Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey - Ep 587 ｜ Biden’s SCOTUS Pick： Soft on Child Abuse & Clueless on Biology ｜ Guest： Steve Deace

00:00:00.000 Hey guys, welcome to Relatable. Happy Wednesday. This episode is brought to you by Good Ranchers.

00:00:05.100 That's American meat delivered right to your front door. Go to goodranchers.com slash Allie. 1.00

00:00:09.360 That's goodranchers.com slash Allie. All right, guys, before we get into this episode, I want to

00:00:24.160 issue you an apology. I promised that I would be talking about my CrossFit experience yesterday.

00:00:31.660 I did not end up going to CrossFit. Motherhood duties pulled me back home when I was on the

00:00:38.480 way to the gym. I can't say that I'm that disappointed. I can't say that it was that

00:00:42.280 difficult to pull me away from the gym, but I was actually pretty excited about trying and you guys

00:00:47.900 were excited about me talking about my experience. So I will have to wait maybe until Monday to talk

00:00:54.840 about that, or maybe I'll just go on Instagram and tell you about it. And it will be entertaining

00:00:59.980 because you're looking at someone, you're listening to someone who has not really legitimately worked

00:01:05.360 out in about four years. Now, I used to be very into working out from about 2013 when I ran a half

00:01:11.440 marathon and I ran a half marathon after not being able to run even five minutes. It took me like,

00:01:16.920 I don't know, 10 months to start running and then train for this. And then after that,

00:01:21.280 I got super into working out. I met my husband doing CrossFit style workouts. I did CrossFit a

00:01:26.160 little bit in college, then on and off until about 2018. I was really into pure bar. I taught pure

00:01:31.280 bar for a little bit. So I was super into working out and then I got pregnant and I was super tired.

00:01:37.220 And I also found an excuse to eat whatever I wanted to. I think that's kind of fun and can be fun

00:01:43.400 done in a fun, balanced way when you are pregnant. But I wouldn't recommend like going all in on the

00:01:50.860 daily hamburgers and tacos like I did. I would maybe like balance it out a little bit with the

00:01:55.780 salad. And so I also just kind of got lazy with working out, which I don't really recommend. I do

00:02:00.780 think that you should try to keep up if you can, if you have the energy to do so, some level of fitness

00:02:05.740 when you are pregnant. You'll just feel better after. And I've heard it can really help labor and

00:02:10.700 delivery and all of that. And so I just kind of gave up and was a little lazy. And I've been

00:02:15.840 exercising on and off at the beginning of this year. I was like, okay, I'm going to start exercising

00:02:20.760 again. We have a Peloton. I was doing the floor workouts and I really liked them. I was working

00:02:25.080 out like every day and I was excited. And then we got COVID and it wasn't that bad, but I was really

00:02:31.140 tired. I was tired for a couple of weeks after COVID and I just couldn't make myself work out.

00:02:35.920 And then I just didn't get back on the bike, literally and figuratively. I just didn't get

00:02:43.860 back into the routine. And now, you know, I've been thinking, okay, should I just do CrossFit?

00:02:48.920 Should I just go all in on this and just really get back to being strong? Because that's the thing

00:02:54.680 I think I miss is working out so hard that you want to pass out. Like I liked that feeling when I

00:03:00.200 was working out and like your lungs burning and just feeling like, wow, I could not have worked

00:03:04.700 any harder than I just did. If you are someone who likes to work out or you've gone through seasons

00:03:09.240 of your life where you've worked out really hard, you know what I mean? It's kind of addictive. It

00:03:13.360 gives you endorphins and it just makes you feel good in different areas of your life. Truly, I think

00:03:18.800 that exercise, the kind of exercise where you're pushing yourself, it benefits you in so many different

00:03:24.260 ways. Most importantly, most significantly for me, it reminds me when I'm doing something that's

00:03:30.960 difficult intellectually or just going through a hard time in my life that you can do things that

00:03:35.900 hurt. Like you can do things that are difficult, that you can push through, that your mind can

00:03:41.080 override the exhaustion that your body feels. And so anyway, I've just missed that. I've missed that

00:03:46.200 feeling. And so my husband, who is very in shape for as long as I've known him, he has very consistently

00:03:51.680 exercised and he eats healthier than me and all that good stuff. And he suggested kind of out of the

00:03:56.480 blue. What if we went to CrossFit? And immediately I was like, okay, let's do it. I'm scared, but sure,

00:04:02.960 let's do it. I want to get back into it. And so we are going to start that. Like I said, I couldn't do

00:04:07.940 that yesterday. And so I'm excited about it. It also, I think is good for us together. It's something

00:04:13.820 that we can do fun and we can work on together. Like I said, that's how we met. We met at, it wasn't a

00:04:21.140 legit CrossFit gym, but it was a CrossFit style workout that we were doing. It was in Watkinsville,

00:04:26.900 Georgia, back when I lived in Athens after college working there. And that's where we met. And that

00:04:32.120 really was kind of how we bonded. That was also back when I was really athletic and in shape. And so we

00:04:36.920 could actually compete against each other and that was fun. And now he's going to make sure, he's just

00:04:40.700 going to have to make sure that I'm not dead. So that's not going to be as much of a bonding experience

00:04:45.420 or that I don't get like rhabdo or something. That's what I'm scared of. And you know what? He keeps on

00:04:49.740 just telling me, you're going to be so sore. You're going to be so sore. You're going to be,

00:04:53.460 your legs are going to be so sore. You're not going to be able to walk the next day. I'm like,

00:04:56.180 thanks a lot, babe. That's a really great motivation. He's right though. I'm going to be

00:05:00.780 so sore. Maybe my arms, not as much because I am lifting children a majority of my day, but I mean,

00:05:09.080 I'm not going to be lifting a lot of weights. If you're worried for me the first day, I mean,

00:05:13.500 I'm probably going to be doing like, I'm probably going to be using like a PVC pipe. I'm not going to

00:05:17.800 be using like even a bar, even a 45 pound bar would be really difficult for me right now. So pray for

00:05:22.680 me. I think we're supposed to go tomorrow after I record. So again, I probably won't be able to tell

00:05:28.700 you until tomorrow or Friday. So pray for me and pray that I stick with it because as I, as I

00:05:35.180 mentioned, I really want to be strong again and Hey, maybe use this as your motivation. If you are

00:05:40.980 like me and you took a break from being fit or in shape or healthy in any way to have children

00:05:45.900 and you're like, I got to get back into it. Look, I'm so out of shape, legit, objectively

00:05:51.180 out of shape in every single way. This is going to be really difficult. It's so beyond my comfort

00:05:56.220 zone. If I can do it, you can do it. And actually I'm very thankful that I can even reach back into

00:06:02.120 my memory and think, okay, one time I ran a half marathon when previously I couldn't even run three

00:06:06.780 minutes without stopping. I did that then. And yeah, I'm a lot older now, but I think I can do that now.

00:06:11.980 So let's do those difficult things together. Um, maybe this is your, your calling, your motivation

00:06:18.860 to do that. All right. I just wanted to give that, that update to you today. We're not talking about

00:06:24.680 that. We are talking with our friend, Steve days that we've had on who we've had on several times.

00:06:29.940 You guys love him. My episodes with him, my previous episodes with him are some of my most popular,

00:06:34.880 most listened to episodes ever, because he's just one of the most insightful people. So we're going to

00:06:39.340 be talking about this question just very briefly. If COVID is making a comeback, Dr. Fauci is coming

00:06:45.680 out from the shadows. Why is that? What's going on? What's the future of these COVID restrictions?

00:06:50.240 Are they, are they coming back? And so we're going to talk about that briefly, but we're also going to

00:06:54.400 talk about, um, what is conservatism? He and I are both Christians. We are social conservatives,

00:07:01.380 and yet we find ourselves in this coalition of people that don't have the same fundamental worldview

00:07:05.800 as we do. And so how do we balance like linking arms with people that we disagree with in big ways,

00:07:10.540 but we agree with in other ways while also staying true to our values and remembering who we are

00:07:16.520 ultimately and primarily, which is part of the body of Christ. And so what exactly does that look

00:07:21.540 like? And he's going to give us some wisdom there. He's also going to, uh, talk, uh, a little bit

00:07:28.040 about Ketanji Brown Jackson. That is the judge, the Supreme Court nominee that is going through Senate

00:07:34.000 hearings right now. We are going to talk about her inability to answer a very basic question from

00:07:40.600 Senator Marsha Blackburn about what a woman is. And so it'll be very interesting to talk about that

00:07:46.540 and hear about that from Steve. But I want to talk about Ketanji Brown Jackson a little bit before we

00:07:53.440 even get into that conversation, because I didn't have time to talk to him about the exchange that she

00:07:58.520 had with Josh Hawley, Senator from Missouri about her judicial record. And the reality that it seems

00:08:07.000 like she has been very light when it comes to her dealing with child predators and people who have

00:08:13.900 consumed and distributed child pornography. So I'm going to play you a couple minutes of the exchange

00:08:19.400 that Josh Hawley had with Judge Jackson yesterday. Prosecutor in this case, say a, uh, a liberal

00:08:26.420 administration. I think it's fair to say this isn't state of Texas. See my colleague from Texas

00:08:30.220 next to me here. Prosecutor in this case, nevertheless, still asked for two full years

00:08:34.820 in prison. You gave the defendant three months guidelines called for 10 years. Prosecutor wanted

00:08:43.280 at least two. You gave him three months. And when you did, you made a, you made a number of arguments

00:08:49.000 and statements in the record. And I'd like to go through some of them because I've read them all.

00:08:52.480 And the first argument you made was that the federal guidelines that punished

00:08:55.980 child porn offenders. The ones that Congress wrote were, and I'm quoting you now are in many ways

00:09:02.160 outdated. That's your quote. And you went on to say about why you thought they were outdated. I'm

00:09:07.620 going to quote you again. You say, and I quote, I don't feel that it's appropriate to increase the

00:09:11.840 penalty on the basis of the number of images or prepubescent victims, meaning little kids as the

00:09:17.620 guidelines require, because these circumstances exist in many cases, if not most, and don't signal

00:09:24.280 an especially heinous or egregious child pornography offense, end quote. I just want to ask you about

00:09:31.800 that because I just have to tell you, I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around it. We're talking

00:09:35.540 about eight year olds and nine year olds and 11 year olds and 12 year olds. He's got images of these,

00:09:41.460 the government said added up to over 600 images, gobs of video footage of these children. But you say

00:09:49.900 this does not signal a heinous or egregious child pornography offense. Help me understand that.

00:09:57.260 What word would you use if it's not heinous or egregious? How would you describe it?

00:10:07.400 Thank you, Senator, for letting me address

00:10:11.080 the concern that you've put forward based on the record that you've reviewed as a judge who is a mom

00:10:24.120 and has been tasked with the responsibility of actually reviewing the evidence, the evidence that

00:10:33.560 you would not describe in polite company, the evidence that you are pointing to, discussing, addressing

00:10:46.220 in this context is evidence that I have seen in my role as a judge. And it is heinous. It is egregious.

00:10:59.460 What a judge has to do is determine

00:11:06.640 how to sentence defendants proportionately consistent

00:11:14.800 with the elements that the statutes include, with the requirements that Congress has set forward.

00:11:25.640 All right. If that was painful for you to listen to her answer when it seemed like every word had to

00:11:34.760 be pulled out of her mouth, it was uncomfortable for me, too. My husband and I were watching this

00:11:39.280 this morning, and honestly, I had to give her kudos because that's a rhetorical tactic that is learned

00:11:45.040 over time. When you are trying to think of your answer without saying uh or um or using any filler

00:11:52.300 words because it makes you seem dishonest or like you've just been caught in something,

00:11:55.820 you use legitimate words or legitimate sounding words slowly so that you can take time to actually

00:12:02.900 think about your answer. So that is, I think, what she was doing there. Like I said, it's a good

00:12:07.680 rhetorical tactic. It still didn't come off as very trustworthy to me. It was very, I was kind of like

00:12:14.040 found myself cringing because I didn't find her answer to be very convincing at all. Basically, what Josh

00:12:25.000 Hawley said is he is describing this case in which there was a consumer of child pornography and the

00:12:32.140 federal prosecutors recommended two years in prison, and she said, oh, no, I think I'm just going to actually

00:12:37.480 do three months. I'm going to do a few months. And the reasoning that she gave is because when the law was

00:12:42.560 written that set these standards for what the punishment would be for consuming child pornography,

00:12:47.800 that was back in a day when you had to go through a lot more steps and a lot more effort to actually

00:12:52.320 purchase this child porn. And now, because it's so easily accessible, maybe the punishment shouldn't

00:12:57.560 be as harsh. And I think Josh Hawley is rightly pointing out what logical or judicial sense does that

00:13:03.360 make? I think it's a perfectly legitimate question. I don't think that she did a good job of answering it.

00:13:08.460 And unfortunately, Josh Hawley has uncovered, he uncovered on Twitter, a pattern for Judge Jackson

00:13:14.780 when it comes to child, when it comes to child predation and child pornography. And so I'm going

00:13:20.320 to read you a few of those cases that he has cited publicly. And then I'll talk to you about the media

00:13:27.220 response to that, which is just crazy. And so this is from cnsnews.com. There was a defendant,

00:13:33.900 this is one case, a defendant distributed multiple images of child pornography, possessed dozens more,

00:13:39.160 including videos. I mean, it just puts a pit in my stomach to even talk about this. It's just so

00:13:44.060 difficult to talk about. And I don't, it's hard for me to understand how more people aren't caring

00:13:48.420 about this. So the federal sentencing guidelines for this case is 97 to 121 months in prison. The

00:13:54.220 prosecutors recommended 24 months in prison. Judge Jackson gave the defendant three months in prison.

00:14:00.080 And so this is the case that he's talking about. A second case, the defendant possessed 48 files

00:14:05.240 of child pornography. Federal guidelines sent 78 to 97 months in prison. First of all, I think the

00:14:11.960 federal guidelines are off. I think it should be way more than that. Like, do you even know the abuse

00:14:16.280 that we are talking about here? The prosecutor recommended the same, 78 to 97 months in prison.

00:14:22.280 Judge Jackson sentenced him to 28 months in prison. Third case, defendant distributed dozens of images of

00:14:28.180 child pornography, possessed over 600 federal guidelines, 151 to 188 months in prison. Prosecutor

00:14:34.780 recommended 72 months. So even lower, Judge Jackson gave the defendant the lowest sentence permitted by

00:14:39.520 law, 60 months. Fourth case, defendant distributed 33 graphic images and videos of child sexual assault.

00:14:47.220 And that's really what you're supposed to call it. Child sexual assault material, not child pornography,

00:14:51.060 because there is no consent going on here. It is sexual assault. Federal guidelines, 70 to 87 months

00:14:56.460 in prison. Prosecutor recommended 70 months. Judge Jackson sentenced to the lowest sentence permitted

00:15:01.000 by law, 60 months. Number five, defendant distributed scores of images in children suffering sexual abuse.

00:15:07.320 Federal guidelines, 97 to 121 months. Prosecutor recommended 97. Judge Jackson gave him 57.

00:15:14.840 Defendant distributed over 100 videos of child pornography. Guidelines say 97 to 121 months in prison.

00:15:21.400 Prosecution recommended 97 months in prison. Judge Jackson gave 71 months. Last one, defendant was convicted

00:15:28.180 of traveling across state lines to engage in sexual intercourse with a child and also possessed six separate

00:15:33.460 thumb drives of child pornography. Who knows how many images and videos? Guidelines, 46 to 57 months in prison.

00:15:39.880 Still, it's just amazing to me that this is not life in prison. You don't want me to become dictator.

00:15:45.940 I'm just saying that. If you think that there should be light sentencing for child pornographers and

00:15:52.080 people who are trying to have sex with a child or rape a child, which is actually what it is in every

00:15:57.820 case. If you think that it should be a couple years or a few years for those people, you don't want to

00:16:04.380 elect me to any position of power because I would ensure with everything that I could that those people

00:16:12.280 get 25 years to life, no doubt, if not something harsher than that. Prosecutor recommended 49 months.

00:16:19.880 Judge Jackson sent us to 37 months. This is a big deal. This is her judicial record. Senator Hawley

00:16:28.240 is calling this out. She doesn't have a good answer for it. And what does the media say? Here are just

00:16:33.640 some headlines that I have. Orange County Register. Josh Hawley's disgusting QAnon slur talking about this.

00:16:40.800 Yahoo News. Josh Hawley is on the verge of being senator from QAnon. So because QAnon people believe

00:16:49.060 that there was this like elite child sex ring going global child sex ring going on in the world that

00:16:55.160 Hillary Clinton was a part of, apparently any time you bring up the reality of child sex abuse material

00:17:02.060 or child predation and you question someone's judicial record on this when she is consistently

00:17:08.760 giving lighter sentences, that's QAnon. That's a dangerous conspiracy theory. Of course, trying to 0.54

00:17:14.460 liken this to January 6th insurrectionist. I'm sorry, but if that's the argument you make, then maybe

00:17:20.260 the FBI should be looking at your thumb drives. That's really troubling. If you are saying that

00:17:26.640 talking about the existence of child sex abuse material is a conspiracy theory, then I'm a little

00:17:33.040 worried about what you're viewing and what you're doing. A business insider. Why Josh Hawley's

00:17:38.760 dishonest claim that Ketanji Brown Jackson was soft on child pornography is devoid of context. It's always

00:17:44.980 devoid of context and without merit. And then, of course, there are several Maddow on MSNBC said that

00:17:53.560 this was terrible, that he actually denigrated himself and not Ketanji Jackson. It's, oh,

00:18:01.980 Reason, of course. Reason.com says, Josh Hawley's attack on Ketanji Brown Jackson illustrates the

00:18:07.800 emotionalism. She criticized. Like, does anyone have a legitimate argument over this? It's insane.

00:18:16.460 This is insane. I mean, these are the same people criticizing Josh Hawley, who was bringing up

00:18:20.540 perjudicial record. We're talking about a position on the highest court in the land. These are the same

00:18:26.980 people who thought that it was totally legitimate and very appropriate and completely objective and

00:18:33.980 responsible to ask Judge Kavanaugh if he was involved in gang rape. That was an accusation that ended up

00:18:43.100 being disproven. What he did at a party when he was 17 years old claims that were never substantiated

00:18:49.780 or corroborated by any witnesses and had many holes in them. What kind of beer he was drinking.

00:18:58.220 If he threw ice at a party. What the inside jokes that he listed in his yearbook meant like boof 0.94

00:19:07.120 and trying to read into every little thing that he did when he was 16 and 17 years old.

00:19:13.300 Apparently, that was totally above board. That was totally fine. That's very legitimate and relevant

00:19:18.660 to the conversation. But her judicial record, when it comes to child sex predators, that's off the

00:19:24.080 table. That's an attack. Of course, that's racist. I'm sure that's what they're saying. That's totally

00:19:29.100 sexist. Really? Again, that makes me question you. That makes me just, I don't know, make me feel like

00:19:38.040 you're a little sketchy. Can you not just maybe, I don't know, disagree with him? I don't even know why

00:19:44.960 you would or like argue against this on its merits or try to come up with any kind of legitimate

00:19:51.000 argument rather than just being so freaking creepy. Like, why? Why are you people like this? Why?

00:19:58.340 Also, the same media that thought it was totally responsible to question why Amy Coney Barrett

00:20:06.540 had adopted black children. I remember there was a story. Let's see if I can pull it up

00:20:11.640 about Amy Coney Barrett's adoption from Haiti and if it was totally, if it was fine. Like, if it was

00:20:22.280 something that was legitimate and above board or if it was something, I can't find it right now,

00:20:31.060 or if it was something, they talked about like the history of Haitian adoption and how sometimes there

00:20:36.940 was like kidnapping involved. And so there were a lot of illegitimate, terrible, immoral attacks

00:20:48.280 against Amy Coney Barrett and because she adopted, because she was a Catholic and she might have

00:20:54.160 certain views on birth control and abortion and things like that. These are the same people who

00:21:00.140 launched those attacks that think it's totally off the table. You shouldn't be able to talk to

00:21:04.920 Ketanji Jackson about her judicial record when it comes to sentencing child predators.

00:21:11.000 It's just, it's very confusing. It's, well, actually, it's not really confusing at all.

00:21:15.380 It's becoming increasingly clear. This is a pattern. It's the same people who think that there is a

00:21:20.260 fundamental right to a teacher teaching a five-year-old about gender switching in the state

00:21:25.080 of Florida. So like, if you don't want people to accuse you of these horrible things or to be

00:21:31.260 suspect of these horrible things, like maybe don't be so suspect. Maybe don't be so freaking weird.

00:21:37.820 I don't know. Like, maybe that's a plan. Good on Josh Hawley for bringing this up. He's going to get

00:21:43.840 a lot of pushback. It's a legitimate line of questioning. Maybe there is more context. That's

00:21:48.620 fine. But don't tell me that the Democrats are the ones that are being responsible and above board

00:21:54.100 when they question the nominees. I mean, come on. Kavanaugh, for a lot of people, including me,

00:21:58.700 it was like a major red pill moment because I saw that there were politicians that were out for

00:22:03.940 blood. And I know for a lot of you, you had known that for a long time. And even though I was always

00:22:09.100 conservative and I was voting Republican, I just saw the depth of the ugliness and the depravity

00:22:14.980 on Capitol Hill that they did not care that they may very well be ruining a man's life with accusations

00:22:20.400 that they either knew weren't true or didn't know were true at all. Awful. Awful. I mean, just the rot

00:22:26.880 in our institutions is so disheartening. But, you know, good for senators and politicians who are

00:22:32.840 pushing back when they know it's going to be unpopular. I hope to God there is more context

00:22:37.940 that explains these decisions that she made. Because, you know, I liked her speech that she

00:22:43.640 gave. I thought that it was good. It was obviously middle of the road. I don't wish ill upon her. I hope

00:22:50.180 that she is a very just justice, that she is impartial, and that she applies the Constitution

00:22:55.980 and all of her decision making. I hope that for her. But, as I say, legitimate questions,

00:23:02.280 legitimate questions hang in the air about this very disturbing record.

00:23:07.760 Okay, Steve, thanks so much for joining us again, helping us make sense of all the craziness that's

00:23:12.840 going on. We haven't talked about COVID in a while, but it seems to be making a comeback.

00:23:17.260 Dr. Fauci, he went away. He was lost in the shadows, and now he's coming back talking about

00:23:24.980 a new variant, new restrictions kind of seem to be being discussed again. What's going on in your

00:23:31.140 estimation? Well, the funny thing is, Ali, is they started about the final week of February through

00:23:39.240 the first week of March. And, you know, we kind of have this term that we use a lot in alternative

00:23:44.140 media called memory holing, when a story that doesn't fit the spirit of the age's narrative

00:23:48.520 just suddenly puffed the magic dragons, right? Yes, for 1984, in case some people don't know.

00:23:53.060 Yes. Yeah, this is different. They wormholed COVID. I mean, they instantaneously took us to an

00:23:59.920 earth where COVID never existed, okay? And so I don't believe they're going back to that narrative

00:24:06.880 anytime soon. Really?

00:24:08.360 Because if you look at the numbers, if you look at the data, the last week of February and the first

00:24:13.060 week of March, actually through the second week of March, so the last three weeks we have complete

00:24:17.280 data, we actually have more COVID deaths in America those three weeks of this year than we had during

00:24:24.760 those three weeks of last year. And it's like the story just went away. In my opinion, I think if you

00:24:30.920 look at the timeline here with Fauci, what I believe occurred is he did some interview where he said he was

00:24:37.460 thinking of retirement. And instantly people started drawing the conclusion that I would imagine you're

00:24:43.880 thinking of retirement when Rand Paul and Thomas Massey and Ron Johnson are threatening you with

00:24:48.960 full-fledged subpoena power if they're in control of the Congress next year. And so I think it's not a

00:24:54.600 coincidence that he ended up right back on the shows right after that, sort of as a reassertion of

00:25:00.540 his position. But I don't believe the regime has any intent anytime soon to return to the COVID

00:25:07.240 narrative. Doesn't mean that they have forever mothballed it. I mean, could I foresee a scenario

00:25:12.080 where we suddenly decide in some very blue counties in some swing states like Fulton County, Georgia and

00:25:19.480 Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania and Washtenaw County, Michigan? Could I foresee that some of those

00:25:25.000 very blue, totally in control counties where they board up windows and count votes for days after

00:25:30.200 the election? Could I foresee a scenario where they decide, man, we just have a very terrifying spike

00:25:34.860 of COVID here in mid to late October and we really have to go to mail-in balloting? Could I foresee

00:25:40.400 something along those lines? I mean, I don't know. Were Popes previous to this one Catholic? Of course. 0.98

00:25:46.160 But for the interim, I don't believe they're going back hardcore to the COVID narrative at all.

00:25:50.880 It's such a loser for them. So do you think the reason that Dr. Fauci is now kind of making

00:25:55.820 appearances on mainstream shows like ABC's This Week and he's warning of these new variants and

00:26:02.580 he's saying, he's using the term pivot, that we might need to pivot back. We might need to, you know,

00:26:07.460 reinstate mask mandates and things like that. I saw this morning for the New York Times, Moderna will

00:26:13.120 seek emergency authorization of its coronavirus vaccine for children younger than six, the company said.

00:26:18.680 And then we've got Jen Psaki and then another, I think, Democrat senator or congressperson

00:26:22.600 saying, oh, you know, we tested positive for COVID even after getting our booster shots.

00:26:28.920 It just seems like it is trickling back into mainstream conversation again. So if you don't

00:26:34.280 see the full regime pivoting towards this and trying to push this narrative again, do you think it's just

00:26:39.600 that some people, they're just hanging on and they're desperate for this to be relevant because

00:26:45.900 they almost like this new normal better than actual normalcy? And if yes, then why do you think that

00:26:52.620 is? I think it's because this gave a group of people, you know, the Karen phenomenon, this gave a group of

00:27:03.480 people meaning. I mean, this gave, and this is much more tangible than Ukraine. I mean, if you look at

00:27:11.740 the entire Ukrainian narrative, to me, there is the fact that Vladimir Putin is a vile despot and was

00:27:19.200 prior to his invasion of Ukraine. And then there is the Ukrainian narrative and how seamless and quick

00:27:24.920 the regime moved to this narrative. Zelensky is the new Fauci. He's the new unassailable figure,

00:27:31.360 hero. You cannot question, even though you had no idea who this dude was 10 minutes ago. All right.

00:27:36.240 But, you know, the mask is the ban Russian products and don't, you know, now Nestle is not going to give

00:27:44.020 hot cocoa to the poor Russian people. OK, that's the new mask. The jab is, well, we have to do a no-fly 1.00

00:27:53.080 zone and all sorts of things that actually don't really threaten Putin the way that we are claiming they do.

00:27:59.940 And then the new ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine is if we actually went back to energy independence

00:28:05.900 and told the Russians, we're not giving you access to the largest middle-class economy in the world

00:28:10.460 any longer until you get out of Ukraine. You know, these are all, these are, see, this is the same 0.99

00:28:14.860 narrative. Nothing has changed. All the same people that went from pronouns in their bios to then putting

00:28:19.980 a mask in their vax card in their bios, then went to a Ukraine flag in their bios. OK. And so what we're

00:28:26.520 dealing with here is true cultic behavior. I've rarely, and you'll see this if you follow my

00:28:32.940 postings or our programming, I rarely use the term liberal or leftist any longer. I don't even use

00:28:38.360 the term progressive really that much any longer. This is true spirit of the age level stuff. And

00:28:44.680 you're seeing just how many people have been groomed. I mean, the poll that came out of Canada

00:28:49.940 this week, Allie, is one of the most stunning things, evidences of like literal Mark of the Beast

00:28:55.960 level grooming I have seen in my life. And it was a poll from the Toronto Sun. And what it showed was

00:29:01.000 that your views on Ukraine, they broke them down by are you triple jabbed or more? Wow. And have you

00:29:07.220 taken no jab or more? And their views on Ukraine, something that should have nothing to do whatsoever

00:29:12.900 with your view of COVID or the COVID vaccines or their efficacy, safety, nothing whatsoever, a total

00:29:19.880 line of demarcation. Why? Because it's really about who has been preconditioned to accept a spirit of

00:29:27.140 the age narrative on any subject, no matter what it is, and then who has not. And so I think that's

00:29:33.740 the reality of the situation. I think there are some people struggling for good old fashioned

00:29:38.380 political relevancy like a Fauci. I think also a little bit of ego. I'm not afraid of you guys.

00:29:43.820 He actually should be very afraid and should probably be lawyering up. But I think that for a lot of

00:29:50.620 people, this is just a more tangible narrative to get meaning from than something going on in a country

00:29:56.640 where we don't know where it is. We still don't know how many whys are in Zelensky and how to

00:30:00.880 pronounce or spell Kiev. Right. You know, the whole Ukraine thing, and we're going to be talking about

00:30:06.120 it more tomorrow, it's very confusing to me that for whatever reason, I guess it is just the spirit of

00:30:13.100 the age. We are unable to hold common sense and compassion at the same time. So if someone says,

00:30:19.720 you know what, I'm not I'm not sure if we should be lionizing Zelensky. There are some questions that

00:30:24.340 I have about Ukraine and why our politicians seem to be caring more about its borders, their own

00:30:30.300 borders. I have some questions about that. So then why are you a Putin puppet? Just like why do you hate

00:30:33.460 grandma? Right. And or and you can simultaneously say Putin is bad as we already have and say, wow,

00:30:40.460 I feel so badly for the Ukrainian people. But it seems like you're not allowed to hold those what 0.51

00:30:46.480 they would call competing thoughts in your mind. You have to say that Zelensky is the best leader

00:30:51.860 that ever was, that there is no corruption in Ukraine whatsoever. And you have to pour out your

00:30:58.340 Svedka from your freezer. And that's the only way that you are considered a virtuous person.

00:31:03.840 Is it really that people are just clinging to meaning and they really are just like waiting,

00:31:10.260 like dogs waiting to be fed. They're waiting for the regime, for the media, for the government,

00:31:16.200 whatever it is. Tell them, tell me what to care about. Tell me how I can show people that I'm

00:31:21.340 virtuous. Tell me what my purpose in life is, what my identity is. I mean, is that really just it?

00:31:27.040 Does it go back to kind of just godlessness and amorality and people are looking for someone to tell

00:31:31.540 them what to do? Yeah. Yeah. That's really what it is. I think that we have to, particularly on the

00:31:39.980 right, I think that there is a huge hesitancy to really admit what this is and to define it as what

00:31:48.240 it is. And I think, frankly, it's because much of the right has gotten more pluralistic and secularized.

00:31:54.680 That's the whole debate we've had within our own company over the last week that a lot of people

00:31:59.520 have paid attention to. I think it's because this lack of critical thinking or attachment to some

00:32:08.980 fundamental plumb line was largely correlated with the American left for a long time. Pardon me.

00:32:16.220 But that's not true any longer. It still mainly comes from the American or the Western left.

00:32:21.460 It is still their native habitat. But whenever a tumor goes untreated for a long period of time,

00:32:27.380 it can't help but metastasize. When locusts are done consuming one plot of land, if they are not

00:32:33.540 eradicated, then they will just move on to the next. And so much of this sort of kind of secularized

00:32:41.040 morality or non-theistic direct notions of philosophy have now permeated the right. And so much of what we

00:32:51.320 view as we're opposed to, we do it on instinct. So we don't oppose the idea on the surface or the face

00:32:58.560 of it that men cannot be women and this is insanity or women-men and should not be entertained at any

00:33:05.340 level. In fact, we flirted with creating our own sort of conservative trans character named Blair 1.00

00:33:10.440 White a few years ago. No, instead we will latch on to something that instinctively insults our craven 0.99

00:33:18.420 senses. Watching Leah Thomas pretend with an Adam's apple and, you know, hills in the shoulders pretend

00:33:25.120 to be a woman and dust the chicks by two seconds in a national championship swim meet. It's when our

00:33:32.160 senses get instinctively assaulted that we instinctively, based on our just, you know, basic craven, being

00:33:39.020 just basically made in the image of God, even if we are philosophically godless, that is when the right

00:33:44.920 tends to speak out. That's the problem is by then it's often too late. A great example of this is

00:33:50.980 what's happening right now with Judge Jackson. So she made a lot of headlines and I commented on it

00:33:56.100 too by saying yesterday, in response to Senator Blackburn's question, she cannot define a woman.

00:34:01.460 And we made it look like this is...

00:34:02.900 Sorry, just so people know, Senator Blackburn said,

00:34:05.440 can you define a woman? And she kind of laughed a little bit. The judge kind of laughed. You could tell 1.00

00:34:10.480 she was uncomfortable. And she said that she's not a biologist. So you have to be a biologist to say

00:34:18.000 what a man or a woman is. Incredibly, the human race has existed all of these millennia without 0.99

00:34:24.480 everyone being a biologist. And yet knowing who carries the baby and who impregnates the woman.

00:34:31.320 Apparently you have to be a vet to know what a dog is. You have to be, I don't know, a professional to

00:34:38.500 know how to categorize anything. That was her response. It was pretty incredible.

00:34:43.160 It was pretty incredible. It was also typical. I mean, she's joining an august body that a decade

00:34:49.740 ago told us after 6,000 years, it doesn't know what a marriage is. That just a couple of years ago,

00:34:55.500 including with Neil Gorsuch, who overall has been a good judicial appointment, but just a couple of

00:35:01.220 years ago told us it didn't know what a gender is. He voted to codify this gender madness into law. 0.99

00:35:05.700 It told us 50 years ago, we don't know what a baby is. This is actually, it's been telling us

00:35:14.720 pretty much for the last 50, 60, 70 years since the Warren court, it doesn't know what a constitution

00:35:19.000 is. So she's actually, she's at home. She belongs in that natural habitat. But the problem is for so

00:35:27.940 long, we didn't defend our fundamentals that we tend to now, we keep on the right, we keep trying to

00:35:34.500 dam the river down the stream. And the problem with that is, is that you'll stop some of the water,

00:35:40.820 but you can't stop it all because by that point in time, gravity, inertia, the laws of physics have

00:35:45.860 taken over and it's gained too much momentum. That's why you dam a river at the source, but we

00:35:51.900 tend not to do that. And we're getting less hesitant to do it or more hesitant to do it on the right

00:35:56.280 because we're all afraid of losing our Facebook monetization models and our Twitter followings

00:36:01.620 and things of that nature, which is why I'm ecstatic to see what the Babylon Bee and Charlie

00:36:06.220 Kirk have done in the last couple of days. No, I'm not going to self edit. No, I'm not going to

00:36:09.900 change. And there's been a lot of money to be made within conservative media for many years

00:36:16.100 in not fundamentally attacking the enemy, but doing so around the edges. The problem is now we've lost

00:36:23.780 so many of the edges. We really have no choice now, but to attack the enemy fundamentally.

00:36:32.800 And I think you get where we are now by the right only ever making an argument of personal

00:36:39.920 liberty. We never defend what we want to defend on its merits. So rather than being, rather than saying,

00:36:47.640 okay, this is what a marriage is, this is how we define it, it pre exists, not only America,

00:36:52.800 but civilization, there's already a definition of marriage. We're too scared to actually defend

00:36:58.420 marriage on its merits or defend what the family looks like on its merits. We have to kind of hedge

00:37:04.600 and say, well, you know, this is really about personal liberty. But if personal liberty is your

00:37:09.280 only standard for right and wrong, well, then of course, anything goes. Of course, we can't really

00:37:14.720 define anything. I mean, if personal liberty is your only argument, then why can't Leah Thomas

00:37:20.800 compete against women? Like there has to be some kind of substance, some kind of why behind what

00:37:26.420 you believe. And we can't just allow the Overton window to keep getting pulled back over and for us

00:37:31.740 to show up five to 10 years later and say, okay, well, now it's fine, because it's too scary to say

00:37:36.900 otherwise. So before we get to Judge Jackson, because I want to play another clip for her. Can you 0.99

00:37:43.260 summarize? Because I think that you have such great insight into this. And this is a debate that

00:37:48.440 we have been having within conservatism. What is conservatism, essentially? What is it? How would

00:37:54.460 you define it? There seems to be serious disagreements about this. To me, a word means what its root word

00:38:04.600 means, okay? And so when Jesus says, no one is good but God, what is the root word of good? God,

00:38:12.140 okay? That's why good and godly are considered, well, they were previous to the last 20 years to

00:38:17.520 be direct synonyms. So a word is what its root word means. Conservatism is not an ideology.

00:38:24.160 It means to conserve. It's an observational science. It means, so what is it I'm trying to

00:38:30.200 conserve? What is it I'm trying to conserve is what history has revealed and history's author and

00:38:36.340 finisher has revealed throughout time to be what is good and what is true and what is beautiful for

00:38:42.980 the human condition and human flourishing as best we can east of Eden in a fallen and sinful world.

00:38:49.460 That's what it means. Now, the problem with that is, and this is, and issues and dilemmas like what

00:38:55.780 happened with Dave this week within our company, these are going to become more apparent. As the

00:39:03.240 opposition to obvious spirit of the age Marxism grows, it's going to become more diverse. I mean,

00:39:10.120 we're living in an era where Bill Maher and Ben Shapiro are sitting down smoking peace pipes, okay?

00:39:15.380 We're living in an era where I'm playing Russell Brand clips and like nodding my head.

00:39:19.780 Oh, right. I'm liking every single one of his posts on Instagram.

00:39:22.680 Yes, yes. And so I think we have to understand that one, that is good, okay? We didn't have the

00:39:30.480 numbers. This is still a numbers game. We didn't have the numbers to move the fulcrum of America's

00:39:36.580 socio-political levers on our own unless we got really rolled snake eyes and a guy like Ron DeSantis

00:39:44.260 wins by less than 40,000 votes in a state of 21 million people and turns out to be the 21st century

00:39:50.020 closest thing we've seen to George Washington, right? But good luck. You can't duplicate that.

00:39:54.440 It's not a duplicatable process, right? That's not something you can rely on duplicating all the

00:39:59.280 time. And so we didn't have the numbers to move those levers, to be the fulcrum that moved the

00:40:04.380 levers. And so it's good now that there is a growing cacophony of people that are waking up that

00:40:09.740 might be like Ayn Rand, atheists who think Christians are fools, but believe in some form of objective

00:40:14.600 reality who are like, what in this Sam Hill is all of this? Those things are good. We should align

00:40:19.820 with those people when we can. What we're going to have to figure out though, is that we cannot

00:40:23.980 abandon our convictions in that process. And that doesn't mean that we're going to ask you to accept

00:40:30.140 the Heidelberg or, you know, catechism and the Westminster confession and that there, you know,

00:40:35.120 there's only a triune God. You know, we would prefer you did. We have those views because we believe

00:40:39.500 those are the ultimate truths and we will never, you know, come off of them and we'll discuss them

00:40:44.620 with you anytime they come up and we'll be bold in discussing them anytime they do. But that's not

00:40:49.460 a qualifier into you aligning with us over shared concerns. Just know that if you put that qualifier

00:40:55.240 on me, I will not honor that. And I think we're going to have to, that's really what it means to

00:40:59.880 be in the world and not of it. And as this coalition expands and becomes more pluralistic, we're going to

00:41:05.440 have to also then make sure we hold onto our distinctiveness, Allie, so that the salt doesn't

00:41:10.600 lose its flavor. There's an issue here that I think we should address. And that is we're dealing

00:41:17.300 with a generation of Americans. I'm going to be 49 this year, right? So I'm the first born from the

00:41:22.020 sexual revolution. My mom got pregnant with me at 14 from her high school senior boyfriend.

00:41:26.720 Roe v. Wade happens a couple months later when she's 15 and she debated whether to kill me or not

00:41:32.140 and then decided not to. All right? I grew up with a, she then when I was three married a stepdad

00:41:36.860 who never really took me in and was very abusive. We were on food stamps, government cheese, reduced

00:41:44.540 lunches in schools. Okay? So I'm a product of what the sexual revolution did to America. 1.00

00:41:51.280 I then grew up to be a byproduct of it. All the exposure to porn and premarital sex and everything of 0.55

00:41:58.840 that nature. And I think what's happened is because the sexual revolution and how comprehensive it 0.54

00:42:06.240 became, it's tainted almost every household in America. Yeah. And I think there are a lot of

00:42:12.140 households with a lot of people who are really wrestling with, hey man, last night I gave into

00:42:18.860 temptation again and I was watching porn after the wife went to bed. I can't take a strong stance on

00:42:22.900 this. And I think, or, or, you know, I've got a loved one who's gay and, and, you know, I just feel

00:42:29.020 like I'm compromised in this area. And I think there's, this is a demonic fallacy. We are all

00:42:34.100 compromised. Even if you're not compromised in this era area, you are compromised in another.

00:42:39.700 Otherwise you wouldn't need a savior. All are like sheep and easily led astray. All of us have sinned and

00:42:45.160 fallen short of the glory of God. If we succumb to the idea, now that doesn't mean by the way,

00:42:50.180 if you're struggling in your personal life with sin, don't run for elder of church. Okay. Don't

00:42:55.740 go to seminary. That doesn't mean there aren't areas or things that you are, you have morally

00:43:00.300 disqualified yourself from. Okay. But in general, if we wait to say, not until I have, I've reached a

00:43:08.580 certain moral standard, while I feel qualified to speak up on something that is clearly evil and wrong

00:43:14.600 and destroying people, then we'll never speak up because none of us can achieve that standard.

00:43:19.380 None of us are, are, are good enough. That's why we need a savior. And so I think there's a lot of

00:43:25.040 people within our ranks who, because of their own personal struggles are feeling, and I don't,

00:43:30.940 and maybe they're afraid those things will come out. That's why, man, I just let all my errors out.

00:43:34.720 I tell everybody everything I'm doing wrong and everything that has gone on in my personal life

00:43:38.880 that I've screwed up, provided it doesn't break a confidence with somebody else. Um, I'm just brutally

00:43:44.560 honest because of course I'm, of course I'm not morally qualified. I was not a virgin on my wedding

00:43:49.640 night. I mean, there's a reason my wife went in what her, her, her major in to be a therapist at 1.00

00:43:55.540 Liberty with issues dealing with sexual dysfunction. And it wasn't just her husband's, it was her own.

00:44:00.900 I mean, we were, we, we met as pagans. Our mutual sexual dysfunction was a primary thing that attracted

00:44:07.000 each of us to one another. Okay. So, I mean, the idea that any of us are perfectly qualified

00:44:13.480 and without any sin to stand up and speak out on what is right and wrong, that's a fallacy. None

00:44:19.320 of us will reach that level. And you're listening to the accuser. The question is, are we, are we

00:44:24.180 speaking out self-righteously and hypocritically without recognition of our own sinfulness? And are

00:44:29.820 we doing so in order to impose some sort of moral standard or because we are trying to stop people

00:44:35.640 from making the same mistakes that were made either against us or by us? What's our motivation

00:44:41.980 here? That's what we should be wrestling with as our motivation far more than our qualification.

00:44:51.980 Yeah. And I think when it comes to conservatives, and as you said, becoming more pluralistic and

00:44:57.200 having the courage and the qualifications, um, even if they're, you know, self-imposed to speak

00:45:05.460 out about the things that we know are good and right and true, we also have to decide what,

00:45:11.260 what conservatism or what this coalition, maybe it's not even conservatism, what we are for,

00:45:18.400 because you are describing, you know, linking arms with people like Russell Brand. You probably agree

00:45:25.880 with a lot of self-described feminists when it comes to men not being able to be women, but obviously we

00:45:33.300 disagree with them on abortion. So I have found myself linking arms with people that I adamantly

00:45:38.220 disagree with when it comes to some of my, you know, most closely held beliefs. But the question

00:45:45.180 becomes, what are we? So I know what we're not, like, we're not insane. We're not woke. We're not

00:45:51.640 anti-reality. We're not left-wing authoritarianism. That's true. That's probably true of you and me and

00:45:57.800 Russell Brand and, you know, Chris Pratt, whoever. But what are we? What are we for? Like, okay,

00:46:03.460 we've got to build something because the left is really good at organization. They're really good

00:46:07.780 at mobilization. They're really good at coming together and saying, this is what we're going

00:46:12.040 to build. We are going to infiltrate all of these institutions. We're going to remake these institutions

00:46:16.920 into our image. And we are really good about articulating why that's wrong. We're not necessarily

00:46:23.040 good at, in general, at coming together and building up. And I feel like one of the reasons

00:46:27.660 is because we don't actually agree in this pluralistic coalition what our foundation is.

00:46:32.760 You really can't build a house without a foundation. Of course, you and I believe

00:46:36.180 that the foundation is, at the very least, biblical morality, even if someone doesn't believe that

00:46:41.040 Jesus is the only way, truth, and the life. I do think that we have to agree just in a broad sense

00:46:46.620 that, okay, our rights come from God, not the government. The reason why you and I have inherent

00:46:51.560 worth is because we are made in the image of God. God is the creator of justice. The Bible is the

00:46:56.900 creator of justice. Let's at least start there, even if someone doesn't believe that spiritually in

00:47:02.520 the same ways that we do. But that's what I feel like we're not doing as conservatives,

00:47:09.920 that we're kind of just like, okay, we're capitalism with a progressive twist, and we just accept

00:47:15.580 everything that progressives were accepting a few years ago. And we don't really know what we're

00:47:19.800 building. But we are getting a lot of views when we talk about these crazy stories coming from the

00:47:24.360 left. But it does seem to me like we have to agree on, okay, where do we start from? And then how are

00:47:29.740 we going to build from there? I like the numbers. I like that there's a broad coalition. I like that

00:47:34.580 there's a lot of people with a different worldview that are against the same things as me. But I do

00:47:39.600 worry, at the end of the day, are the moderates that we're talking about, who I love. I love Barry Weiss.

00:47:45.240 I think Douglas Murray has a lot to contribute. I think Russell Brand is awesome. I love those

00:47:49.320 people. But at the end of the day, like, do they hate me and my worldview just as much? Like, are we

00:47:55.480 agreeing at all on the starting point? And what we're trying to build? Are we just the same anti?

00:48:01.280 I don't know. I don't know the answer to that.

00:48:03.540 This is a, this is a, you've made a perfect argument here about the dilemma. And those who have

00:48:09.980 not learned from history are doomed to repeat it. A different variation or proto version of this was

00:48:15.840 tried when I was a kid and probably before you were born with the original religious right.

00:48:21.600 All right. So prior to Roe v. Wade, Catholics had never voted majority for a Republican ever in

00:48:27.760 American presidential history. Never happened. Not even for Eisenhower. Never happened. All right.

00:48:33.820 And then since Roe v. Wade, what's happened is every time Republicans win a majority of Catholic

00:48:38.520 votes, they win a presidential election with one exception, the hanging chat election. And then

00:48:43.040 every time that they don't, they don't. All right. And so what happened is post Roe v. Wade,

00:48:47.820 a new coalition was formed. All right. Catholics started considering voting Republican for the

00:48:53.000 first time over the life issue. And evangelicals put down how Lindsay's late great planet earth, 1.00

00:48:57.620 that the world's going to end in 1988 long enough to realize we got to confront this evil in our

00:49:01.740 midst right here in 1980 and 81. Okay. And they formed this coalition, the Catholic Paul Weirich,

00:49:07.440 who started the Heritage Foundation with men like Protestant leaders like D. James Kennedy and Adrian

00:49:12.360 Rogers and Jerry Falwell Sr. And it became the most potent political force for the next 25 years in

00:49:19.440 America, known as the values voters, religious right, whatever you want to call it. But to do that,

00:49:24.340 they had to align pluralistically within the Republican Party, align with people like Barry Goldwater,

00:49:31.180 who thought religious, the religious right was a crock, even though he might've agreed with a lot 0.86

00:49:36.460 of, we might've agreed with him on a lot of issues. And what they learned though, was what the dilemma

00:49:41.660 that what we learned the wrong way, unfortunately, is we thought we were building a big tent. Instead,

00:49:47.100 we built a big tarp. Let me explain. A tent has stakes in the ground so that the center can hold when

00:49:54.780 there is, when the wind and the rains come, that makes it a shelter. A tarp is something that when

00:49:59.880 people see the storm, they just indiscriminately run into for cover. It can flop around. It can,

00:50:05.320 it can lay on the ground. Okay. But there is no foundation to it. And so what happened is they

00:50:10.560 aligned with a lot of these corporate entities and other entities because the enemy of my enemy

00:50:15.100 is my friend, but there was no valid thing actually tying them together. The proverb can too,

00:50:21.620 walk arm in arm lest they see eye to eye proven true once again. Let's not make that mistake here

00:50:27.200 again. So how do we not make it? We have to establish some plumb line here. And the, and the,

00:50:32.640 and the good news is, is actually the hardest plumb line of them all to establish is actually the one

00:50:39.040 that's the most readily available right now. What is true? Let's start there. And what we started

00:50:46.120 with before were in the previous generation, the religious right did was Democrats are bad and have

00:50:51.380 to lose no matter what the cost, even if it means nominating Mitt Romney, John McCain at all.

00:50:56.260 And that was, and that coalition has collapsed, doesn't exist any longer. And right now our

00:51:01.440 audiences probably trust Russell Brand, Bill Maher more than they trust John Cornyn, Mitch McConnell,

00:51:08.940 Kevin McCarthy. I could go on and on. Okay. And so that coalition has failed. I think there's a new

00:51:15.920 opportunity here to begin with. What is the truth? Because, and now we're playing in an arena for us

00:51:22.180 as Christians. We're the home team here. Okay. And, and, and because this is the arena that we

00:51:27.260 have struck. I'm just going to tell you, Ali, I've been working in this movement and industry longer

00:51:31.800 than you because I'm older than you. What has gone on within our company and the controversy over it

00:51:37.200 internally and externally, since what happened with Dave Rubin and his announcement last week

00:51:41.760 is the most honest conversation that has taken place within conservative media in my 15 years

00:51:47.460 working here. And I can't think of a close second. See, we have a tendency to not want to be honest.

00:51:52.620 We have a tendency to want to count our own. How many times did we see over the trite headlines that

00:51:57.820 we all rallied around Democrats, the DNC doesn't have any money. Look at how much money the RNC has. 0.87

00:52:03.060 Well, that's because Democrats figured out that the DNC cooked the 2016 election for Hillary to win. 1.00

00:52:07.620 So they stopped giving it money. So they just give millions of dollars to flake candidates like

00:52:11.940 John Ossoff directly now. And then they turn around and kick our butt. See, we have tried to

00:52:16.600 counter with our own talking points. We've tried to counter with our own win-win for the Gipper

00:52:20.820 speech, not with the truth. And what's happening right now, as I think you're seeing God in the

00:52:26.300 culture has put his thumb on the scale and says, you know, we're going to let the line out of its

00:52:30.540 cage. We're going to let the truth have its way. Now the truth makes for some strange bedfellows.

00:52:35.980 And right now there are people that we have voted for that don't want to hear a lot of these

00:52:39.920 truths. Not necessarily because they agree with Leah Thomas swimming with women, but because they

00:52:44.700 don't want to have to act on it and confront it. All right. And so right now I think here's our new

00:52:49.840 coalition and here's what we are. We're truthists. Where is the truth? Whoever is speaking truth,

00:52:56.120 we're with them at that time. When they see speaking truth, we're not. When someone was not

00:53:01.480 speaking truth before, but they're speaking truth now, we're with them now. We go, we migrate

00:53:07.020 wherever the truth is. It doesn't mean we just give up whole cloth political activism. Even in a,

00:53:13.140 we live in a partisan country. We cannot avoid that. Let us not be like the people you and I were

00:53:17.520 talking about 20 minutes ago who cannot hold competing thoughts. Okay. But it does mean we've

00:53:23.080 got to understand what time it is here. We got to be sons of Issachar, men who understood the times

00:53:27.600 and what to do about them. I think what you're seeing when you get outside the R versus D and R versus

00:53:32.620 L paradigm, you are seeing God move in a mighty way to expose real truth in this culture that we

00:53:39.680 have tried to cover in talking points and political propaganda and slogans for decades. And now that

00:53:46.140 can be a painful, harsh existence. The sword of truth is a double-edged sword. Okay. But the truth

00:53:54.480 is having its way. If you're willing to accept that and understand that may take you into some

00:53:58.740 uncomfortable places that may force you to compel you to align with people you wouldn't have in the

00:54:03.980 past, but then you may have to confront those people later on when they want to, when your

00:54:08.700 conscience is violated. If you're comfortable with being uncomfortable, this is actually a pretty

00:54:13.560 exciting time. Right now though, most of us are not comfortable with being uncomfortable. And so we're

00:54:19.320 seeing the old R versus D, R versus L paradigm blow up in our midst. And we're, and we're kind of in,

00:54:24.980 nothing good can come from Nazareth mode. We don't want to see what new thing that God is doing right 1.00

00:54:30.620 now because it doesn't look like the old thing we're accustomed to. I would urge everyone within

00:54:35.780 the sound of my voice right now, get comfortable with being uncomfortable. And you'll see that God

00:54:40.780 is actually moving very mightily. This is that things are kind of from a truth perspective going

00:54:45.640 well. They're just not going as we planned. Yeah. And I think that we forget that. I think we forget

00:54:52.040 what collective hunger there is for truth. A lot of people. So just to use the Dave example,

00:55:00.320 and I don't want to beat a dead horse. You and I have probably both talked about it. I've talked

00:55:03.820 to Dave about it. I'm not trying to, you know, keep going back to this, but because we're talking

00:55:07.880 about what conservatism is in the conversations that we've had, I, you know, made a video explaining

00:55:12.900 why, even though I love Dave and I think he's a great guy and we have so much in common, I just

00:55:18.220 couldn't congratulate. And I listed my four reasons why the interesting thing was that I got several

00:55:22.980 messages from people who I know did publicly congratulate him who messaged me and said,

00:55:27.460 thank you so much. Thank you so much for that video. I found myself agreeing with you, or I

00:55:34.280 agreed on two of those points, but I didn't want to say anything. But now that you've kind of

00:55:38.700 articulated why you believe what I believe now, I'm kind of considering my position. I'm kind of

00:55:43.180 considering what I said publicly or where I am. And so I'm just using that as an example of

00:55:48.120 you never know what effect and what contagion you can start by saying what you know is true or what

00:55:55.040 you sincerely believe in. There might be a lot of people who you think disagree with you, who actually

00:56:00.740 they just don't know, or maybe they're afraid to say their public opinion. But when you kind of give

00:56:06.100 them cover and you're the first one, hey, I'm going to shift the Overton window back over.

00:56:10.520 I'm going to pull us back. I'm going to go even farther than some of the other people are by saying,

00:56:15.600 actually, I'm going to go back to creation for my argument. Then other people feel, well, okay,

00:56:20.860 I can kind of inch my way back to maybe there is a rational, compassionate reason to believe the

00:56:26.380 unpopular thing. You never know who you are begetting your courage to by standing up for what

00:56:34.240 you know is true or what you believe to be true, right?

00:56:37.040 Right. Sister, all I can say to that is testify. Yeah. Every word and amen.

00:56:43.960 Yeah. Well, thank you for being one of those people. You're so wise and you have so much

00:56:48.460 discernment and you articulate it so well without any kind of, we always are impressed after we're

00:56:53.940 done recording. You never say, uh, you never say-

00:56:56.120 It's because I have made a crap ton of mistakes and tried to learn from them, Allie. That's why.

00:57:00.280 Well, you are, you are a gift, a gift to the movement and to our show. So thank you so much,

00:57:06.260 Steve, for taking the time to come on today. That's very sweet and kind and, uh, likewise,

00:57:11.340 and same to you. Thank you so much. You bet.

00:57:18.260 All right, guys. Thanks so much for listening. As always, if you love this podcast, please leave a

00:57:22.500 five-star review wherever you listen and make sure to subscribe on YouTube. If you have not already,

00:57:29.560 we will see you guys back here tomorrow.

Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey - March 23, 2022

Ep 587 ｜ Biden’s SCOTUS Pick： Soft on Child Abuse & Clueless on Biology ｜ Guest： Steve Deace

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript