The Michael Knowles Show

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

00:23:41.340 is not the historical American nation.

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.

00:50:36.900 We'll be right back.

00:50:53.180 Bye.

00:50:55.620 Bye.

00:50:55.920 Bye.

Ep. 1029 - The ＂Alex Jones Was Right＂ Jar

Summary

Transcript