Ep. 1029 - The ＂Alex Jones Was Right＂ Jar
Episode Stats
Words per Minute
172.41492
Summary
It turns out, whatever they are putting in the water is not only turning the fricking frogs gay, but it s posing a serious danger to our health. And now, all of a sudden, the EPA is admitting it. EPA finds no safe level for two toxic forever chemicals found in many U.S. water systems.
Transcript
00:00:00.000
Put another nickel in the Alex Jones was right jar. It turns out that whatever they are putting
00:00:06.640
in the water is not only turning the fricking frogs gay, but it's posing a serious danger to
00:00:12.660
our health. And now all of a sudden the EPA is admitting it. We've got a story just came out
00:00:21.680
from USA Today. EPA finds no safe level for two toxic forever chemicals found in many U.S. water
00:00:30.620
systems. These, quote, forever chemicals are linked to different types of cancer, low birth
00:00:36.420
weights, and other ailments. One expert said this will set off alarm bells. So there are all sorts
00:00:43.080
of contaminants in the water and the EPA will say, okay, well, if it's below this threshold,
00:00:49.660
then it's fine. But if it's above this threshold, then it's not fine. What the EPA has discovered
00:00:54.700
is that two of these contaminants are not safe at any level, any level that can ever possibly be
00:01:00.000
measured. They're still very dangerous to human beings. And so they've now got to work to take
00:01:05.300
all of that out of the water. For 60 years, these guys have been mocking American people, regular old
00:01:13.640
Americans as rubes and kooks and idiots for asking if maybe there's some dangerous stuff in the water
00:01:19.600
supply. Now they tell us there are multiple contaminants in the water that are not safe at
00:01:24.040
any level. The chief issue here is not that we might currently all be poisoning ourselves.
00:01:30.540
My problem is not even that our public authorities got this and so many other things wrong.
00:01:36.780
My main issue is the arrogance, the haughtiness, the absolute disdain with which our genius rulers
00:01:46.720
look on all those rube, idiot Americans who have the temerity to question their wisdom.
00:01:54.060
My issue is that almost every single day now, it seems, these supposed genius experts who run our
00:02:01.660
country are being made to look like fools by the people that they all used to accuse of wearing
00:02:07.320
tinfoil hats. I'm Michael Knowles. This is The Michael Knowles Show.
00:02:17.640
Welcome back to the show. My favorite comment yesterday is from SoulSilver Snorlax, who says,
00:02:24.240
I tied a cinder block around my ankle before going swimming today on the advice of an expert.
00:02:29.140
It was terrible and I almost drowned. But imagine how much worse it would have been if I didn't have
00:02:35.900
the cinder block tied around my legs. Such a great point. We got to make sure, goodness sakes people,
00:02:41.560
tie those cinder blocks around your legs. The experts say so and they can't be proven wrong.
00:02:46.420
They literally cannot be proven wrong because anything that happens they say proves them right.
00:02:51.920
We need to talk to each other. The mass messages that we are getting from the institutions
00:02:58.220
and the big propaganda outlets, they are not serving us very well. We need to speak to one
00:03:03.100
another and communicate. When you want to communicate, I strongly recommend you check out
00:03:07.100
Pure Talk. Right now, go to puretalk.com. Use promo code KnowlesPodcast. Later on, we're getting to my
00:03:14.040
favorite time of the week. That is the mailbag now with the voicemail bag. And that voicemail bag is
00:03:19.560
brought to you by Pure Talk. I totally love these guys. If you want to keep more of your money,
00:03:26.500
if you want to save money from woke cell companies that are just spending it on all
00:03:31.620
sorts of nonsense, if you want to keep the voicemail bag on this show, go switch to Pure Talk
00:03:37.600
now. You are getting the exact same quality service as all those other companies that you're saving a
00:03:44.960
ton of money. You can get the unlimited talks, the unlimited text, six gigs of data, beautiful 5G
00:03:52.620
network, puretalk.com. What's the catch? There isn't one. There's no catch. Go to puretalk.com,
00:03:59.820
select a plan, enter the promo code KnowlesPodcast, save 50% off your first month. You can be switched
00:04:07.040
over to Pure Talk in less than 10 minutes. That is promo code KnowlesPodcast, K-N-O-W-L-E-S-P-O-D-C-A-S-T,
00:04:14.900
all one word at puretalk.com. Pure Talk is simply smarter wireless.
00:04:18.980
I'm not sure I want to be citing USA Today on this water story. It's been reported elsewhere,
00:04:25.000
so I suppose we can assume that it's real. I saw the press release from the EPA,
00:04:30.360
but I don't know that I would trust USA Today because USA Today just found itself
00:04:33.840
in a huge journalistic scandal. Yesterday, USA Today announced that it would be deleting
00:04:40.840
23 articles, almost two dozen articles. Why is that? They were all by the same writer,
00:04:48.780
Gabriella Miranda, and they had to delete them because it turns out that those articles were
00:04:53.600
fake news. They weren't just fake news in the sense that they got some facts wrong,
00:05:01.680
even that they slightly misquoted something. They were fake news in that they were just completely
00:05:06.360
made up. This reporter, this breaking news reporter for USA Today was just making up quotes,
00:05:12.960
people out of whole cloth, and then writing works of fiction, and then publishing those works on USA
00:05:19.000
Today. Why is this a big deal? Well, one, because USA Today used to have some kind of reputation,
00:05:25.120
and now that reputation has taken a big, big hit. But there's a political problem too,
00:05:30.080
which is that USA Today is a trusted source on social media. When something appears in USA Today,
00:05:36.240
that helps to push social media algorithms in a certain direction.
00:05:42.220
But it can't be a trusted source. They just deleted almost two dozen articles because they
00:05:46.320
were totally fake. Daily Wire has never had to delete two dozen articles for fake news.
00:05:51.300
Have we gotten everything 100% right all the time? No, there's occasionally a problem here,
00:05:56.700
an error here. You go in and you correct it. We've never had anything anywhere close to this.
00:06:02.160
And yet Daily Wire is not considered a trusted, super duper special, nonpartisan,
00:06:08.240
unbiased news source for the social media algorithm. On the contrary, we rely on those
00:06:13.840
algorithms. We rely on all of the supposedly trusted sources to back up what we're saying.
00:06:19.600
And if they contradict us, then very often social media will suppress what we have to say.
00:06:23.540
My problem here is not even that there is such a thing as trusted sources. I know some people are
00:06:31.340
so skeptical of the power in big tech, are so skeptical of the power in our corporate press,
00:06:39.660
that they don't think we should have any trusted sources. It's that social media and the public
00:06:44.280
square should just be a total wild west where no one organization carries any more weight than any
00:06:50.160
other. I'm not even saying that. No, look, there are total rags out there that I don't think should
00:06:54.900
carry a lot of weight in the public square. My problem isn't that there are trusted sources,
00:06:58.780
quote unquote. My problem is that the trusted sources that our public square relies on are not
00:07:05.440
trustworthy. I don't even mean to beat up USA Today. USA Today is far from the worst offender of this.
00:07:11.640
The fact that the New York Times counts as a trusted source is preposterous. The New York Times is not
00:07:18.160
fit to line a person's birdcage. You think of the fake news that the New York Times has spread just on
00:07:24.080
the Russia hoax alone in the last five years. It's a joke. And there have been so many other,
00:07:29.100
you think about the fake news that the New York Times has spread about January 6th or really anything
00:07:34.760
having any to do with Donald Trump and the effective parts of the Republican Party.
00:07:39.760
Why is that a trusted source? I'm not saying this in a self-serving manner or at least not exclusively
00:07:47.840
in a self-serving manner. The Daily Wire is a much more reliable, trustworthy source than the New York
00:07:54.280
Times. The Daily Wire, the Michael Knowles show in particular, you hear things here first. I take out
00:08:00.540
my crystal ball as Knowles Stradamus. I tell you what's going to happen in the future. This show,
00:08:05.660
this news outlet, is a much more trustworthy source. We have a much better record of accuracy
00:08:11.540
than the Washington Post, than CNN, obviously, than ABC, CBS, NBC, than any of the supposedly
00:08:18.880
trusted news sources. We've got experts. You know, we've got experts out there beyond just the news
00:08:26.620
organizations, and we are supposed to trust the experts. Who is the number one expert, quote unquote,
00:08:32.780
in the country? You know, you know who I'm talking about out there. Of course, it's Dr. Fauci. He's
00:08:39.380
the number one expert. Whatever he says is the law. He has got more power than the ancient pharaohs,
00:08:48.080
than any dictator has presumed to have. This, whatever he says, it not only is policy, whatever he says
00:08:56.480
is the science. He says he's a representative of the science. And yet, Fauci consistently
00:09:02.680
gets things wrong. Now, you have our public health establishment, just to use one example,
00:09:08.760
encouraging the Fauci ouchie, the boosters, the jabs, all that stuff, in very, very little kids.
00:09:15.080
So during a COVID hearing yesterday, Senator Rand Paul asked for any scientific evidence at all
00:09:20.820
to back up that policy. Fauci comes up empty. What is the possibility if your kid has had COVID,
00:09:27.960
which is 75 percent of the country's had COVID, what is the chance that my child's going to the
00:09:32.420
hospital or dying? If you look at the number of deaths in pediatrics, Senator, you can see that there
00:09:39.940
are more deaths of people who have had it, of people who have had the disease.
00:09:44.900
Senator, we also know from other studies that the optimal degree of protection when you get
00:09:54.320
infection is to get vaccinated after infection. And in fact, showing reinfection in the era of
00:10:01.120
Omicron and the sublineages that vaccination... But you can't answer the question I asked. The
00:10:06.680
question I ask is how many kids are dying and how many kids are going to the hospital who've already
00:10:11.760
had COVID? The answer may be zero, but you're not even giving us the data because you have so much
00:10:17.640
wanted to protect everybody from all the data because we're not smart enough to look at the
00:10:22.040
data. When you release data earlier, when the CDC released the data, they left out the category of
00:10:26.820
18 to 49 on whether or not there was a health benefit for adults 18 to 49. Why was it left out?
00:10:33.580
When critics finally complained, it was finally included because there was no health benefit from
00:10:38.320
taking a booster between the 18 to 49 and the CDC study.
00:10:41.760
There it is. There is the expert. The expert is asked a very simple question by Rand Paul.
00:10:48.860
Dr. Fauci, how many children are dying of reinfection from COVID? It's a very simple
00:10:54.040
question. And Fauci starts to answer a different question. He starts to say, well, among children
00:11:00.020
generally with or without a prior infection. And Rand Paul says, no, that's not the question. My
00:11:05.940
question is how many people are dying from reinfection. And Fauci says, well, Senator,
00:11:12.040
you know, we know that the optimal degree, and then he's answering a completely unrelated question.
00:11:17.920
He's just spouting his talking points. And Rand Paul says, you just won't answer.
00:11:25.100
Why won't he answer? Is it because Fauci doesn't have the data? He just doesn't know. Is he just an
00:11:30.700
idiot? Maybe I could see why you might be inclined to think that because he doesn't come off as the
00:11:36.080
brightest bulb in the pack. But then Rand Paul makes a great point. He says, how come the federal
00:11:41.480
government collects all of these data about COVID? My goodness, they collect every little jot and
00:11:46.400
tittle they possibly can about COVID. And then when they release the data, they leave some parts out.
00:11:52.380
They only release the data that are convenient for their narrative. They'll leave out whole age groups
00:11:56.820
when it comes to risk from COVID. Why? They just conveniently, they happen to leave out all of
00:12:01.820
the age groups that show that COVID is not as dangerous as the ruling class led us to believe.
00:12:07.820
That is not just a matter of idiocy. That is not even just a matter of ignorance.
00:12:13.140
That is a matter of corruption. Now, when you want to protect yourself from all sorts of bad people
00:12:19.560
and from freeze and from fire and from flooding, you got to check out Ring. Right now,
00:12:24.940
go to ring.com slash Knowles. Summer is here. People are traveling. You're going to be away
00:12:32.380
from your home quite a bit if you're anything like me. You can also rest easy if you're anything
00:12:37.960
like me because of Ring Alarm. Ring Alarm is the award-winning home security system
00:12:42.880
with available professional monitoring when you subscribe. Best of all, you can easily install
00:12:49.020
it yourself. Friend of mine just got married here. Do you know what I did? Do you know what I gave
00:12:52.760
this person for her wedding? I gave her Ring Alarm Pro. I love it. It makes a great gift. It's
00:12:59.620
really, really great for your home and you can go pro. You can be a pro just like me. Ring Alarm
00:13:05.280
protects your home, your windows, your doors from freeze, fire, flood. Ring Alarm Pro protects
00:13:11.060
your physical home and your digital home too. It protects your data. We live so much of our lives
00:13:15.080
online. Make sure you're protecting your data. They've got an incredible deal to subscribe
00:13:20.840
for professional monitoring. Right now to learn more, go to ring.com slash Knowles. That's ring.com
00:13:26.360
slash Knowles. Our genius experts are not only stupid and incompetent very often, but they're also
00:13:34.720
frequently corrupt. In part of Rand Paul's beautiful grilling of Dr. Fauci, the high pontiff of public
00:13:41.920
health, Rand Paul asks him a question, not so much about the data and the infections and the deaths
00:13:47.340
in the hospitalizations. He asks him about the money. He says, do you think Dr. Fauci, there might
00:13:52.340
be any kind of conflict of interest here? There might be any kind of big money moving around when
00:13:58.240
you guys are all making your recommendations? Can you tell me that you have not received a royalty
00:14:03.840
from any entity that you ever oversaw the distribution of money in research grants?
00:14:10.460
Well, first of all, let's talk about royalty. That's the question. No, that's the question. Have
00:14:17.460
you ever overseen, have you ever received a royalty payment from a company that you later oversaw
00:14:23.360
money going to that company? You know, I don't know is a fact, but I doubt it. Well, here's the
00:14:29.380
thing is, why don't you let us know? Why don't you reveal how much you've gotten and from what entities?
00:14:34.400
The NIH refuses. We ask them, we ask them, the NIH, we ask them whether or not who got it and how much
00:14:42.580
they refuse to tell us. They sent it redacted. Not only do they refuse to tell, they'll actually
00:14:48.980
redact the specific pieces of information that the Senate is requesting, that Rand Paul is requesting.
00:14:55.980
Why? Later on in that exchange, Fauci is able to turn it a little bit and he says, well, listen,
00:15:01.860
for this specific series of years, I didn't make a lot of money. And he thinks that that is going to
00:15:07.340
put the question away, but it's not. You see it from the early evasion. Rand Paul asks a direct
00:15:13.020
question. He says, hey, did you guys get money? Do you guys get money from these things? And what does
00:15:20.900
Dr. Fauci do? He goes, listen, let's talk about, no, let's not talk about any nonsense that you want
00:15:25.500
to talk about, Fauci. How about you just answer a simple question? You don't want to. You don't want to.
00:15:30.360
And by the way, even if Fauci is not making it, let's say that Fauci is not making a lot of money,
00:15:34.160
then why won't the NIH provide this information of the royalties that members of these committees,
00:15:40.020
members of the public health establishment are getting specifically with regard to companies
00:15:46.020
that they are passing judgments on? Why won't the government give you that information?
00:15:53.600
The very fact that they won't provide that kind of transparency is proof positive,
00:15:58.640
as far as I'm concerned, that there is clearly the possibility, the open door to corruption.
00:16:05.700
The issue is not any conspiracy theory. There's nothing conspiracy theoretical about suggesting
00:16:13.000
that there can be conflicts of interest in big politics and we should protect against them.
00:16:18.320
It's not even a question of getting rid of the experts. I have no problem with listening to
00:16:24.160
expertise and putting expertise in its proper place. I don't believe that the only thing that we can do
00:16:31.280
is just destroy all of the American scientific institutions and all become yeoman farmers or
00:16:36.680
something. I'm not saying that that's what's going to happen. But surely the experts that we have
00:16:43.480
are no good. They're no good. Their predictions are wrong. They lie to us. Not only get things wrong,
00:16:50.700
they will actively lie like Fauci did during COVID. And there is a huge possibility for corruption,
00:16:57.280
which is now not being dealt with. Now we're just getting stonewalled by the NIH. So what's the
00:17:02.120
solution to that? The solution to that is to go in and wield political power to make it better.
00:17:09.060
There are two reactions from the right, two completely different strategies for how to deal
00:17:14.300
with this kind of thing. There's one, which is the kind of, the libertarians tend to favor this
00:17:20.140
strategy more, which is just get rid of the experts, forget about the, you know, ignore the experts
00:17:25.780
entirely and take all of the money and the power away. And then nobody gets power. And we just reduce
00:17:32.980
the amount of power in the government and reduce the amount of power specifically in the scientific
00:17:38.680
bureaucracy and then everything will be better. I get why that suggestion is tempting. I get why
00:17:45.200
that sounds, it does sound good. If we could just take that power out of Washington DC, take that power
00:17:50.460
out of the NIH or any other aspect of the deep state, I would, I would love that. Wouldn't that
00:17:55.880
be so wonderful? Would that it were so simple. The conservative solution, the solution that the
00:18:01.820
conservatives generally tend to favor more though, says you're not, you're never going to get rid of
00:18:08.080
experts. Every state, every government in the history of the entire world has had experts and
00:18:16.000
has had bureaucracies and has had specialization. And it's a complete pipe dream to say that you're
00:18:22.900
going to get rid of that. Furthermore, every state, every society in the history of the world
00:18:27.760
has political power that is conserved. Political power is not just going to disappear. It's not just
00:18:34.520
going to go away. You're not going to just pop it like a balloon. It's going to go, it's going to
00:18:39.140
exist, especially in a big, powerful country like ours. You're not going to just make the power go
00:18:43.900
away. So it's just going to move. Is the power going to be in this part of the government? Is the power
00:18:49.180
going to be more with the corporations? Is the power going to be more with the universities? Is the
00:18:52.480
power going to be more with technology? Is the power going to be more in Silicon Valley? Is the power
00:18:56.360
going to be more in Washington DC? Is the power going to be more with the Republicans? Is the power going to be
00:19:00.420
more with the Democrats. Some people might not like that. They might think it's kind of icky
00:19:05.780
and yucky. What do you mean we can't just make the power magically go away by waving a magic wand?
00:19:10.360
I would that it were so simple, guys, but it's not. There is going to be power.
00:19:17.560
The only question is going to be who is going to wield it, where is it going to reside,
00:19:22.840
and what is it going to be wielded in service of?
00:19:26.080
I'm not giving you some kind of utopian dream fantasy of how we're going to just knock down
00:19:34.900
all the buildings in Washington, D.C., and send all of those deep state bureaucrats to St. Helena,
00:19:40.840
and then we're going to return to the republic of the 1790s, and all will be well again. No,
00:19:46.660
that's not going to happen. I don't think it's going to happen. I don't even really want it to
00:19:52.420
happen. It's just so fantastical to suggest anything like that. The question right now is
00:19:57.100
what do we do? I think very, very easily you could, well, one, just to Rand Paul's point,
00:20:03.480
you could demand a little bit more transparency on the conflicts of interests that these guys have.
00:20:08.140
You could take some of the power away from the Fauci's of the world and give it back to the
00:20:12.760
Rand Paul's of the world. That would be an improvement. Take some power away from the
00:20:17.660
scientific bureaucracy, give it back to the Senate. Maybe take some power away from the federal
00:20:21.620
government, give it back to the states. You're not saying we're going to magically get rid of power
00:20:25.400
here, but you can move it around in such a way that's more conducive to flourishing to a traditional
00:20:30.700
American government. And you can move some power away from these idiot experts, these jerks,
00:20:36.680
these corrupt people, these deceivers, these, oh, they're just so awful. You could take some power
00:20:42.800
away from those experts and give it to our experts. You could take some power away from the Democrats and
00:20:48.440
give it to the Republicans. Is that a perfect solution for all time? No, but it would do quite
00:20:53.500
a lot to improve the state of our country and the state of corruption. And then if the Republicans
00:20:59.300
screw it up, then we'll go to somebody else. If the new experts screw it up, we'll go to somebody else
00:21:03.940
and we will keep this thing moving so that power doesn't become so concentrated and in this horrible
00:21:09.740
elite that becomes so corrosive to the American form of government. We're getting all sorts of bad answers
00:21:16.360
from the Biden administration right now. Ducey, Peter Ducey at Fox News just grilled the new press
00:21:23.980
secretary, Corrine Jean-Pierre. He asked her, why is inflation so bad? And the press secretary gave
00:21:31.400
this answer that the White House has been pushing on television in the press, which is, look, inflation
00:21:38.020
is no worse here than it is anywhere in the world. It's actually much, much worse. It's better here
00:21:43.700
than anywhere else. It's much worse overseas. And so stop complaining about inflation. And Peter
00:21:50.540
Ducey looks down at some of those numbers. He says, wait a second, that's just not true.
00:21:55.420
I did look globally though. He says that inflation is worse everywhere, but here, that's not true.
00:22:00.580
US has worse inflation than Germany, France, Japan, Canada, India, Italy, Saudi Arabia.
00:22:05.940
Well, I think what we are saying is that when you talk about inflation, it is a global thing and it
00:22:13.900
is not just about the United States. This is something that everyone is feeling because of
00:22:19.000
coming out of a once in a lifetime pandemic because of the war that Russia has started in Ukraine.
00:22:25.440
No, that's not what you said. You're changing your answer now. Previously, you said inflation is
00:22:32.340
worse everywhere else. Come on, it's relatively not that bad here. And then Peter Ducey says, no,
00:22:37.400
it's actually relatively really bad here, even relative to other places in the world. And then
00:22:42.160
Karin Jambir says, no, look, we're just pointing out it's like a global thing. No, that is not what you
00:22:47.640
pointed out. That is not what you said. Either you guys just got the numbers completely wrong and
00:22:54.340
you're incompetent or you knew what the real numbers were and you lied. Either way, not good.
00:23:01.400
Either way does not speak very highly of our current ruling elite. It's a very different country
00:23:08.640
that we are living in right now compared to, well, certainly compared to the country that we had at
00:23:15.660
the start of the United States. It's a very different country that we're living in right now
00:23:19.700
compared to the country we had three years ago. I had this thought the other day. I said,
00:23:22.960
do you remember when Trump was president and pretty much everything was better? Do you remember
00:23:27.540
that? Seems so long ago. What about, what about other historical, what kind of country are we
00:23:33.880
living in now and going to be living in, in the future? The country that the libs want to give us
00:23:45.920
With 20 years reporting on the markets, I know that some industries are built to last,
00:23:49.960
but others are built to lead. John Oelichman here. If you want exposure to what's really
00:23:54.260
shaping our world, think beyond trends. Think defense, healthcare, telecom, real estate, gold,
00:24:00.460
crypto. They're not just headlines, they're foundations. And with GlobalX, one of Canada's
00:24:04.980
largest ETF providers, you can invest in them intelligently. With a range of ETFs designed
00:24:10.540
for long-term growth and steady income opportunities. GlobalX, where innovation meets
00:24:15.480
investing. Brought to you by GlobalX Investments Canada, Inc. For key risk information, please refer
00:24:20.160
to the ETF's prospectus available at globalx.ca. George Washington University is named after George
00:24:28.600
Washington. It resides in Washington, D.C. It's also named after George Washington. George Washington
00:24:37.740
is the father of the country. Their mascot is a colonial who looks like George Washington.
00:24:43.320
They're called the colonials. Well, the school just voted to get rid of it in the name of inclusivity.
00:24:50.400
Here is what the school said. A moniker must unify our community, draw people together,
00:24:57.260
and serve as a source of pride. This is the chairman of the school's board of trustees. We look forward
00:25:03.420
to the next steps in an inclusive process to identify a moniker that fulfills this aspiration.
00:25:11.060
It's got to be really inclusive. I suspect that if you took a poll of Americans, most Americans still
00:25:22.500
like George Washington. I think George Washington is pretty inclusive. GW pushes policies that are not so
00:25:31.420
inclusive of everyone's views. GW pushes transgenderism, right? I don't, if a, if a boy wants
00:25:39.560
to go into the girl, dress up like a girl, go into the girl's bathroom at GW, I strongly suspect that he
00:25:45.220
would be allowed to do that. That's not inclusive. It's inclusive of that deluded man and his small band
00:25:55.300
of other deluded people, but it's not inclusive of the views of the majority of Americans far from it.
00:26:00.660
So when they say inclusivity, they're describing inclusivity for their group. They're describing
00:26:09.100
inclusivity for an extremely exclusive group that doesn't include you. You used to hear this line
00:26:16.560
about the Senate, about the political elite broadly. They say, it's a big club and you ain't in it.
00:26:24.280
When we hear the word inclusion, some people are deceived to believing that means we just include
00:26:29.960
everybody. No, it doesn't. It means we include everyone in this extremely corrupt, stupid elite
00:26:37.080
and we exclude everybody else. That's what it really means. Even now to the point where you've
00:26:42.840
got these radicals at the university saying, we're going to cancel George Washington at George
00:26:49.160
Washington University in Washington DC. Who are you going to replace him with? Either you're going to
00:26:57.760
just become completely nothing, completely generic. Remember they got rid of the Redskins and they
00:27:04.580
called it the Washington football team for a while. Now they call it the Commanders. Just still pretty
00:27:09.520
bland, not quite as bland as the Washington football team. So either you're going to do that or you're
00:27:16.220
going to pick some radical who I promise you is less popular and almost certainly less virtuous than
00:27:24.200
George Washington. What's it going to be? The new mascot is Ibram X. Kendi of GW University. Here is
00:27:30.640
our new mascot, a drag queen. Happy Pride Month. Drag queens are everywhere now. That's going to be our
00:27:37.120
new inclusive mascot. Don't you feel like that's very inclusive? When I was an undergraduate, there was
00:27:44.020
going to be a class-wide dance and I think it was themed after Gone with the Wind or The South or
00:27:50.140
something like that. And I think it was Gone with the Wind though. And then some liberal northerner
00:27:56.940
took issue with this. Some white liberal northerner took issue with this and said it's racist, it's
00:28:02.560
terrible, it's not inclusive. Mind you, this was 13, 14 years ago. Things hadn't gotten nearly as crazy
00:28:09.740
as they are now, but you saw the seeds of it already. This is not inclusive at all. This is terrible.
00:28:15.020
And so what did the theme become? Any theme that we tried to pick, someone could contrive a problem
00:28:21.980
with. Oh no, well this theme is offensive to this group. This theme could be misconstrued to be
00:28:27.220
offensive to this group. This theme upholds a norm and a standard that now is considered unfashionable
00:28:31.720
and politically incorrect. And so there's no, do you know what theme we ended up going with?
00:28:36.020
Blue. Blue. Blue was the theme. Because no one yet was able to come up with an issue to have with
00:28:45.580
blue, though probably they would now. Is this the country we want to live in? Seems like either way,
00:28:51.560
this, this, I've been radicalized by this GW mascot issue. It can only take our country in one of two
00:28:57.440
ways, both of which are worse than the current way. The one way that it could take us is to get rid of all
00:29:01.880
particular things. Anything that is particular, nice, beautiful, you can have an attachment to,
00:29:08.060
goes away. And now everything's just bland and generic and, and, and totally plain without anything
00:29:14.800
that would draw you to it. Or it goes in the direction of particular radicals. So we get, we,
00:29:20.940
we cancel Thomas Jefferson and we exalt Ibram X. Kendi or Malcolm X or somebody like that.
00:29:28.240
Or Angela, Angela Davis is a good example of this. Angela Davis is an actual communist who was
00:29:34.580
credibly accused, I think, of, of terrorism. And now she's considered this great luminary,
00:29:39.600
Bill Ayers of the Weather Underground. Bill Ayers was considered a mentor to Barack Obama. Radical
00:29:45.160
leftist terrorist. Bill Ayers, though, he gets, he's, he's exalted. He's fetid. But John Adams,
00:29:52.160
George Washington, those guys were terrible. Got to cancel them. Got to tear down their statues.
00:29:55.400
Speaking of that Washington football team, Jack Del Rio coach over there with the commanders. He just
00:30:03.520
got in a whole lot of trouble because he had the audacity to contradict the official regime
00:30:08.720
genius expert narrative on January 6th. I see the images on TV. People's livelihoods are being
00:30:19.460
destroyed. Businesses are being burned down. No problem. And then we have a dust up at the Capitol.
00:30:27.060
Well, there's nothing burned down. And we're not going to talk about, we're going to make that a
00:30:31.440
major deal. I just think it kind of two standards. And if we apply the same standard and we're going
00:30:38.160
to be reasonable with each other, let's have a discussion. Let's be reasonable. Let's have a
00:30:43.420
discussion. Let's compare similar events. That guy nearly got canceled for those comments.
00:30:51.480
He got a massive fine. I think it was about $100,000. He's now at the target of a ton of attack
00:30:59.520
pieces. Why? Because what did he say? He said, you know, that dust up at the Capitol, I'm not saying it
00:31:04.740
was good, but I'm saying relative to other insurrections, violent uprisings, it wasn't a big deal.
00:31:12.900
That's just true. That's just a fact. We know that January 6th was not the worst insurrection in
00:31:18.840
history. We know it wasn't the worst insurrection of the year. That would have been BLM. But even look
00:31:22.920
at attacks on the Capitol. 1915, a Harvard professor blows up the Senate reception room, sets off explosives
00:31:29.080
in the Senate reception room. When was it? 1943 or 53? I think it was 1953. You had a group of Puerto
00:31:39.860
Rican activists who shot up the House of Representatives, injured five members of
00:31:44.860
Congress. 1971, the Weather Underground, you know, Bill Ayers' organization, the Weather Underground,
00:31:49.660
radical leftist group, blew up part of the Senate. A little over 10 years later, another radical group,
00:31:55.520
another radical leftist group, blew up another part of the Senate.
00:32:01.600
Did the January 6th people blow up the Senate? Did they shoot up the House of Representatives? Did
00:32:06.340
they do really anything other than dance around in a horn hat, crack a Coors Light in the rotunda,
00:32:11.160
and make a mess of Nancy Pelosi's desk? I'm not even excusing that. But the language that Jack Rio
00:32:16.520
is using here is absolutely precise, and he's not allowed to say it.
00:32:21.920
He's not allowed. So which narrative do you think is more accurate? The narrative that you're getting
00:32:28.680
from CNN, Washington Post, ABC, NBC, New York Times, Liz Cheney, Nancy Pelosi, everything,
00:32:35.020
big tech, everything, that January 6th was the worst event ever in the whole history,
00:32:38.820
our democracy was on the brink of collapse, or this guy, this football coach who says, yeah,
00:32:44.940
you know, let's have a conversation about that little dust up back there. Let's just be reasonable and
00:32:49.280
have cooler heads. Which one, which one do you think is more accurate? Which do you think is
00:32:52.880
more precise? My problem is not with experts. My problem is not with talking about political
00:33:00.000
events. My problem is, my problem is with this current crop. And the answer to this current crop
00:33:08.600
of experts, hollowed out institutions, political rulers, the answer is not to bury our heads in the
00:33:15.880
sand and hope that the power goes away. The answer is not to pretend that there's some kind of neutrality
00:33:20.640
here and we can find some neutral, I don't see any neutral ground. The answer is to take political
00:33:25.040
power away from them and redistribute that, they love redistributing things, redistribute that
00:33:30.840
political power to experts who are, who have greater expertise, to public servants who are more
00:33:38.680
interested in serving the public, to institutions that are more conducive to human flourishing. The
00:33:45.180
answer is to engage in that political process and to wield the power that we get. You know,
00:33:51.840
right now, one, there's political power all throughout our country, obviously in the Senate,
00:33:57.240
obviously in the courts, obviously in big tech. Entertainment is one that conservatives often
00:34:01.940
neglect. Well, we at the Daily Wire are not neglecting it. We've got a big movie. We uncancelled
00:34:06.820
Gina Carano. That movie is available right now. That's over at the Daily Wire. Dailywire.com
00:34:12.480
slash subscribe. You can watch Terror on the Prairie with Gina Carano. We'll be right back with the
00:34:18.420
voicemail bag. I love the voicemail bag. This is my favorite thing that we've done on the show in
00:34:35.340
years. If you want to keep the voicemail bag continuing, you need to switch your cell phone
00:34:42.620
service to Pure Talk. I love Pure Talk. They're sponsoring the voicemail bag. They're making it
00:34:47.200
possible. Go to puretalk.com. Select a plan. Enter promo code NOELSPODCAST. Save 50% off your first
00:34:54.400
month. You will save a ton of money. You will get exactly the same high quality service that you've
00:34:58.980
got now. Maybe you'll end up getting better service. But most importantly, you will keep the voicemail
00:35:03.340
bag coming so I can hear your dulcet tones. All right. Let's take it away with the first question.
00:35:09.360
Hey there, Mr. Michael. My name is Stanley. I just want to say, first off, I'm a big fan. I'm one of
00:35:14.920
those came for Ben, stayed for Michael kind of guys. And of all the questions I might ask you about your
00:35:20.100
thoughts on politics, religion, you know, relationships, et cetera, really the one question
00:35:26.080
I would love for you to answer. And I'm so glad the voicemail is here because I didn't know how to ask
00:35:30.320
you this in a written email. Why do you pronounce certain words with a short I sound rather than a
00:35:34.940
long I sound? Words like divisive rather than divisive or words like ideology rather than
00:35:41.920
ideology. To me, I would take the root word idea or divide and make it ideology or divisive. So I want
00:35:51.560
to know why you do the ideology or divisive kind of pronunciation. Otherwise, I'd love to hear what
00:35:57.140
you have to say. Have a great one. The answer, this is a very, very good question. The answer to
00:36:03.460
this question is extremely complicated, but the short version is because it's a fallen world, my
00:36:09.640
friend. That's why, that's why I pronounce certain words. So for ideology, I believe that ideology or
00:36:16.580
ideology are both considered somewhat common and acceptable pronunciations, but you've hit on the word
00:36:22.600
that is very divisive. And that would be the word divisive. And I think in the case of divisive,
00:36:28.580
I think my pronunciation is technically incorrect. It's, it's become popular, especially in politics,
00:36:36.380
but it is, I believe, incorrect. I Googled this some time ago because I was having a debate with a
00:36:43.040
friend over divisive or divisive. And apparently it is a mispronunciation, first popularized by George H.
00:36:49.240
W. Bush, then popularized again by Barack Obama. I, I believe it is the common pronunciation in
00:36:56.840
Canada, America's hat. But in America and in the United Kingdom, in, in England, the preferred
00:37:04.260
pronunciation is divisive. And I just, I just say it wrong. I don't know. I find it easier to say
00:37:09.940
divisive. That's a tough one. The word, there's another word. The one, this one I'd definitely get
00:37:14.260
correct, but it bothers people. Schism versus schism. People want to say schism. It's not,
00:37:19.580
it's schism. That's one that drives people absolutely up. There's so many. I say coffee
00:37:24.260
because I'm from New York. Some people say coffee. I don't know. I actually don't know how people say
00:37:29.700
it. You know, I don't be, there, there is some variation here, but I, I, as prescriptivist as I am
00:37:36.460
when it comes to language, I will have the humility to admit sometimes I get it wrong and I'm so damn
00:37:42.300
stubborn. I won't change. Next question. Hello, Nostradamus. My best friend who lives in another
00:37:47.900
country recently told me that by December of next year, she will either conceive a child with a
00:37:52.520
partner or will be artificially inseminated. I asked her why she wouldn't want to find a man who would
00:37:57.260
stick around for her and commit to her and a child. And she told me that she would prefer that, but her
00:38:01.860
end goal is to have a baby. And she's perfectly fine with being a single mother if her timeline runs
00:38:06.740
out and she's left with artificial insemination. She told me that she wants a baby more than anything,
00:38:12.040
which is understandable because we're, we're both 19. We talked about marriage and children
00:38:16.840
since we met five years ago. And we even talked about wedding dresses and everything that, that
00:38:22.560
girls talk about, about marriage in the future. Um, but my question is how can I help my best friend
00:38:28.780
find a guy who will commit to her and a child? And if she goes the other route, how can I be a
00:38:34.000
supportive friend for her and this baby regardless of the circumstances of their conception? Thank you for
00:38:39.820
advice and love the show. Wow. That was a real shock right there in the middle of that question.
00:38:46.820
I was kind of going along with the question. I understand it. I think a lot of people are
00:38:49.880
dealing with some of these issues. Then you said the girl's 19. If I'm not pregnant by next summer,
00:38:54.620
I'm going to, I'm going to artificially inseminate myself and intentionally deprive my child of his or
00:38:59.920
her father at 19. It's not like your biological clock is running out at that point. Okay. That,
00:39:06.740
that makes it an extremely clear cut case. Tell your friend to stop being so damn selfish and
00:39:12.120
recognize that a baby is not all about her. She's obviously not ready to be a mother because she
00:39:17.840
still is only viewing the world entirely through her own desires and the, the satisfaction of her
00:39:24.360
own caprices and appetites. The bait, what, what is good for the baby is the question. There's no
00:39:29.880
question. It is much better for a baby to be raised in a stable home with a mother and a father who are
00:39:36.480
married to each other. There's no question about that. It's not that you can't have a good life
00:39:41.160
being raised by a single mother or being raised in some kind of difficult circumstance or anything.
00:39:45.540
Of course you can. And, and people can do that wonderfully. It's a, that's, uh, but it's not
00:39:50.900
ideal. If you, if you had your choice, it's not that, you know, the husband leaves. It's not that a spouse
00:39:58.240
dies. It's not that there, there's some difficult circumstance. If it just, you're, you're planning it out.
00:40:03.820
No, it's extremely selfish to choose to bring a baby into the world, intentionally to deprive that
00:40:11.660
baby of his natural father and his natural mother joined together in matrimony, uh, to, to intentionally
00:40:17.600
deprive that father, that child of any kind of fatherly influence in his life. It's just, that's
00:40:22.300
just a terrible thing to do. So tell your friend to stop being so damned selfish. Right now she's
00:40:27.780
thinking of it as a wonderful gift that she can give the gift of life. And then she, she's, she's
00:40:34.420
trying to position herself in her own mind as the, the sort of hero, this wonderful giving person.
00:40:40.720
I think you need to make it clear to your friend. She is being extremely selfish as is often the case
00:40:46.600
is often the case. You know, it's, it's not that, it's not that your friend has a tiny heart.
00:40:51.260
It's that her heart is not in the right place. This is a line that Chesterton used about his friend,
00:40:55.220
George Bernard Shaw. He said, Bernard Shaw has a great, great heart. The socialist playwright,
00:41:00.260
Bernard Shaw, but the conservative Christian Chesterton said, the problem is his heart's
00:41:04.180
not in the right place. Tell your friend to get her heart in the right place. Meet a man the normal
00:41:08.280
way, get married, get settled, have children the right way. Next question.
00:41:14.660
Hi, Michael, love your show. Um, this week my company came out with a company diversity,
00:41:20.820
equity, equity, and inclusion style guide, just so we don't make any missteps. And I noticed while
00:41:27.140
going through it that we're instructed not to capitalize white, um, because that refers to,
00:41:35.520
that goes back to white supremacy. And, but we are supposed to capitalize black in all instances.
00:41:42.120
So I'm wondering how that's not racist and what your thoughts are on that. Thanks.
00:41:49.520
Well, it obviously is racist. I don't know that the word racist means anything anymore. I try to
00:41:54.400
use even more specific language. The, the policy is designed to punish white people and to give an
00:42:02.140
advantage to black people to say that white people are worse than black people, which is why we're going
00:42:07.040
to lowercase this, you know, just that, that's just what the symbolism suggests. You're lowercasing
00:42:13.420
the word white because white people are lesser than black people who deserve more. And, and that is
00:42:18.260
represented in the capital letter B. So I would not do that. I would not follow that policy. I'm not
00:42:24.660
saying you have to quit your job. I'm not saying you even need to make a big hullabaloo at the diversity
00:42:29.880
equity training or anything, but I would not go along with that policy. And if, if one of your
00:42:35.340
superiors has a problem with that, I think you can very calmly explain and say, you know, I just
00:42:39.360
find this very racist. And so I'm, I'm not going to go along with that. And if they insist upon it,
00:42:44.580
then you, you might, you might want to consider other employment because
00:42:49.600
especially when we're talking about language, this is not just your, your manager telling you,
00:42:57.440
hey, hey, go over there and do that grunt work that you don't want to do. And maybe,
00:43:01.160
maybe you, you don't really want to go do it, but hey, that's your job. You're getting a paycheck and
00:43:04.780
you're going to go do. When we're talking about language, this is your manager saying, hey,
00:43:09.800
discard your beliefs. Hey, say something that you know, isn't true or that say something that you
00:43:16.900
think is evil or say something that you think is not conducive to human flourishing. That,
00:43:21.800
that's a, that's far more insidious. I would, I would, I would not be able to do that. Next question.
00:43:29.060
All right, Michael, I've got one for you. I'm an anesthesia provider in a blue state that does
00:43:32.980
gender affirmation surgeries. Yes, my institution cuts perfectly functioning body parts off people
00:43:39.140
with underdeveloped prefrontal cortexes and mental illnesses. My question is, is how do I conduct
00:43:47.120
myself in an atmosphere I do not want to be in? I love what I do. This is only a sliver of
00:43:55.260
what I do as an anesthesia provider, but I have a very difficult time in the operating room surrounded
00:44:02.180
by people who were given the title of doctor, although they fail on maintaining objective
00:44:11.420
reality and truth and doing this. And they consistently call girls, boys and boys, girls.
00:44:19.040
Give me some advice. Anything will help. Thanks. Really tough problem. I don't think you necessarily
00:44:26.740
need to quit your job, but I, I would not be able to participate in those kinds of surgeries. So you
00:44:34.000
say it doesn't happen frequently, maybe, but when, when little kids come in and their psycho parents
00:44:39.740
and these sick doctors decide to put them under and then chop off their body parts, you might be called
00:44:45.020
in to provide the anesthesia. If I were you, I would not be able to do that. I don't, I, I, I think it
00:44:52.040
would probably disturb your sleep at night. I think your conscience will probably bother you because of
00:44:56.260
that. I would, I would not participate. There are different, different degrees to which people
00:45:01.420
participate in evil. There are really indirect ways, a really indirect way that one could participate in
00:45:08.600
evil is by going over and eating a Girl Scout cookie at a friend's house. And the Girl Scout cookie
00:45:13.200
funds the Girl Scouts organization of America. And some chapters of a Girl Scouts organization used
00:45:19.260
to partner with Planned Parenthood. And so as a result, you're basically performing an abortion
00:45:23.900
when you eat your friend's cookie, right? Well, there is a, there is a remote participation with
00:45:27.900
evil there perhaps, but it's not, it's not a very direct one. At a certain point, you can't really
00:45:32.740
operate in the world if, depending on how removed you become from this, the very fact that you and I
00:45:38.660
pay taxes means that we are funding Planned Parenthood. Just to stick on that same example.
00:45:45.380
So there are, there are, there is nuance when we're talking about a very, very remote participation
00:45:51.620
with evil. You're not, you're not morally required to participate with evil in any way, certainly not.
00:45:56.860
But it's, it's a different situation than when we're talking about a direct participation with an
00:46:01.440
evil act. So I would, I would, I would say no to that. And I, I like to think that your,
00:46:07.540
your superiors would accommodate that. I, I know some people who work in the medical field who say
00:46:13.100
they, they're not going to do that kind of thing, specifically on transgender surgeries. And the
00:46:18.660
people that I know have, who have, who have voiced those concerns have been accommodated.
00:46:22.240
Your mileage may vary and you might need to go to a different healthcare center, but that's,
00:46:25.540
that's the way I would parse the issue. All right. One more question from Rosalie.
00:46:28.460
Michael, I need your advice. I've always had the problem of wanting everyone to like me,
00:46:31.820
which I know is impossible, especially as a right-wing conservative. I've heard people say,
00:46:35.580
just get over it, but I need more advice than that. How do you handle the liberal attacks?
00:46:39.440
And do you have any suggestions on how I can speak up for what I believe is right without getting
00:46:44.440
emotional and letting the libs get under my skin? Yes. I like it when people like me. I don't need
00:46:50.940
people to like me. Obviously I would have chosen a different profession had I,
00:46:54.880
and I really needed people to like me. But I like it. I don't, I don't get a thrill when everybody
00:47:01.180
hates me. I know that some people feel that way and they, they want to always be the object of
00:47:05.860
scorn in any room. And, but I don't, I like it when everybody can get along. Okay. So then if you're
00:47:13.560
inclined that way, as it seems that you are, how do you deal with it when you are maybe an otherwise
00:47:21.380
perfectly lovely, charitable, nice, kind person whom everyone should love, but because of your
00:47:26.780
politics, at least half the country hates you. And because of the liberal skew of the culture,
00:47:31.080
the number is probably even higher. This is where Christianity is very helpful for two reasons.
00:47:37.320
One, look at what they did to Jesus. Okay. They don't, when you say things that are true,
00:47:42.880
well, in the case of Jesus, when you are the truth, then they really come at you. And even when
00:47:47.440
you say things that are true, when you, when you take the side of truth, that's generally unpopular.
00:47:52.680
That's been true since the very beginning of the world, almost the very, very beginning of the
00:47:56.660
world, certainly since sin and death pervades the world. So you can take some solace and comfort in
00:48:01.280
that. And then there is the traditional Christian, and certainly now this would be considered a Catholic
00:48:06.540
point of view, that suffering is sanctifying. That suffering is not just a bad thing that people
00:48:11.440
endure and it's really annoying and it's sad and it's just, just generally depressing. No,
00:48:15.720
suffering can be a good thing. When we suffer, we can kiss it up to God. That's, that's another
00:48:21.260
old way of talking about it. That actually the greatest saints in history have suffered a great
00:48:25.480
deal. Our Lord suffered as much as could be suffered on the cross. And so when, when that
00:48:32.120
happens, we are, we are in a way connecting ourselves to Christ. This is what St. Paul writes
00:48:38.440
about this. He says, I rejoice in my sufferings. I am making up in my flesh that is, that which
00:48:44.860
is lacking in the cross of Christ, which is a really pregnant line of the scriptures.
00:48:51.600
But this is, this is that connection there, that we are, we are, we are doing in some way
00:48:57.320
doing some good when we endure suffering with patience and with grace. Suffering is not a moral
00:49:04.340
category. It's not that it's just really, really bad. It's not even that it's just really,
00:49:07.920
really good. Suffering is just a fact of the world. The, the only question that you have
00:49:12.100
is how will you react to suffering? Will you react to suffering in a whiny, petulant,
00:49:17.120
self-absorbed, destructive way? Or will you react to suffering in a way that is sanctifying
00:49:22.800
and edifying and lifts your eyes up to heaven? Hopefully the latter, my friend.
00:49:26.680
I'm Michael Knowles. This is the Michael Knowles Show. See you Monday.
00:49:28.980
The Michael Knowles Show is produced by Ben Davies.
00:49:58.060
Executive producer, Jeremy Boring. Supervising producer, Mathis Glover.
00:50:02.860
Production manager, Pavel Vidovsky. Editor and associate producer, Danny D'Amico.
00:50:07.820
Associate producer, Justine Turley. Audio mixer, Mike Coromina. And hair and makeup by Cherokee
00:50:13.640
Heart. Michael Knowles Show is a Daily Wire production. Copyright Daily Wire 2022.
00:50:18.200
Hey everybody, this is Andrew Klavan, host of the Andrew Klavan Show. You know, some people are
00:50:23.220
depressed because the republic is collapsing, the end of days is approaching, and the moon's turned
00:50:27.820
to blood. But on the Andrew Klavan Show, that's where the fun just gets started. So come on over
00:50:32.500
to the Andrew Klavan Show and laugh your way through the fall of the republic with me, Andrew Klavan.