Will Cain Country - Should Abortion Be A GOP Priority? Tomi Lahren and Ben Domenech Debate

Episode Date: January 18, 2024

Story #1: Should the GOP continue to fight against abortion? A debate between Host of Tomi Lahren Is Fearless on Outkick, Tomi Lahren, & Host of The Ben Domenech Podcast and Editor of The Spectator at-large, Ben Domenech. Story #2: Some towns just don't want heroes. The case of Daniel Penny versus New York City. Story #3: Audience interaction: your comments on the first week of The Will Cain Show. Tell Will what you thought about this podcast by emailing [e-mail] Follow Will on Twitter: @WillCain Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Hey, we know you probably hit play to escape your business banking, not think about it. But what if we told you there was a way to skip over the pressures of banking? By matching with the TD Small Business Account Manager, you can get the proactive business banking advice and support your business needs. Ready to press play? Get up to $2,700 when you open select Small Business Banking products. Yep, that's $2,700 to turn up your business. Visit TD.com slash Small Business Match to learn more.

Conditions apply. 1. Should the GOP continue to fight against abortion? A debate between Ben Dominic and Tommy Laren. Two, some towns just don't want heroes, the case of Daniel Penny. Three, your calls, your comments, right here. into the Will Cain Show. It is The Will Cain Show streaming live at Fox News.com and on YouTube at Fox News. Always on demand on video.

At YouTube, find The Will Cain Show on YouTube. You can get full episodes and clips of past versions of the Will Cain Show. And you can always get it in audio format on podcast at Apple Spotify or at Fox News Podcast. I encourage you to go subscribe at YouTube. or to whatever your favorite podcast provider might be so that you can always get updates from us right here at the Will Cain show. I wasn't prepared for my middle schooler, beginning to call me bruh.

I wasn't prepared for slang. One minute, they're cute and cuddly. The next, they're shaped like a bag of pencils. They're just not capable of being hugged. And they're starting to say things like, mom's on that clash royale grind, or tell me that I don't know ball. and mead mug me after a game of FIFA on the Xbox.

It's quick. It happens really fast. One minute, you know, you're tucking men to bed. The next, they're like, see you tomorrow, bro. And there's nothing that you can do to stop that march of inevitability. Maybe not towards the slang, but to them turning into their own version of adults, hopefully on their way to becoming men. I've always wanted the Wilcane show to become an arena, a place where we can have conversations

that you don't often find in the media that's not always an echo chamber and doesn't always set off the endorphins you get when you hear something you already agree with, but rather that challenges you in ways that can either solidify your beliefs or make you grow in your beliefs. I do believe it's something that's all too uncommon, too rare, in the media landscape. A few, I'd say a month ago. We had a fascinating debate here on the Will Kane show between libertarian comedian Dave Smith and the editor of The Transom, Ben Dominic, over the role that America should play in the war between Israel and Hamas. And that led to a much bigger conversation about American foreign policy and the role that America should play on the world stage.

I found it stimulating. I found it refreshing. Honestly, I found it necessary. So as we embarked on this growth of the Will Kane show, I wanted to make sure that we did that, that we brought back debate. And not just debate between two participants of, yes, passion and goodwill, but debates that brought in you as well. I always want to hear from you. And I would love today to hear from you, not just on this issue, but any issue that came up this week or thoughts you might have on the Will Kane show, but also who swayed you in a debate over whether or not the GOP should continue to fight against abortion?

You can join us here today in the final segment at 855 Fox Talk. That's 855369-8255. That's 855-369-8255. And you can get on air here. And you can play jury on whether or not the GOP should continue to fight against abortion. And so with that, let's get straight to it. Story number one. She is the host of Tommy Laren is fearless at Outkick.

She's a Fox News contributor. She is my friend. It is Tommy Laren. And he is the host of the Ben Dominic podcast. He is the editor-at-large of The Spectator. His substack is at the Transom. And he is also, my friend, Ben Dominic. I'm glad to have you both here on the first week of the Will Kane show.

Thank you. Well, congratulations. Well, I'm happy to be here. I also want to say, I love your background. I know you're in Dallas. I'm here in Nashville, Tennessee, which is better than Dallas. But I appreciate the neon lights behind you as well. I feel at home here.

You know, Tommy, I'm going to be honest with you and the audience. First of all, I said, I'm not from a big city. I don't want a New York City or Dallas skyline behind me. I believe in Americana, and I'm from a small town. So give me images of Americana. But I did also say, I really like the set of Tommy Laren is fearless. So whatever you can do to bring that into the Will Cane Show, I'll appreciate. And Ben, you texted me.

We texted back and forth last night. You're in the middle of my son's soccer game. We didn't get to connect. But, you know, I wanted to hone in this conversation today. And so let me start with this. I just want to say this first to you, Ben. This is the second time you've done this. And I want to say this for the audience's benefit, but also because it's just real.

I so appreciate you guys doing this. You know, I think that I don't know your personal relationship whatsoever. But, you know, I just think it takes a level of yes, absolutely. goodwill to have a conversation where you know there could be disagreement and maybe passionate disagreement. But it also takes an act of confidence, confidence in what you believe, but confidence in the other person. And so for the second time, Ben, and for the first time, Tommy, I just want to say I really appreciate this. And this is something that, whether or not it happens here on my shows or your shows, I just want it to happen more, Ben, out there in America. Well, I appreciate the

invitation. And I'm always happy to have these types of conversations. I know, you know, I share or belief that it's really important that we have more of these back and forth in debates on subjects that are at the center of American conversation. And I think this one is absolutely at the center of our political conversation at the moment. Tomorrow you'll see in Washington, you know, the thousands of people from across the country descend to participate in the March for Life, which has taken on, you know, a new character, obviously, you know, as long as it's been going on. And it's also my second daughter's, her first birthday, her first trip around the sun, is

tomorrow as well. And so this is something that I think is very personal. It's felt by a lot of people on both sides of an issue that certainly can be very passionate. But I'm looking forward to this conversation and to going back and forth on where things ought to go. And, you know, I know this is a heavy one. Tommy just posted on her Instagram, come join us in a light little topic we're dealing with today, abortion.

and I get that, but I think that we can do this in a way that is not the conversation that's often stuck in the mud. And so this is where I want to start. The resolution in effect is, should the GOP continue to fight against abortion? And I think the best launching off point is a tweet that you sent Tommy on November 8th of 2023. You wrote, if Republicans don't get abortion messaging right or refuse to move to the center on that issue, next November will be a red wedding, not a red wave. Shriek all you want about pro-life and that's fine, but strict abortion ban policies will lose elections. That's the cold, hard truth. So Tommy, I think many people had that same takeaway when they saw abortion on the ballot in various states and they saw corresponding losses

for the GOP. So is it your position that essentially the GOP should stop now, at least legislatively, fighting against abortion? So, well, I'm glad that you brought up legislatively. because I think that oftentimes we see this issue as black and white, you're either pro-life or you're pro-choice, but most Americans don't exist in the pro-life or pro-choice category. Some do, but most people exist in the middle and a spectrum and a gray area. So when you say legislatively, should the GOP stop fighting against abortion, I would say if we would like to win elections, perhaps that's the route we need to go. Now, that doesn't mean don't fight for any type of restriction whatsoever. I'm not in that camp either. But, I think you can still fight for pro-life beliefs. You can march for life. You can be personally pro-life. You can be philanthropically pro-life and encourage pro-life sentiment without believing that government restriction on abortion, at least an all-out ban or really aggressive bans, are the way to go.

And I think if we want to win anything and advance any type of a conservative Republican agenda, if we keep pushing this ban abortion message, quite frankly, we're just going to keep losing. And I think 2022 midterms proved that. And maybe I'm wrong. But if you look at the sentiment in the country, a lot of these races that come down to that or that have the undertone of that end up being, like I said, a red wedding for conservatives, Republicans, anybody to the right of the issue. So, Ben, I know you've done this before.

You both can feel free to jump in and comment on what each other have to say. I'll do my best to moderate. I'm not going to take affirmative positions. I'm going to try to facilitate a. during this debate, facilitate a good conversation. You know, Ben, I'll never forget, you and I were both cycling through guest hosting, I believe it was the 7 o'clock hour on Fox News. And you gave a monologue, Ben, and look, man, I'm not an expert on reading authenticity on television,

but I've been doing it long enough that I can see when somebody feels something. And you clearly felt what you were talking about when you gave a monologue on abortion. This is a very, as you mentioned, a personal issue for you. You're passionate at an emotional level on this topic. What I'm curious about is Tommy does seem to have facts on her side when it's the pulse of the country right now when it comes to bans legislatively. I'm curious if your passion drives you past that and says, no, no, no, we still have to fight against abortion. Well, I think there's a couple of different things to hone in on here. One is, I think, you know, you can be very passionate about the issue of life.

And I certainly think that, you know, there are many Americans who are and who felt, you know, the enormous, I think, relief, you know, shock and surprise from the Dobbs decision that something like that could happen within my lifetime is something that I really was not sure would ever be possible. But I do think that one of the things that we have to recognize is that we live in. in a political environment in which we have to deal in the realm of the possible and of which we have to build consensus toward things. We can't just have this top down attitude and have it work out in the long term. It's one of the reasons why,

whenever we've seen that approach to policymaking, those types of approaches tend to fail. Or if they succeed, they succeed only in states that are red enough or blue enough to have essentially permanent party control. And I certainly see that you can defend, the positions that have been taken by popular governors like Greg Abbott, by Ron DeSantis, of course, by Brian Kemp, you know, who have gone in the direction of six-week bans and the like.

But I think that whenever you've put this out there as something that is a state kind of ruling that voters have to go and make a decision about, when it comes time for them to go into the ballot box and cast their own votes, I think there's a lot of misgiving, and I think that there's also a lot of bad information. And part of that has to do with the fact The pro-life movement for decades was essentially short-circuited. It was focused only on the issue of the courts and making the argument through essentially that the court process. And that includes, of course, arguments that were made about various aspects of abortion

that could be dealt with even under the context of Roe. Now we have a situation where that pro-life movement effectively has to completely turn itself around and turn itself in focus on these different issues in a way that they never have before because they never had the opportunity to before. There is no equivalent of on the pro-life side of something like the NRA, for instance, that exists to try to protect, you know, members and try to defend them in ways that are, you know, supported by a grassroots political operation that's been around and been very effective over the years in preventing the kind of backlash, even in the wake of polling that tells you that that backlash matters over various gun rights

and the like. So from my perspective, we have to be clear about what we believe is feasible, what is realistic, what can endure as legislative policy on this front, and be wise about the fights that we pick. And so, I mean, we can talk a bit more about that and where I think, you know, some of those things should go. But there's no, there's nothing gained by pretending that reality doesn't exist when it comes to how hard the pro-life cause is going to have to fight in order to achieve the gains that it wants to. So that's interesting. So not far apart right now. That's a recognition of reality.

You know what's interesting, Tommy, before the Dobbs decision, so when everything, when we were living under the regime of Roe v. Wade, the coalition was pretty diverse in that you had people who were religiously pro-right, but you also had, or just philosophically pro-life, but you also had people like, this just is a stupid decision. It's bad constitutional law. and it should go away. And now it's like that segment of the coalition is gone. Like, okay, that's a victory. Dobbs is a huge victory, right?

And now we move on. And the move on part doesn't have the same breadth of constituency that fighting it judicially did. And by the way, I think that should be put on Democrats. Like, also, like, what is your position? Is your position no restrictions? Like, we're having this debate now. should we advocate for restrictions? But it's all, like the burden of proof is all on conservatives, like six weeks, second trimester. But like Democrats just to sit this one out. And I don't think that

works either. Like what is your position, Democrat? Yeah, no, I agree. I think that we need to stop taking on, I guess, the narrative of we are the radicals because we're not. And most people, when I say we, I mean the Republican Party, which is generally more pro-life. We need to stop characterizing ourselves as radical on the issue, but we don't help ourselves in that. And again, when I say we, I mean we, Republicans, conservatives, don't help ourselves on that because you're right. Well, the problem for me was, I agree with the Dobbs decision, by the way. I believe it should go to the states. I think that was a great victory. And I think that conservatives and the pro-life movement have been fighting for that for so long. And you're right, once they got it, it's like,

okay, that's a victory. So you wanted it back in the states. And then some of those same people turned around and said, okay, now we need a national ban on abortion. And I'm thinking you worked all this time to send it back to the states. And now you're telling people, no, no, that's not good enough. Now we want a national ban on abortion. So I think that part of the reason the right gets the messaging so wrong on this is that the right is divided on it, can't make up its own mind, can't decide what the actual goal is, and it gets convoluted. But the left, you know, with everything else, they stay in lockstep. They just say, oh, we're pro choice. We fight for women's rights. And that's where they land on it and their messaging is cohesive.

I'm not saying that it's great messaging. I don't agree with it, but it's cohesive. It's easy to understand and it's easy to vote on. We don't have that on our side. We just throw things at the wall and see what sticks and we're losing the argument. Well, let me, let me jump in the support something that Tommy just said there. You know, when you talk about Democrats being lockstep on this, one of the great examples is playing out right now when it comes to the fights that are happening on Capitol Hill,

where Democrats are referring to any of the pretty standard abortion policies that are usually fought over within the funding battles as being abortion restrictions. Now, let's be clear about what they're talking about. What they're talking about is anything that would prevent taxpayer dollars going to be spent on abortion. That's something that historically has polled very well for the Republican side because people, even if they are in favor of the pro-choice position, don't want necessarily taxpayer dollars going toward it. Another aspect of this, we have an enormous amount of polling data that shows that even among young people, you know, millennial voters and Gen Z voters, that they are overwhelmingly in favor of people having to go and see a doctor in order to get abortion pills, which are now make up more than half of the abortions that happen in America. You know, obviously that was something that was pre-pandemic, but dramatically accelerated in the ability to do telehealth and just get pills through the mail. of course what that does is it leaves people open to both not having the accurate weak count, you know, taking those pills past the point where they could result in all sorts of problem for women's fertility going forward, ectopic pregnancies, all these other risk factors. And so that's one of the reasons why those polls turn out the way that they do. But when you talk about it with a Democratic politician, they just view that as another restriction. They don't talk about it being something that's supposed to help women's health. And so Tommy's correct. They have a lockstep message. And Republicans, pro-lifers included have not found a message that they can coalesce around in the wake of Dobs.

And they don't have to put flesh on the bone of that lockstep message. It can stay abstract to Tommy's point of I am for pro-choice. I would love to hear a Democratic politician pressed on what you mean by that. Like, are you okay with, you know, partial birth abortion? Are you okay with abortions at nine months? Are you okay with eight months, seven months? But they never have to answer those questions. Never.

Because it's always on Republicans. side of the debate, six weeks, whatever it may be, conception. So I want to hone in, Ben, I heard Tommy clearly, like, I think, and I don't want to put words in your mouth, Tommy, you would be opposed to an effort for a federal ban on abortion. Where are you been? Well, I think people can put forward federal bans, you know, all they want to, but similarly to what Nikki Haley was saying on the debate stage a few months ago, I think that that's not living in reality. I just don't think that that's something that's even possible. I think you have to work through the federal policy in the ways that we've currently seen some of these hot button fights

play out. Obviously, Senator Tuberville stand, for instance, against taxpayer-funded abortions through the military and the like. Those are the policies that have to be resolved at the federal level. But look, we made the argument over and over again that we thought this issue should go back to the states because it would result in, I think, a very different reality for California versus Texas. And that's something that I think is a good thing. And then we can work back backwards from that argument. We're going to see what happens, I believe, in these states where they make the decision to try to press against abortion, to make it something that is less and less. They're going to see what happens in those populations. And I think we have to make

the case as pro-lifers across the board, but we have to do it in the new context, I believe, of fighting it at the state level. So, Tommy, you were, I don't know, you might still be, I've kept up with your Twitter feed to some extent, a supporter of Ron DeSantis, I believe, openly. And I'm curious, you know, I think people have legitimately said Desantis's position on abortion in Florida would have, let's say he had, and let's say he still does. I don't want to call the race, but become the Republican nominee for president, that what he advocated for and pushed for in Florida would kill him in a general election. Yeah. So to clear that up, I am still a DeSantis supporter. I don't believe he's got a pathway to the nomination.

So therefore, I'm kind of anybody but Biden and Nikki Haley. But I'm obviously, I've been pro-Trump since before pro-Trump was cool. I still like Donald Trump. I'm going to fight like hell to see Donald Trump get reelected. But I'm still a fan of Ron DeSantis, by the way. So it doesn't mean that you jump ships. I think that you can have a foot on each boat here because before, you know, DeSantis announced, I think we were all the same people.

But that's another argument for another day. I will say this. I was disappointed. Florida when Ron DeSantis made that move. And again, separate for those that are listening, not personally disappointed, but politically disappointed, because I did think that was going to be a big hurdle for him come 2024 if he were to be our candidate for the general election. I see that as being a big problem. I know that he's very personally pro-life, which I respect, and I know that Ben is as well. And I think most people on the right personally are pro-life. I'm personally

pro-life as well. But I think that would have been a huge, huge hurdle for him because the left, they're messaging on this. They don't really have much else. So they're really able to hone in on those things. Abortion, racism, mega-Republicans. I mean, they hit those three and they hit them hard and they keep winning elections off those three. So now, I will say, though, the other night when Trump had the town hall on Fox News, his answer on abortion I thought was excellent. He said, hey, listen, kind of what Ben was saying, what we're all saying here, it's not a reality to say we're going to have an abortion ban. And he was very careful the way he talked about that issue, very general election-minded. And I think his answer was fair. And I think it was the kind of answer we're going to

need going into a general election. So if I can just follow up on one thing there, though, I actually think that any restriction whatsoever at any weak point would have been something that Democrats, demagogued, regardless of whether it was something that was more in the middle or something that was, you know, more to the right. And an example that I would have here in Virginia, where I live is, you know, you all saw that effort by Glenn Yonkin to push to take over the Virginia legislature. And some of the key races that happened within that included some candidates who, you know, all took the same position that he did, which was, we're going to fight for 15 weeks. We think that that's the most that we would push for. You know, we're not.

going to go do one of these six-week bans or something like that and including you know a conservative woman in one of these state senate races who you know took every exception including not just rape insist life of the mother which has always obviously been the republican platform but other exceptions as well even beyond that she still ended up getting her position on abortion demagogued she even despite the fact that she works within the healthcare industry and she ended up losing narrowly to a to a democrat who completely, you know, painted her as an extremist. So I think Republicans shouldn't be disabused of the notion that regardless of what you're pushing for, if it has any kind of restrictions whatsoever, you're going to be painted as an

extremist by the same media that refuses to ever ask a Democrat whether they're essentially no restrictions at any point, abortion for any reason, for any justification. They're never going to have to answer for that, and Republicans will. So, Tom, you put it well. I think most, not all, but most conservative slash Republican voters are pro-life. And you made a very pointed statement in that I'm not saying that I personally disagree with Ron DeSantis, but politically, as a calculation strategically, I thought it, you, I'm characterizing your argument, thought it was a mistake. Do you think that that pretty much applies across the board, Tommy, like state level. Now, I'm moving from federal down to state. And I know the easy answer is, well, different states are different, but, you know, 2023 elections, Ben pointed out Virginia, and it was 15 weeks. It's just, it seems like, honestly, it seems like it is a loser, and it is, it drives passionate opposition everywhere.

Now, Ben brought up Texas, and maybe there are some, maybe there are some exceptions. But it, it didn't it, And Ben, you can probably notice, Tommy, didn't it, even in Kansas? Like, it's just been losing at the state. And so I'm curious where you are, Tommy. I'm curious where you are. Like, drop it down to the state level. Do you think the fight should also not move legislatively in the states? It definitely depends on where you are.

I'm here in Tennessee. We basically have an abortion ban in Tennessee. And Tennessee is very red. It's the Bible Belt. Texas is similar in some cases, though. Texas is changing a little bit. I think Texas needs to be a little more concerned. certainly Florida need to be a little more concerned because Texas isn't as deep red as it used to

be. I mean, well, you're in Dallas. You know Dallas is pretty blue. I'm in Nashville. That's pretty blue. But Tennessee is very, very red. So in some places, you might be able to get really strict abortion laws and it might be okay politically. And you might be able to win elections on it still. Depends on where you are. If you're in the heart of the South, Tennessee, it's probably, you know, something that can be looked beyond for a lot of the voters that are just very deep red voters. But it definitely depends on where you are. I think we also need to go back in this argument to what is the goal of the pro-life movement? If the goal of the pro-life movement is to save life, I personally don't believe that government does that. I don't think that government fulfills that. I think

it's much better from a faith perspective, from a community perspective, from a messaging perspective, I think that government kind of fails at this. And so if you're in Tennessee and you want to get an abortion and we have an abortion ban, that's not going to stop you from getting an abortion. You're just going to go to another state and get an abortion. So I think we also need to take this argument back to are we solving a problem? And if we're not solving a problem through talking about government bans, then we maybe need to go back to the drawing board and have a collective discussion on what that solution actually looks like in reality, which I know is where all three of us are living. Well, I would push back on that a little bit, Tommy, in that the government

does definitely plays a role in criminal law and like murder and and and for someone you know i i think ben clearly thinks of it as as such you know and i think many people do you know and so you ask yourself well does the government have a role in stepping in and stopping murder and disincentivizing and deterring it the answer i think is yes and i don't want to speak for you ben but i think that would be the analogy on well no no there is a role for government before you get there will i have to say this though because we're going to talk about this i know that's the argument that the pro-life movement uses a lot is that well murder is illegal yes but are you going to lock women up for getting an abortion because you're going to lock up a murderer except maybe in

California you're going to lock up a murderer but then we need to have a whole other discussion is if the pro-life movement is ready to lock women up because otherwise you can't use that analogy and still have it work on on the case because unless you're locking women up you can't you can't really liken it to a cold-hearted killer it's just not the same thing you know first off I would just point out that, you know, in the European experience where you have, you know, obviously, you know, limits in other areas around the world where you have limits, it's, it's the medical professional, it's the doctor who actually, you know, performs the abortion, who is viewed as being the criminal in that situation. But I fundamentally disagree about this philosophical

notion that I've heard from many people that having this type of law on the books does nothing in terms of changing human behavior. And I think that you can actually see the opposite effect, taking place right now just to our north in Canada where almost 4% of the Canadians who died in the last year died under the auspices of their euthanasia regime which endorses the idea of a suicide, the made program that they have there that now increases in justification to every aspect of mental health

and that kind of thing. The idea that it's okay to kill yourself or to make a decision, a government endorsed decision, to kill yourself, you know, has an effect on the population. And I think that these laws also indicate, frankly, where we are in terms of our understanding of the value of the human life involved there. You know, the fact that when a pregnant mother is, you know, killed in a car accident or murdered by, you know, an abusive partner that we view that as two lives lost, not just one

is important. But I also think that, you know, to the overall point, one argument that has definitely been, one where the left has failed is an arguing that abortion is a cultural and social good, which is something that they've been trying to argue for a long time, the shout your abortion movement, everything associated with that. What our polling data shows us is that, you know, by usually more than 90% margin, people view abortion as being something that is tragic, that's painful, that's emotionally damaging for those involved. They view that in that negative sense. And I think that that's something that is a powerful starting point and one to work from.

It doesn't just have to be in the context of the law, though, and I agree with Tommy on that point. The law itself is not the end-all, be-all solution for this fight. And if you want to see abortions reduced, the best thing to do, I believe, is to start paring more and more support for mothers and for children, even in the womb, with these kinds of steps that are designed to discourage abortion and to continue to keep it in that box of being something that even if people are in our choice, they view it as a last resort and not something that is without emotional or personal consequence. You know, I'm really glad, Ben, that you brought up Europe because that's part of this

thing, this conversation that is just so lacking context, like this idea that America is draconian on abortion, like we are more liberal on abortion than every European country. I believe they have stricter restrictions in almost every European country, which that are, you know, the Europhiles live this progressive life vision of utopia probably blows their mind because they've never heard that or understood that to be the case. But to the larger point, and this is, I'll go to you, Tommy, and this will be, we'll head towards the end here. I think you just put it very eloquently, Ben, and I do think this is probably where the whole movement has to go winning over hearts and minds, Tommy. Yeah, no, I agree wholeheartedly with what Ben said there

at the end when it comes to not just talking about life and why life is important, but getting back to why family is important, valuing each other, valuing our time together, valuing, you know, whether that be faith, religion, whatever it is, we've moved so far away from that in this country, that that whole shout your abortion, praise for abortion movement, it got legs a few years back kind of in the heart of the Me Too movement, which is very interesting there. And I think that it's up to us as conservatives to push back against that wholeheartedly and forcefully. And I'm right there with you in that fight. So I think we can make ourselves look like the reasonable ones, the understanding ones, the compassionate ones on the right, on the conservative

side, on the America First side. I think that's the direction that we need to go in to win those hearts and minds. And then to put in restrictions that make sense that people can get behind and explain our side better so that the left doesn't have a monopoly on it. So I think that we're kind of all in agreement on that. We can just do better on the right in discussing this issue. Yeah. And it seems like the end resolution is not a complete removal from the legislative process, but not making it necessarily a priority in the purpose of defending life. Ben Dominich. Can I just say one more thing?

I appreciate Tommy's point. I just think this is something that people have to be patient about. It's not going to happen overnight. And as much as the consultant class would like the GOP to move away from this issue, as much as they would like to say, your politicians should run in the opposite direction. They actually have to find a message themselves to deliver because there is no running away from it. It is an issue that now stretches downward into every level of policy, every political fight, all the way down to your state and local representative.

and that's something that I think is unavoidable and it's not going to go away. We're not going to go back to the before time. You have to take a position, you have to stand for it, and you have to be forthright, authentic, and honest about what you believe. Ben Dominic, the Ben Dominic podcast right here at Fox News podcast, editor-at-large for The Spectator.

You can check his substack out at The Transom. And Tommy Laren, who hosts Tommy Laren, is fearless at Outkick, and I know she has to go soon to make sure she produces that show. And so, therefore, I appreciate you both very much personally and professionally for doing this today. Thank you, Tommy. Thank you, Ben.

Thank you, guys. Good to see you, as always. Take care. Here we go. Let me know what you think. 855-369-8255. That's 855 Fox Talk. We'll continue to incorporate debates right here on the Wilcane show.

Not always as heavy as abortion. But anywhere where America needs to find that collision of ideas. to arrive at the truth. Coming up, not every town wants a hero, the case of Daniel Penny. We'll be right back with more of the Will Cain podcast. For a limited time at McDonald's, enjoy the tasty breakfast trio.

Your choice of chicken or sausage McMuffin or McGrittles with a hash brown and a small iced coffee for five bucks plus tax. Available until 11 a.m. at participating McDonald's restaurants. Price excludes flavored iced coffee and delivery. It is time to take The quiz. It's five questions in less than five minutes.

We ask people on the streets of New York City to play along. Let's see how you do. Take the quiz every day at thequiz.com. Then come back here to see how you did. Thank you for taking the quiz. Welcome back to the Will Kane Show story number two. Not every town wants a hero. case of Daniel Penny. A judge in New York has ruled that there is sufficient legal evidence to pursue

a criminal trial against Daniel Penny, the subway hero who, in the words of others on the train car that day, felt their life threatened, as he put, a man in a chokehold who subsequently lost his life. He's facing second-degree manslaughter charges. At the earliest, they will see that trial in the fall. Now, yesterday we had a conversation. It revolved around the death penalty. And whether or not the criminal justice system should reflect your community, a sense of that doesn't happen in this town.

Here's the conversation we had yesterday with Brad Palumbo about what it means to be judged by, a jury of your peers. That's a good thing because we, are a federalist system, which means that most of our choices should be made at the most local level possible. And you're going to have different cultural and moral calculations of the death penalty, state by state, even jury by jury. And I would argue that that's kind of a healthy way to approach it instead of like the pretense. And I do think it would be a pretense that we could impose some uniform standard across the country. Well, I get what you're saying,

because I support federalism generally for policies as well. But if I commit the same exact murder in one town versus one town over, it seems unjust. It seems unfair to me that people would get radically different punishments. Imagine if you're driving down the road and you're speeding, but cops are only pulling over certain color cars and not others. It's like completely arbitrary for the same exact offense. That seems to me like a fundamental tenant of criminal justice that we're doing wrong. More importantly, though, if we even look at this case that we're talking about in Alabama, he committed this crime in 1988, and he's still not dead.

They tried to execute him and botched it. It's like one of the most expensive and ineffective systems. I would rather have us put that time and energy into solving more crimes. So the question is whether or not we are protected from those arbitrary applications of the law by any men. mechanism beyond simply everyone being subjected to the same standards, the same jury of their peers. And the answer is yes, we have the Constitution of the United States, which is designed to protect certain civil rights, regardless of whether or not you live in Florida or in the state of Washington. But when it comes to the application of the law, I think it's a healthy system

where your outcome could be different depending upon who is the jury of your peers. Now, we see bad applications of this, you know, I'd give you O.J. Simpson. O.J. Simpson, I think by almost anyone's estimation, had enough evidence presented to presume beyond the shadow of a doubt that he was guilty of murder. But instead, a jury of his peers, and in most documentaries that have looked at that case in retrospect, attached themselves to a racial tribalism that forced them into an unjust outcome. I'll give you another example. Most people say, do you trust a jury in Washington, D.C., with any of these cases against Donald Trump? No, in that case, they revert to some attraction to political tribalism. And I see, therefore, the problem with the jury of your peers

producing different outcomes depending upon where you live. But this is how America is set up. It's set up with the idea, not in this town. In this country, we protect. certain constitutional rights. But in this town, we don't put up with murder, and we will punish that criminal act by death in this town, in this state. And another state, as just referenced in a joking manner by Tommy Laren, the state of California, we'll put up with it, and you won't even have to sit in jail. And you reap the fruits of your laws. You create the society that reflects those values. That's why people are moving out of California, in part, because it's created this dystopian criminal environment. And when it comes to Daniel Penny in New York, the state

of New York, the court system, and we'll soon see the jury of their peers, the district attorney who choose to pursue charges, and we'll see what the reflection is from a jury of his peers in New York, has said very clearly, we don't want heroes. We don't want you to stand up to criminals. We don't want you to protect your fellow citizen. And that's sad. for Daniel Penny. It's also the dystopia they want to create in New York. And so, therefore,

we all need to make that choice. Do you want to live in a place that says, we don't want heroes in this town? Because that's what they've said in New York to Daniel Penny. All right, coming up, your involvement in the Will Cain Show. 855-369-8255.

What did you think of the debate between Tommy Laren and Ben Dominic, who won? Plus your comments in email and on YouTube and on X on any topic you'd like to discuss right here on the Will Cain show. 855 Fox Talk coming up on the Will Cain show. Longbendy Twizzlers candy keeps the fun going. Keep the fun going.

Welcome back to the Will Cain Show, streaming live at Fox News.com and on YouTube at the Fox News page, always on demand on YouTube in video form at Will Cain Show. Go to that page, find that page, and subscribe. You'll always get the latest here from the Will Cain Show. And you can get us on audio format in podcasts. at Apple, Spotify, or at Fox News Podcast. If you leave a comment, if you leave a five-star review, if you feel it's so deserved, we'll appreciate it. And we could include some of your comments right here on the Wilcane show, as well as your calls at 855-369-8255. So let's get to some of your comments. Two days back in New York has been collecting them throughout the day and throughout the week.

So what are the people saying, Dan? I mean, they're loving the show. I love watching the comments. The live chat's been really funny. are hilarious but going back to stephen a show someone said man i missed this stephen a and will were great together on first take back in the day so good to see them reunited that's from bc schneider 53 so they're loving that so here's what i i appreciate that you know i get that comment a lot by the way whenever stephen a and i reunite and i gave an interview yesterday to front office sports about the

launch here of of the will cane show and they were talking about the first take has has done well this season. The ratings have gone up. And I said, you know, one of the things that I think that they've done well is they've made that show fun again, and it should be fun. Sports is fun. And we had some heavy conversations back in the day, and some of them were probably too heavy. It was too political. But what I like about the dynamic with Stephen A, then and now, is that you can have a serious conversation about race. It doesn't have to be full of bad blood, something that I hoped to and hope to continue to, you know,

create here on the Will Cain Show, but then also have fun. Like, I'm going to dress up in the robe and the boxing gloves. I'm going to recognize that this is sports and this is all about fun. I'm going to shoot, pretend crow out of the sky and make Stephen A. eat crow when the Cowboys win. That's all too rare these days.

But, yeah, man, I love that. What I love and miss about that dynamic is both the seriousness and depth and the fun. Yeah, that's true. Someone said, also said, I don't agree with Stephen A, but I have a deeper respect for him for his stance. He is very articulate and stands for his beliefs, if only the rest of the country, could be so understanding. That's from Michael Davis, 6734. And never afraid of the interaction. Yeah. Never afraid of the debate. Exactly. So we had one from Dr. Peterson when he was on. Someone said props to Will Kane for probably his most difficult interview. Great job. Dr. Peterson isn't easy to. understand with the way he speaks so eloquently. He doesn't drop it down to a lower level so everyone can understand. Dr. Peterson certainly speaks like he's speaking to doctoral candidates,

no matter who he's speaking to. That's from Kevin MacDonald 357.4. So a little props to you. There's no surface. There's no, props to me, thank you. Also, there's no surface level with Jordan Peterson. Like, I feel like, and I kind of wanted to say, hey, Jordan, you know, like, what's the diet like these days what are you eating or what you know i've talked about here on the program like you know my struggles with zen and i wanted to like what's your biggest vice dr peterson but i i'm pretty sure if i just you know let's get some you know quick hot take some personality he would have had a deep philosophical understanding that he wanted to share the nature of humanity and his relationship with evil on any of those questions that i'm just looking for a quick a quick bit

of personality hot take i mean everything he has to say And I love this because I like being thoughtful and introspective and seeing how things are connected. But everything he has to say is deep. It kind of made, like if you went to a game with Jordan Peterson, right? Say you were sitting in the stands. I can't imagine. I don't know. Yeah, like say you went to a Yankee game.

Like, is he going to have a philosophical understanding of everything happening when you run it out to first base? I mean, I what did you think of that play, Dr. Peterson? And get ready because you're about to. to learn something beyond baseball. No, I would agree. No, that would be very hard and very introspective. I just want to go to a game and have a couple beers and not think about those kind of things. So I might be like everyone else.

There was another comment. You know, some comments are nice to you, Will, and some are not always the nicest. Someone said, Will Kane is like Frodo Baggins, but more effeminate. Wow. That is just a shot across the bow. I don't even know what to make of that. Me either. So is Frodo, is he the main guy?

He's the main guy in the Lord of the Rings, yeah. Or is he a sidekick Hobbit? No, he's the main guy. He's the guy that brings the ring to the Mountain of Doom. He's the hero. Yeah, I sound like a nerd, but whatever. I wasn't really into Lord of the Rings. I don't get into fantasy.

Game of Thrones won me over. I got past the Dragons to learn to love the political machinations of Game of Thrones. I couldn't get into Lord of Rings. But I liked it. I'm the hero. and the main Hobbit. I don't even know what that means a more effeminate Frodo Baggins.

Thank you? Yeah, thanks. You know, the comments on your looks, cool, keep them coming, whatever. I do want to clear up one thing. I don't dye my hair. I get that all the time, boys. I get you shouldn't dye your hair.

There's zero hair dye, James. I see you in there doing some Just for Men swipes across the top. There's zero hair dye. Then the gray's coming. I'm three years on a four o'clock in the morning. Are you sure? I mean... Show, Foxen, Friends.

Zero hair dye. What do they do for your hair before you host 8 p.m.? Because it always has a little more of a little more of a woof to it. Oh, I don't know. There's different makeup and hair artists, hair stylists. They're good at what they do. With every show. They all do something different.

And to be honest, like, you just kind of have to let go of vanity because, I mean, you say, hey, I kind of do this or I kind of do that. But after a while, you're just like, to hell with it. Do what you do. You know, you're a paid professional, do what you do. But here's the thing on the hair dye. There's different lighting in every studio. And it's all about lighting.

And some lighting, like, from straight up, I think, makes your head super dark. So that's what, I don't know if that's APM or Fox and Friends. I don't know what that is, but no hair dye, just lights. I like it. Well, we have, speaking of Fox and Friends, we had some. someone comment, Will, you're whining. Rachel's new to football. Give her kudos for participating.

So that's a call back to Rachel giving you crap. I don't think I whined. I don't think I whined. I think that's in reference to all the trash talk Rachel gave me during the game. Yep, exactly. Look, fellas out there. Sports fans, not just fellas. Ladies, too.

More than sports fan for a day. we all acknowledge there is a line right do you kick a man while he's down and that's the question here because i got curb stomped via text during the cowboy's loss to the packers and i think it was over the line i'm not whining it's just like you know it's like observing a social norm like if you're boarding group number four don't crowd the entrance when they haven't even called boarding group number one. Like, we can all agree. That is a social faux pa. What are you doing? You're creating a more impenetrable wall to the boarding process than our southern border. Like, our southern border is more open than the line for you to board through groups one through two. Because the group

five and six has created a human chain and kept us from getting on. And I think that's not whining. That's just a social observation, as is the fact that Rachel went over the line on her trash talk. well no I think it was all right but we had some more comments people keep them coming for the show it's been great we'll read some more so but I think everyone's been you know been pretty nice

to you for the most part but yeah we'll see except for the Frodo Baggins comparison yeah a more effeminate Frodo Baggins yours truly Will Kane keep those comments coming in during the show there's a live chat up on

YouTube, Fox News.com, or Fox News.com, and at the Fox News page on YouTube. There's an email address, Wilcane podcast at fox.com. You can follow me on X at Wilcane. On Instagram, see Wilcane. I read

all your messages. I'll incorporate you into this program as we move forward. I love the arena. I think it's the best way to have fun and arrive at the truth. So, we'll be back tomorrow, not with a live streaming version, but there will be an episode devoted exclusively to sports, which you'll find at YouTube slash Will Kane Show and on podcast.

Again, exclusively dedicated to sports on Fridays all other days, Monday through Thursday, streaming live right here at Fox News.com and on YouTube at Fox News. That's going to do it for me today. I will see you again right here next time on The Will Cane Show. Listen 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. This is Jimmy Fala, 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. live at noon Eastern or get the podcast at fox acrossamerica.com.