? Good to see you. Sorry about that. Sorry about that. We are going to talk to Jonathan Morrison just a moment about Reagan and the Pope. I just really want to hear. Ellie, go ahead.

Give me your take on the women's hockey team versus the men's hockey team and President Trump's joke in the locker room. Is it working? Yeah. You're live. I don't think I have a lot of disagreements with what you said. I think if you actually think about like women's sports and men's sports, like it's not surprising that women's sports is getting less attention. I even think like Patrick's point.

Can you hear me? No. All right. Well. We can't hear. I can't hear. I can't hear. I know you could.

couldn't hear Ellie, so I can't respond anything she's saying. She's not going in to my... What a great segment this is. One of these did. Ed. Yeah, Ed. Bravo. You can turn that mic down now. Her mic's open. She's got an I-FB. Obviously, she's never used to an IFB because she doesn't know how to put it on. Yeah. Yeah.

This is not... The technological expertise of the control room right now is not Olympic level. I can hear myself. It's not gold medal Olympic winning level right here. This was her broadcasting debut. This is also her broadcasting sunset. This is unfortunately the end.

I do want to keep talking about this subject. I do want to keep talking about that joke that President Trump made. And why, you know, in the end, you're going to have to accept that not everybody feels the way that you feel about sports. And that doesn't make them wrong. And when President Trump makes a joke that leans into the truth, it doesn't make him evil. You can't make people feel the way you feel about the thing that you want them to feel. I would say the thing you love, but the truth is, most women don't watch women's sports. So it's not even at that standard.

Okay, he was up for a minute. We've lost him, at least visually, but I think he's here now. Jonathan Morris is with us as well today. He's got a brand new special out at Fox Nation. It's called Reagan and the Pope. Talking about the relationship between former President Ronald Reagan and Pope John Paul II. Jonathan, great to see you. Thank you very much, Walt.

Good to be with you. I love the introduction as Father Jonathan. That was, it brings back, like, yeah, got a bittersweet memories. But the sweet part of it, besides the many wonderful times I had is ministry of the Catholic priesthood, now I'm married, as you know, and have two kids, but also the sweet moments of all the friendships that I have. had, including with you, Will, through that ministry in our time on Fox. I'm still a contributor to Fox, but you and Pete Higsef and I in the couch on Fox and Friends. We had some good times.

We did. And the father title was a force of habit there at the beginning, which I did catch myself on and didn't do it a second or third time. I'm glad you, I'm glad you corrected the record. You know, so this thing that you've done here with Fox Nation is pretty fascinating about the relationship between the Pope and President Reagan. Can we just start with one thing that I was really fascinated by? And I don't know what to think of it. I'm curious what you're going to say. In the documentary, you highlight this, that Pope John Paul II is the very first Pope in 455 years to not be Italian. And on one level, I'm like, well, Catholic.

and Christianity are worldwide. And yeah, we've talked about now we have a North American, an American pope. We had a Latin American, South American pope. We've had, obviously, a Polish pope, a German pope. And it reflects the growth and the expansiveness of Christianity and in particular Catholicism. But I just kind of thought about that for a minute. And most of the time, Jonathan, when I see something is the first and the precursor is almost half a millennia, I go, hmm, wow, that's a pretty drastic change. And I'm forced to just think, like, what does that drastic change actually mean? Is it always all good? Yeah, okay. Interesting. Well, I think it was very good that John Paul I second was elected. Carol Waitiwa, right, from Poland.

Remember that John Paul I was elected just 30 days before John Paul the second was elected, and he died after 30 days along his pontificate. He was Italian, but it seemed like during the conclave prior to John Paula Seconds election, when they elected John Paul I first, they got to know this guy named Carol Wirtia. In his 50s, from Poland, an incredibly impressive intellectual, but also a humble man in an amazing communicator, an amazing communicator, who lived during, for years, both studying and in his ministry under the communist bloc. And they were impressed by him.

The Cardinals were impressed by him. So John Paul I second, John Paul the first dies. They have to have a conclave 30 days later, and they elect John Paul a second. When he came out, there's great video of this. Our listeners can look up when John Paul a second comes out onto the balcony. And he says, open the gates. Open your doors to God, to Jesus. Be not afraid.

Be not afraid. And that was coming from, first of all, he spoke in Italian, this Polish guy speaking in Italian. So then immediately the Italians were like, oh, okay, it's not going to be too bad. At least the guy speaks Italian, the only worthwhile language, of course. And he said, open the port. Abriete la port. And then he was speaking also to the communist government who had suppressed his people and continued to suppress his people for 44 years after World War II. And he was telling the people in Poland, it doesn't matter who your government is. Do not be afraid.

And that had to do with do not be afraid because there's a greater power than any government. And that is the power of the Holy Spirit, the power of God, to. encourage people to give up even their lives, to seek what is natural to the human person. And that is freedom and a desire for excellence. And there's no excellence when there's no freedom. Oh, wow. How beautiful, how eloquent. And obviously what you offer there either intentionally or unintentionally is the unique power and ability to speak to that moment from somebody who had come from that background, not Italian, but Polish, had lived behind the Iron Curtain. And and took that issue on, along with Ronald Reagan, and it's one of the things they shared that desire to drop the iron curtain to do.

I don't know if, I don't know if the Pope was the Pope's goal the same as Reagan's, really honestly to defeat the Soviet Union? Was it, would it have been that openly political? 1,000%. And, you know, you could say is it political? but when a human being is being suppressed, whether by a government or through slavery or whatever happens to be, of course there's political elements. But the bigger element,

the foundation there is one of humanity, and that is that we are meant to be free. We are co-creators with God. We are supposed to use our human agency to do good, to co-create, to build, to better the world, to better our society. And John Paul I second said, that is being suppressed.

And his very first visit was back to Poland. That says it all. Think of Pope Francis never even went back to Argentina, even during his nine years of his pontificate. It looks like Pope Leo is not coming to the United States, at least in his first year. And Colonel Ortiz, this 57-year-old, if I'm not mistaken, young cardinal who was this amazing communicator in any language that he spoke because he really

knew how to tap into what matters to human beings he went back to Poland and he defended and supported this what was called the solidarity movement and the solidarity was coming together to speak truth to power did um i'm going somewhere with this i have a question for you that i think you're uniquely capable of answering did pope leo is he declining to come to the United States. I think I read this, but I'm not sure that I'm 100% accurate on this because of opposition to the current government's policies on immigration, like with ICE and all that. Hasn't he spoken out against that? Is that his reason for not coming back to America? I think was the invitation around the World Cup or something like that to come or something like that

and he's not going to come? I do have some construction going on above me, so I apologize for the audio here. He certainly has not said he's not coming to the United States because of or anything like that. In fact, I think he would love to come to the United States and speak his mind about lots of issues, including humane immigration reform, et cetera. So I don't think it's because of that. My guess is that as an American, he wants to let everybody know that he, first and foremost, he's representing Catholics around the world and that he's not, you know, there was a very, very valid belief that an American would likely not be elected ever as because as long as the United States was the most powerful country in the world, there'd just be too much power in the hands of one people. But the cardinals believed that he was the right person for the job, and they elected him. Well, here's the question. And maybe this ties back into the relationship between John Paul II and Reagan as well. What is, Jonathan, what is the relationship between Catholicism and the concept of the nation state? And here's why I asked that.

Okay, on one hand, I've got John Paul II looking to, as you said, 1,000 percent defeat the Soviet Union. And there's a lot of reasons for that, primarily probably because it's a position on religion. But Pope Leo seems to have taken a position on, you know, a free flow of migration. I don't know exactly what he wants when it comes to immigration, but he doesn't seem to look kindly upon the enforcement of immigration laws in the United States. And I guess my question is at a deeper level, well, but that's kind of core to the concept of a nation state, like borders and protection of immigration and control over it versus a free flow of migration. And if you take that position, you deny really the definitional concept of a nation state, right? That's sort of key to the existence of the nation state. And on one hand, I got one guy who's going after an existing nation state, maybe for the same.

reasons. I don't know. Maybe you'll say that. But I'm curious, like, with the over, is the nation state? Like, is that something, is that a virtue within the Catholic Church? A thousand percent. You go back to Thomas Aquinas. You go back to Plato, Aristotle, these great Western thinkers that established really the foundation for universities, and the universities were founded by the Catholic Church. That is the Western tradition. And Pope Leo, Will, I'm glad you asked this question. because Pope Leo has said that when talking about immigration multiple times, the media, we don't always pick up on this, but he said a nation has a right to defend its borders.

And the social doctrine of the Catholic Church throughout is not only the right to defend the borders, but also a obligation to regulate immigration in a safe and sustainable way, safe and sustainable, with the priority given to the country that you're receiving, that you're responsible for as politicians. Pope Leo has said it needs to be done in a humane way. Now, keep in mind, he's coming from many years

working in Latin America as a missionary. And many of the people that he served would have made the terrible track, as we know, up north being trafficked by cartels, by coyotes, as they call, whether it's drug cartels or just human trafficking cartels, for economic purposes. And he knows what that's like.

And so he's saying, people coming across need to be treated humanely. He's getting news. I lived in Europe for many years. I worked at the Vatican for nine years. A lot of the news is very European-centric when you're there. And of course, now in 2026, we have a lot more, no matter where you live, you have a lot more sources of news. But I think that's where he's coming from.

He's erring on the side of, let's protect the human dignity of every person, whether you're someplace legally or not. You deserve respect. You deserve to be treated humanely. And so he says that more often than he does the first part. But he truly believes, because he said it, it's actually the teaching of the Catholic Church, that it is politicians, not churchmen,

who have the obligation before God even to make sure that immigration is done on a safe and sustainable level. And it's certainly a lot safer to say, don't come by way of coyotes. And I would love to hear that be spoken as well. Right. Okay, going back to Reagan and the Pope, would you say, was that one of the best relationships between an American political leader and a pope? I mean, they had some things in common.

Their position on the Soviet Union, in particular on Poland, by the way. They both seemed to think Poland was the lynchpin of the Soviet Union. And if you can liberate Poland, the thing begins to fall. But they also both survived assassination attempts. Like, have we had as good of relations since as we did then? I would say it's the most practical. pragmatic relationship that had the most impact. It's interesting, you said, Will, that they both recognized that Poland was kind of a linchpin to bring down communism.

And the reason why they believe that, and Reagan knew this, he also got to see the power of just the personality of John Paul. And he said, this guy's very special. Let's work together. But Poland was able to maintain its religious identity in a way that many other countries in the communist bloc were not able to. had been wiped out in many places it had been wiped out just by the pure force of of of government saying if you do this you're going to die or you're going you are going to be persecuted or you're going to be put into jail and then we're going to shut down your churches and we're going to take over your churches propaganda machine but in poland that identity was preserved and they both knew i think i just lost audio by the way of of jonathan morris just lost in my

AFB. This happened once again last week. I don't know if Jonathan Morse. There we go. I can hear you fine. Okay. I can hear you again. I got you as well. Okay. All right. And then, but the relationship between these two guys and not just on the Poland aspect, but the assassination aspect as well. This is the subject to the documentary, how these two men, Reagan and the Pope, work together. So what was the relationship? It was really. It was really, special right from the beginning because they decided that they were going to meet together. And they made a promise that nothing was going to be revealed. Nothing would be revealed from those first meetings.

And they came out of there and they said nothing. And there were documents that were shared by the Vatican, by John Paul II, to Reagan. The Vatican has an incredible diplomatic corps and has political data that other people, other countries, have. And the Vatican shared that with Reagan. And Reagan used that in order to work with Gorbachev to make sure that this was moving in the right direction. They were all working together. Oh, fascinating. This is all laid out in a documentary at Fox Nation. It's entitled Reagan and the Pope, Jonathan Moore's Theologian Fox News contributor, as you heard, here at the top. And it's good to see you again, Jonathan. It's been too long. And I'm glad to have you

on the show to lay out Reagan and the Pope. Thank you. Thank you, Walt. Thank you very much. All right, good to have him. You bet. Good to have you again on the show. Let's take a quick break, but we'll be right back on Will Cain Country. Welcome back to Will Cain Country. Okay, let's see. Let's see if we can do this. Okay. Bonnie Sue Rosenwald. Okay, Bonnie Sue, over on Fox, over on Facebook. says the following, she says, Will, I listen to the comment, assuming that's President Trump in the locker room with the hockey team. I have a completely different take on it. Patel was in the locker room and called Trump. Trump invited the men's team and said he would have to invite the women's team because he invited the men impromptu, and now he has to call the women to invite them

too. It didn't take, I didn't take it any other way. I also think that was a joke about impeachment. I must tell you, I have to invite the women, or I'm almost certain. I'll get impeached. Lockroom talk. I don't even think it was locker room talk. I think what he was, he was making a joke about the fact the left goes about, goes against him for everything. Like, look at how they blew this up.

I mean, like, he could have said something completely, you know, unrelated, and they still would have gone after him for nothing. That's how they work. Well, look, that's a fact. The whip saw, whip lash nature. Why do I say whipsaw? Is Wipsaw a word? It's not a word.

Does that mean something? Oh, I made that up. The whip-lash nature of outrage is wild. Like, it is a word, Dan? What is Wipsaw? A saw with a narrow blade and the handle at both ends, usually typically used by two people. Like the ones that, like, one a person on each end? Like a lumberjack contest?

Yeah. But I'm using it. But I'm using it wrong. That's not. I don't know, back and forth like that. I don't know. It's a stretch, but yeah, sure. What do we, what are we, like, are we on a,

we're not on a monthly, biweekly, are we on a biweekly, outrage cycle from the left? Daily. What do you talking about? When it comes to President Trump? It's like every half a week. No, I'm saying like, like when one is replaced by the next.

Do you know what I'm saying? It's like half a week. I would say two weeks. In my reporting from the left, it's two weeks. It was ice. Have you noticed it's not ice now? Now it's not ice. I mean, there's some vestigial properties of ice still out there.

I mean, they were freaking out over the White House, what is it, East Wing Edition? You know? Like, who cares? Yeah. Like, who gives a dam? No one. They're upset about the snow up here. It's got to be exhausting.

It's got to be exhausting. Dan, the brunch crew is like emotional, emotional roller coaster. If you saw the art group. Dude, it's got to be exhausting. It is. And it's funny because, like, I don't agree with them on everything, and I don't agree with you on everything here. So I'm in this, like, weird limbo.

Shut. I get it. I'm in this weird limbo where, like, I'm just being things on bulls, I'm seeing things on both sides and trying to make sense of it. It's just, wow. Because you're further left, right? Yeah. I've gone just, you know, all the way.

Way further left than he lets on. No. I do think this is a shot at you, Patrick. It could be me. Joseph Smith. Dude looks like he's never played a sport in his life, L.O.L. Say hi to your mom when you leave the basement. Well, I'll tell you right now.

That's untrue. I used to play hockey and baseball. And he owns that basement. Yeah, well, I don't have a base. I live in Florida. That's his basement. Yeah. We don't have basements because.

It's his own. Joseph. That is Patrick's basement. Yeah. Not his mom's basement. Yeah. I was. Okay.

Can I just say something real quick? Go ahead. So you said about your wife, my wife weighed in to a little bit. She was a D-1 sprinter in college. I will say in my most athletic time, she would be able to kick my ass and running, hands down. That's not the point. But track and field is very impressive in the Olympics with women. I think it's close.

Everything has a scale, Dan. Okay. How about this? And if we just, what we're really talking about mostly is ratings. ratings as a reflection and not the world's not driven by ratings that's not just like a guy in the media saying that ratings are all that matters ratings are a measurement of people's interest in something right so um ratings as a proxy for entertainment value probably to some extent not totally respect um that's not right i'm not saying we shouldn't respect the women's hockey team i'm just telling you men gravitate to men sports and women don't gravitate to many sports, right? And I said to my wife, like, you say this, she goes,

I probably know more about what sport did she say? Oh, the WMBA than you. I'm like, I doubt it. I really doubt it. I have watched more minutes of the WMBA than she has. I can name more players in the WNBA than she can. There's no doubt about it. But Olympics are different.

Men just like sports more than women, period. We know that. They'll bet on the WMBA. It's not controversial. To be fair, we had the six. my wife. And that's, we were really attracted to that story. Let's pick another one.

Women's tennis, right? When Serena was at her apex and she was winning everything and she was getting pretty good ratings, right? Do you think the majority of that audience was men or women? The majority, over 51 percent, men or women? Men. I would say men. I would, I don't know. I don't know.

Women aren't. Women don't watch sports as much as men. I don't know, tennis is different. Women watch tennis a lot, in my experience. What do you think the WNBA's audience is? If you did a pie chart of the WNBA's audience. You think it's more men? Men versus women.

They get mad. They get mad because men aren't watching enough, and it's like, it's literally mostly men watching. That's what I'm saying. A lot of men watch women's college basketball, by the way. I'm telling the majority of... Yes. There are people like Big Cat who will sit there and watch...

Anything you put on ESPN. But those men, like most of them, men sports more. The point is the women aren't even holding themselves to the standard that they're seemingly requiring the rest of the world to be held to. Watch it, celebrate it, respect it. But you don't. Now, you're going to come with isolated incidences and anecdotes, and I'm sure that's true. But I'm talking about on the averages, the numbers. And my larger point, Dan, is there's going to be a scale.

So the gap between the NBA and the WNBA's interest level is wide, right? Oh, huge. Yeah. The gap between women's figure skating and men's figure skating is all the way the other way. It might tilt. I don't know this for a fact. I don't have the ratings. But I wouldn't be surprised to learn the women's figure skating rates higher than men's figure skating, right?

And then in between, you have everything else where I think tennis. I do know men's tennis rates higher than women's tennis. But it's probably a narrower gap. than the basketball gap. The hockey gap is large. The soccer gap is pretty large. People don't believe that or want to know that because we're talking about most of the time,

a World Cup, global audience. So the gap is different. I was going to say, Dan, is I'll bet you track and field. I'll also put swimming in there. Swimming to you. The gap is more narrow. Right? So, like, I do think the men's probably rates higher than the women's,

but not at the same level or not at the same level. or not the same gap that it does with basketball. Right? So I want to, um, what is the awesome women swimmer's name? Gosh, why is my, Katie Ladeke? Or maybe it is. Katie Ladecki. What are the ratings for Katie Ladeke's race versus Michael Phelps?

Right? I don't, I think you have the difference right there. I'm sure she did. I'm sure she did. Do you know who one? It's different. And my original analysis really quickly was, do you guys think I'm wrong real quick on that? And I can't hear Ellie if she's in there.

She's not in there. But do you think my analysis is wrong? The sports where the women's sport does rival the men's are the ones where they offer something uniquely feminine that men can't offer. Skating, gymnastics, volleyball. You think that's right, Patrick? Yes, 100%. I mean, can you name the gold medalist who won the women's figure skating? Yeah, Alyssa Liu.

Yeah. Yeah. Do you know who did male film figure skating? I don't know. I couldn't tell you. Quad God. Quad God. Don't know his name, but I know his nickname is Quad God.

Ilya Malin. But also, a woman did that backflip first before he did. I'm just saying years earlier. But this goes back to the darts thing. Like, I do like that. I'm making light and using an anecdote. But it's always the best one to me. Somewhere out there, there is a dude that has dominated the world of darts.

And by the way, that's on TV sometimes. I watch darts. It's on TV every once in a while. I do watch it. You know what to get them on? It's big in England, right? It's big in England. They're so good.

Yeah. It's insane. But, Dan. Their ratings are not. I know. Because not that many people care. And we don't know his name. And he walks around in the world out there.

That's me. The bumper pool champion. I'm the world's best bumper pool player. Of North Texas, at least. The darts dude walks around in the world anonymous. He walks around the world very few people going, hey. Billy! You know, I think he pulls.

Can I get your autograph? Can I get a selfie? It doesn't happen to him that much. And he can't be mad at the world about that. He can't require the world to care about something as much as he has. And in the end, this entire enterprise is requiring of the world to care about something. There is fulfillment in your accomplishment, regardless of the external validation. You don't need the world to celebrate.

celebrate the women's Olympic gold medal and the men's at the same level to gain the same amount of respect internally. And so I just think this whole industrial complex enterprise of the women's sports criticism, the editorial criticism. A, I don't think they watch. I don't, you know, take your random ESPN commentator. I don't think they watch things at the same level. I don't think they watch the women's sports that they say that we all should be watching. and in the end, they're just saying you guys should all be doing something that I don't do and you should feel a way that I dictate to you that you should feel.

And if you don't, then you're a sexist. You're a bad person. And I guess the guy who's the world dart champion could feel the same way then. Go ahead, Dan. Can just read one comment from the chat right now? It's kind of interesting. Lady in agriculture says you're twisting yourself into a knot to prove a point. based on today in history, you are correct as it is a man's world,

but ponder this as to why women aren't into sports. Look at her day. On your day of sports, who cooks, cleans, and entertains the kids that get bored, how many women take the day off for sports? So she's saying that we, it's part of our life and not as much of a woman's life. No, read that again. She's not saying that. I feel like she's saying that the only reason we get to chill and watch sports is

because there's a woman taking care of the kids and doing the thing. Read it again. I want to hear what she's saying. On your day of sports, who cooks, who cleans, who entertains the kids that get bored? How many women take a day off for sports? Okay. That was only part of the comment. Can you read the top of it?

Yep. You're twisting yourself into a knot to prove your point. Based on today and history, you are correct as it is a man's world. But ponder this as to why women aren't into sports. Look at her day. Okay. This is nonsense. Okay. It's a man's world. And you evidence, let's just take that for a moment. I'm not talking about this being a man's world. Okay. I'm talking about sports by their very nature being masculine.

By their very nature, I have been talking about the outliers like figure skating, gymnastics, and volleyball. But the vast majority of sports are masculine by their very nature. are fastest, jump the highest, most physical, body contact, conflict-oriented, all traits that are inherently masculine. These are things that men gravitate towards, okay? Almost the entire enterprise of sports is a proxy for who is the most masculine. That is what it is. When I whip Ed and Herman in bumper pool, I know who is the big dog, who is alpha, who is the most masculine.

Go ahead, get up. What you got? Come on. You want to jump, jump. That is the nature of sports, okay? This is why there's a difference in entertainment, interest, rating. and respect, all of it. Okay?

Now, as for the work thing, okay, I don't think you want to go down this road. I don't think you want to do this. Oh, no. Okay? I don't think you want to do this. I don't like this game. This game of measuring who does what, okay?

I don't know what your life is like. Maybe you work full time. Then you say, oh, on Saturdays, I got to do all the housework as well. But there's usually a division, and only one side seems to get credit for the division. I know the whole world in the patriarchy. It's like men only get credit for the work.

But now we live in this new world where, you know, A, we don't give women credit for the stuff they do at home. And B, we don't say men, you know, get credit for their work as well. Like, you're saying that five days a week, I go to work, and then I got to come home and do the other thing. Okay, here's the question. What's her name? Lady in Agriculture. Are they both working in your scenario? Are they both working?

By the way, I do stuff with my kids on the weekend. But do you take the day off to watch like a big sporting event? Like from work? Yeah, or just like from just like... Or like on a Saturday. Settled down in front of a TV for eight hours. For sure. Yeah.

For sure. I say it's part of my job for years. That's been my excuse. I have to watch this. Because you were in sports. I have to. Sorry, babe. I have to sit here and watch.

watch this. I'm so sorry. Yeah, I mean, like, you're watching your kids. It's part of the matriarchy. Why women watch so much reality television. Have your kids watch with you? What the hell? Yeah. That's a great point, Patrick. What about all the entertainment that over-indexes women? Is that when the men are watching the kids?

Wow. Like, what about that? Wow. There's plenty of entertainment that over-indexes and women. They watch Bravo shows. It's time-consuming. Is that when the dudes are, is that when the dudes are doing the dishes? Real Housewives? When you're watching Bravo? Yeah. All the things. that women do more than men. What about that? What's happening then? Right? We're only talking

about sports here. Sports ball. Now let's go over. Now let's go to YouTube. Big Jep, O KC. Women shouldn't have to be equal to men to be honored for the top tier of accomplishment. It's, but the word that is carrying all the way in your statement, Big Jep, is shouldn't. Shouldn't. You're living in a world of should and shouldn't, and I'm telling you the human nature of why things are the way they are. Also, in other words, carrying all the way is honor. What is honor? Is honor external validation? Is honor someone else's praise?

Is honor attention on national TV? Like, what is all that? You keep telling the world the way it's supposed to be. I'm telling you the reason the way the world is. And the way the reason the way the world is isn't some baked in sense. sexism. It just isn't. Maybe a little bit. A dash. Maybe it's a little. James Mark says, the absurdity needs to stop. Like I said, I live in Boston, and there are high school elite hockey schools in my area that will beat the women's national team. That's just a fact. And it's okay to say.

That's true, I'm sure. But it's the Patrick's point about, yeah. And then finally, Jeffrey Martin says, did Trump really have to say that the woman's team is not as good? He did not say that. I don't think I need to address that, right? He just did not say that. No. That's insinuation. What's that called where you try to, like, put your own viewpoint on something because you want it to be that way?

Yeah. There's so outrage all the time. That is everything. Yeah. One little thing, the echoes of what Trump says is amazing. It starts one way and it, like, warps speeds into this other thing. And everybody believes it. Like, oh, he said, did you know that he said women can't skate?

Can you believe? He said they should cancel women's hockey. He said that. He said that. I find this joke and this entire analysis we've been having interesting because I think it underlies. First of all, I think the joke was innocuous. I want to repeat, I do understand how the women's hockey players would feel. I get it. I think they have a right to feel disrespectful. The world is not giving. us the attention. So much though that the President of the Free World made a joke about us at the same level of the men. And what I'm telling you is that the world doesn't stop at your feelings, right? Like President Trump's joke was leaning into broculture. He was having a good time. He was

impromptu. He was speaking contemporaneously with the men at that moment. And it was reflecting a deeper truth about the fact that there is just more interest in the men's accomplishment than the women's. You can say there shouldn't be, and you be right. But I'm telling you why it is. And the truth is, I'm also telling you what is not just an opinion that I hold or an analysis that I'm making, but for the vast majority of people that tell me I'm wrong, I am also reflecting the way they behave, the way they behave. No matter how much Sally Jenkins preaches, she didn't watch the women's game with the same level investment that she watched the men's. And that's the truth for almost everyone unless they had a wife or a daughter or a sister on that women's team or they have a

daughter who plays women's hockey and they invest in particular in women's hockey. That's what I think. All right, that's going to do it for us today here on Will Kane Country. We appreciate you hanging out for a multitude of conversations there. We'll be back again tomorrow. Same time, same place. Make sure you follow us on Apple or Spotify and we'll see you next time. Listen to ad free with a Fox News Podcast plus subscription on Apple Podcast and

Amazon Prime members, you can listen to this show, ad-free, on the Amazon music app.