The Michael Knowles Show - Ep. 706 - Conservatism Uncanceled

00:00:00.000 Did you know that over 85% of grass-fed beef sold in U.S. grocery stores is imported?

00:00:05.260 That's why I buy all my meat from GoodRanchers.com instead.

00:00:08.900 Good Ranchers products are 100% born, raised, and harvested right here in the USA from local family farms.

00:00:14.600 Plus, there's no antibiotics ever, no added hormones, and no seed oils.

00:00:18.820 Just one simple ingredient.

00:00:20.360 That's meat.

00:00:21.280 Best of all, Good Ranchers delivers straight to your door for added convenience.

00:00:24.760 So lock in a secure supply of American meat today.

00:00:26.980 Subscribe now at GoodRanchers.com and get free meat for life and $40 off with code DAILYWIRE.

00:00:32.420 That's $40 off and free meat for life with code DAILYWIRE.

00:00:35.700 Good Ranchers, American meat delivered.

00:00:37.660 He lives.

00:00:39.000 We all thought Merrick Garland was gone after Cocaine Mitch kept him off the Supreme Court.

00:00:45.540 But Merrick Garland is back.

00:00:47.700 Long after the left mourned his loss, the Democrats rent their garments and gnashed their teeth.

00:00:53.380 Merrick Garland is back.

00:00:55.160 He is Joe Biden's nominee for attorney general.

00:00:58.220 And I actually don't mind this nomination all that much relative to some of the other picks.

00:01:04.280 Because one, it's kind of funny.

00:01:05.960 Merrick Garland became this meme after he was nominated to the court.

00:01:08.940 And now he's back.

00:01:09.800 It'd be sort of like if Harambe came back to that zoo, you know, everyone would kind of get a kick out of that.

00:01:14.540 But the other reason, the more substantive reason why I wasn't so upset about Garland is

00:01:18.380 he was the most moderate of the Joe Biden prominent nominees.

00:01:24.140 So I thought, okay, we can breathe a sigh of release.

00:01:26.400 At least he's not going with some crazy left winger for attorney general.

00:01:29.660 And then Merrick Garland testified on Capitol Hill.

00:01:33.680 He was grilled by a bunch of senators on his views.

00:01:37.220 Turns out he's not all that moderate.

00:01:39.220 Here is Josh Hawley, Republican senator, asking a very simple question, Merrick Garland.

00:01:44.380 Will you continue to enforce our southern border?

00:01:47.980 And the answer, pretty weak stuff.

00:01:50.560 Do you believe that illegal entry at America's border should remain a crime?

00:01:55.440 Well, I haven't thought about that question.

00:01:59.020 I just haven't thought about that question.

00:02:01.240 I think, you know, the president has made clear that we are a country of,

00:02:07.220 with the borders and with the concern about national security.

00:02:10.400 I don't know of a proposal to decriminalize, but still make it unlawful to enter.

00:02:17.980 I just don't know the answer to that question.

00:02:19.520 I haven't thought about it.

00:02:22.160 Will you continue to prosecute unlawful border crossings?

00:02:28.300 Well, this is, again, a question of allocation of resources.

00:02:33.120 We will, the department will prevent unlawful crossing.

00:02:40.400 I have to admit, I just don't know exactly what the conditions are and how this is done.

00:02:46.940 I just know it doesn't, well, simple question, Merrick.

00:02:52.800 Will you enforce the law at the border?

00:02:54.960 Well, uh, ooh, uh, ee, uh, ooh, ah.

00:02:58.440 Oh, boy.

00:02:59.040 I'm Michael Knowles.

00:02:59.720 This is The Michael Knowles Show.

00:03:00.520 Welcome back to the show.

00:03:10.200 My favorite comment yesterday is from July 24 Pictures, who says,

00:03:15.280 the woke left says, be less white.

00:03:17.960 Me, acts more black. 0.95

00:03:20.300 The woke left says, hey, how racist of you to appropriate their culture.

00:03:23.100 Yes, this is the, uh, paradox here, too, with the, the be less white campaign that, uh,

00:03:31.340 you saw from some of these woke corporations.

00:03:33.780 I was associated with Coca-Cola.

00:03:35.720 Coca-Cola is kind of not denying it.

00:03:37.400 It's part of Robin DiAngelo's broader and anti-racist curriculum that a lot of corporations

00:03:42.500 are buying into.

00:03:43.800 And when, when you say be less white, first of all, it's not pot, you can't, you know, 0.80

00:03:48.000 you're not going to demelanate your skin.

00:03:49.520 But even if you lose your own culture as a white person, then what do you do?

00:03:55.420 The only thing you, you have to have some kind of culture.

00:03:57.720 You have to have certain behaviors and manners of speaking and things like that.

00:04:00.560 So the only thing you can do is take on the attributes of other cultures.

00:04:04.920 But then the minute you do that, you're accused of cultural appropriation.

00:04:09.180 So there, there is no win.

00:04:11.100 You are damned if you do and damned if you don't.

00:04:14.420 What crazy times.

00:04:15.420 Don't you wish you could think back on all those wonderful halcyon days going by when

00:04:19.500 things are more normal?

00:04:20.240 Well, you can with Legacy Box.

00:04:22.540 Legacy Box is an ingenious mail-in service to have all of your irreplaceable moments trapped

00:04:27.880 on videotapes, camcorder tapes, film reels, and pictures converted to DVD or digital to preserve

00:04:33.640 them.

00:04:34.360 Home movies can transport us back to unforgettable times.

00:04:37.880 Well, I hope you don't forget them the way that you can not forget them.

00:04:41.100 It is by preserving them.

00:04:42.960 I will warn you.

00:04:45.520 I dragged my feet.

00:04:47.140 I didn't send all my stuff into Legacy Box right away.

00:04:50.480 Even though I knew, I'd been told by friends of mine, Ben had had Legacy Box on the show

00:04:54.140 for a while.

00:04:54.760 I'd been told it was great.

00:04:56.040 I hadn't done it.

00:04:57.760 And I lost a lot of article, or a lot of photos rather, of a family member of mine who

00:05:02.920 had passed.

00:05:04.400 Luckily, I found some more pictures, immediately sent them to Legacy Box.

00:05:06.880 It's so simple.

00:05:07.900 It's so easy.

00:05:08.380 They send back the physical media to you, and they send it back digitized.

00:05:11.540 It's just magnificent.

00:05:13.480 Get started preserving your past today.

00:05:14.980 Go to LegacyBox.com slash Knowles to get an incredible 40% off your first order.

00:05:19.460 Buy today to take advantage of this exclusive offer.

00:05:22.100 Send it in when you're ready.

00:05:23.680 Go to LegacyBox.com slash Knowles and save 40% while supplies last.

00:05:27.380 Head on over to Legacy Box right now.

00:05:30.580 That testimony that Merrick Garland gave to Josh Hawley was even worse, I think, than many

00:05:40.940 people realize.

00:05:42.060 Because I think the way most people analyze that is they say, okay, Merrick Garland, he's

00:05:46.920 this very serious procedure-focused lawyer who's nitpicking all the minor details, and he doesn't

00:05:53.880 want to give a flippant answer to anything, sure, maybe the first question might lead you

00:06:00.940 to think that.

00:06:02.220 He says, hey, are you going to continue to enforce the law at the border?

00:06:07.120 He says, well, and I don't know that there's a way that you could, there's no proposal to

00:06:13.520 keep the border secure, but then not enforce the law and this, and he's getting into all

00:06:19.780 this minutiae, then he says sort of platitudes like, Joe Biden believes this is a country

00:06:24.280 with a border.

00:06:26.680 Oh, he believes it's a country?

00:06:28.400 All countries have borders.

00:06:29.980 So the grand, brave, courageous statement from Joe Biden is America is still a country, at

00:06:35.280 least for now.

00:06:36.860 But then, the reason that I don't think you can just chalk this up to Merrick Garland

00:06:41.620 is trying to be really precise, is when Hawley pushes him on, it's a simple question, it's

00:06:46.280 illegal to, it's illegal by definition to enter the country illegally.

00:06:49.920 Will you continue to enforce the law?

00:06:52.080 Merrick Garland changes his approach.

00:06:53.800 So he doesn't just say, well, what do you mean by illegal and this and that?

00:06:56.880 He then says, well, that would be a matter of allocating resources.

00:07:01.220 It would be a question of where we want to put our resources.

00:07:03.720 So he's totally changing his answer.

00:07:05.460 He's saying, well, you caught me, Josh Hawley.

00:07:08.980 Probably not.

00:07:10.340 Probably I'm not going to enforce the law.

00:07:13.780 Really bad stuff if this is the most moderate guy.

00:07:16.100 Uh, Garland is catching probably most flack right now for saying, uh, that it refusing

00:07:22.600 to, uh, acknowledge that burning down federal buildings is domestic terrorism.

00:07:28.660 I actually think here, Merrick Garland is showing a kind of restraint.

00:07:34.300 I actually think conservatives shouldn't totally attack him for his answer, though it didn't

00:07:37.480 sound all too great yesterday when he gave it.

00:07:39.720 Let me ask you about, uh, assaults on federal property in places other than Washington, D.C.,

00:07:46.280 Portland, for instance, Seattle.

00:07:47.520 Do you regard assaults on federal courthouses or other federal property as acts of domestic

00:07:51.520 extremism, domestic terrorism?

00:07:54.320 Well, Senator, my own definition, which is about the same as the statutory definition,

00:08:00.500 is, uh, a use of violence or threats of violence, uh, an attempt to, uh, disrupt, uh, democratic

00:08:06.580 processes.

00:08:07.120 So an attack on a, uh, uh, uh, courthouse while in operation, uh, trying to prevent judges from

00:08:15.240 actually deciding cases that plainly is, um, domestic, uh, um, uh, extremism, um, um, um, uh,

00:08:24.300 domestic, uh, terrorism, um, an attack simply on a government property at night or any other

00:08:30.380 kind of circumstances is a clear crime and a serious one and should be punished.

00:08:34.720 I don't mean, I don't know enough about the facts of the example you're talking about, but

00:08:38.780 that's where I draw the line.

00:08:40.740 One, one is both are, uh, criminal, um, uh, but one is, uh, a core attack on our democratic

00:08:47.880 institutions.

00:08:48.640 So this answer filled with Garland's usual ums and awes and hmms and stammering is a

00:08:56.720 little bit weak in that he's conflating extremism, which is a very vague term that can really mean

00:09:02.100 anything you want it to with terrorism, which is a much more specific term.

00:09:05.800 But I actually don't think that burning down a federal courthouse, for instance, is necessarily

00:09:11.080 terrorism.

00:09:12.280 And the reason for that is terrorism traditionally defined is specifically the use of violence

00:09:18.060 against civilians for the purpose of achieving political ends.

00:09:23.240 And this is why if you attack a political target, you know, a government target that

00:09:28.860 is different than attacking an elementary school.

00:09:31.640 Those are, those are different things, both very bad, you know, both should be discouraged,

00:09:34.740 but we don't want the definition of terrorism to become overly broad just as, as has happened

00:09:40.560 with extremism.

00:09:42.080 Now, the reason this is a bad answer from Garland is it, the takeaway technical details aside,

00:09:47.860 and conservatives should pay attention to the details, but the takeaway is he's not going

00:09:51.240 to go after groups like BLM for burning down courthouses and federal buildings and, and

00:09:57.360 other sort of government buildings.

00:09:58.800 And that's, that's too bad.

00:10:00.520 But still, I, I actually think he's getting too much flack for that answer.

00:10:03.340 A much more radical answer, even than the extremism, terrorism answer that Garland gave.

00:10:08.060 And this, this is like sort of the third and final point, and maybe it's worth considering

00:10:12.340 Republicans trying to vote against him.

00:10:14.600 I don't think there's any way to stop this Garland nomination.

00:10:17.120 I think we already, we already stopped the main Garland nomination, but he gave an answer

00:10:21.340 on the transgender question that to my mind shows he is basically unfit for this job. 1.00

00:10:28.000 He was asked a simple question.

00:10:29.820 Um, is it right and just and lawful for girls to have to compete against boys? 0.98

00:10:38.380 In other words, uh, does the law say that boys can just define themselves in girls for

00:10:45.020 the purposes of say, playing women's sports for the purposes of going into the girls' bathroom? 1.00

00:10:49.160 This is not a difficult question, but Merrill, Merrill Garland seems to think that it is.

00:10:53.360 In my last 20 seconds, I'm going to ask you if you agree with this statement, uh, allowing,

00:11:00.340 and I'm not suggesting the answer one way or the other.

00:11:04.200 I just want to know what you believe.

00:11:06.220 Allowing biological males to compete in an all-female sport deprives women of the opportunity 1.00

00:11:14.320 to participate fully and fairly in sports and is fundamentally unfair to female athletes. 0.89

00:11:20.480 This is a very difficult societal question that you're asking here.

00:11:25.460 I know what, what underlies it.

00:11:26.820 I know, but you're going to be attorney general.

00:11:28.700 Oh, but, uh, I, I may not be the one who has to make policy decisions like that, but it's

00:11:33.440 not that I'm adverse to it.

00:11:34.740 Look, I think every human being should be treated with dignity and respect.

00:11:39.380 Um, and that's an overriding sense of my own character, but an overriding sense of what

00:11:43.720 the law, uh, requires, um, um, this, the particular, uh, question of how Title IX applies in schools

00:11:51.340 is one, and in light of the Bostock case, which I know, I know you're very familiar with, is

00:11:56.280 something that I would have to look at, um, uh, when I have a chance to do that.

00:12:00.560 And there it is.

00:12:01.460 There is the answer.

00:12:02.700 The Bostock case is the case that, uh, thanks to our good friend, Neil Gorsuch, uh, the Bostock,

00:12:09.060 who's a, you know, the ostensibly conservative judge who totally, totally broke with conservatives

00:12:14.820 and, and redefined, uh, sex as gender identity in that case.

00:12:20.180 I'm oversimplifying a little bit, but that's, that's the takeaway of it.

00:12:23.660 Uh, if, if Garland is saying in light of Bostock, I'd have to revisit it.

00:12:27.000 What he's saying is, yeah, boys can compete against girls and girls can't really say anything

00:12:30.420 about it.

00:12:32.420 When, when he says, well, this is one of the most difficult societal questions.

00:12:37.880 No, it's not.

00:12:38.820 It's a very simple question.

00:12:40.860 Can, can men magically become women? 0.97

00:12:43.020 That's the, that's the question.

00:12:44.140 That's what it boils down to.

00:12:45.040 Can men magically become women? 0.96

00:12:47.260 And is there therefore no difference, really no substantial difference between men and women?

00:12:53.720 Simple question.

00:12:54.700 Merrick Garland doesn't want to answer it.

00:12:56.140 He can answer it, but he doesn't want to answer it because his answer is radical.

00:13:00.600 When he says, look, I don't know if I'm going to be making policy on this.

00:13:03.860 If you're the attorney general of the United States, this is one of the most hotly debated

00:13:07.440 issues and you are going to have to interpret specifically this kind of law, then it is

00:13:14.360 not only important that you know the answer to that question, but it is your job.

00:13:18.560 So if you're going to, in this sort of cowardly way, say, well, I don't know that I'll have

00:13:23.220 any, of course you will.

00:13:24.280 Do you not even know what your job is?

00:13:26.380 Of course you will.

00:13:28.260 But he, he doesn't want to say, and then he comes out with that very courageous statement.

00:13:31.960 Look, my guiding principle is I think people should be treated with dignity and respect.

00:13:36.660 Oh, wow.

00:13:37.320 Oh my gosh.

00:13:37.920 That's almost as brave as Joe Biden saying, I believe the nation should still have borders

00:13:42.180 for now.

00:13:43.820 Yeah, sure, buddy.

00:13:45.080 Oh, great.

00:13:45.660 Dignity and respect.

00:13:46.440 We, yep.

00:13:46.660 We all agree on that.

00:13:47.980 But is it your view that we should force little girls to compete against grown men, grown,

00:13:54.100 I mean, physically grown, I suppose they're the same age, but much more grown out.

00:13:56.860 They're bigger, they're stronger, they're faster because men are different than women and lose 1.00

00:14:00.180 their scholarships and lose their trophies and by that same principle, have to go to

00:14:05.620 the men's changing room in the public pool, or rather have men go into their changing room

00:14:08.940 in the public pool, which destroys the entire concept of men's and women's changing rooms.

00:14:13.020 Have to use the bathroom with men. 1.00

00:14:15.120 What, what is your answer?

00:14:16.140 That actually is a radical question.

00:14:18.000 And sadly, I think he gave us our answer.

00:14:20.800 If you want simple answers to complex questions, head on over to rockauto.com.

00:14:25.320 Rockauto.com is a family business serving auto parts customers online for 20 years.

00:14:30.180 Go to rockauto.com to shop for auto and body parts from hundreds of manufacturers.

00:14:34.380 Best of all, prices at rockauto.com are always reliably low and the same for professionals

00:14:39.020 and do-it-yourselfers.

00:14:40.220 Why would you spend up to twice as much for the same parts?

00:14:42.600 The rockauto.com catalog is unique and remarkably easy to navigate.

00:14:46.300 Quickly see all the parts available for your vehicle and choose the brands,

00:14:49.500 specifications, and prices that you prefer.

00:14:52.340 Fabulous selection, and you won't get caught in this very embarrassing

00:14:55.640 situation that I sometimes could find myself in, which is you go into the brick and mortar

00:15:01.480 auto parts store and they ask you all this, all these questions about your car and you

00:15:05.600 don't know anything.

00:15:06.240 And then, you know, they go in the back.

00:15:07.600 They don't have the part.

00:15:08.320 They order it online, probably from rockauto.com.

00:15:10.440 Then they charge you twice as much.

00:15:11.880 Why would you do that?

00:15:13.280 When the rockauto.com catalog is so simple to navigate, even I can do it.

00:15:16.940 Go to rockauto.com right now.

00:15:19.060 See all the parts available for your car or truck.

00:15:20.640 And then write Knowles, K-N-A-W-L-E-S, in their How Did You Hear About Us box so that

00:15:25.100 they know we sent you.

00:15:27.320 Speaking of Supreme Court nominees, I guess in this case of successful Supreme Court nominees,

00:15:34.580 unlike Merrick Garland, who was an unsuccessful Supreme Court nominee.

00:15:39.520 Justice Thomas is the last tough guy left in America.

00:15:44.240 The last guy with really rock-ribbed moral vision.

00:15:48.320 Honorable mentions to Alito here, and I suppose even Gorsuch, even though I still haven't

00:15:53.680 forgiven Gorsuch for that transgender decision.

00:15:56.780 The Supreme Court was asked to hear a case, the final case of the 2020 election, regarding

00:16:04.640 mail-in ballots in Pennsylvania.

00:16:06.440 There were lots of questions about mail-in ballots in Pennsylvania because, probably most

00:16:11.340 importantly, the Supreme Court, or I'm sorry, the Constitution of Pennsylvania prohibits

00:16:18.160 the use of these widespread mail-in ballots that we saw in the 2020 election.

00:16:22.260 The Pennsylvania Supreme Court, in a very politically motivated decision, just chose to ignore that

00:16:28.820 part of the Constitution.

00:16:30.520 The U.S. Supreme Court didn't want to hear about it.

00:16:33.420 Then there was this issue of mail-in ballots coming in after election day, whether or not

00:16:38.140 those can be counted.

00:16:41.420 Supreme Court actually was sort of willing to weigh in on that, but now they're not willing

00:16:44.880 to hear the case regarding the validity of these ballots.

00:16:50.360 Sadly, you got all the libs voting not to hear the case.

00:16:54.800 You also have John Roberts, but I guess I repeat myself.

00:16:58.220 You also have Amy Barrett voted not to hear this case.

00:17:03.040 You also have Brett Kavanaugh voted not to hear this case.

00:17:07.320 We fought real hard to get Brett Kavanaugh that seat.

00:17:09.800 We fought real hard to send Merrick Garland into political irrelevance, at least for a few years.

00:17:16.800 And they went squishy.

00:17:18.140 They went squishy on what should be a very simple answer.

00:17:22.500 Now, Thomas Alito and Gorsuch did think that the court should weigh in on this matter.

00:17:28.700 Thomas most vigorously.

00:17:31.580 So Thomas, in his dissent, said something very important.

00:17:35.520 And it's important for not just this election, because the court, generally speaking, they did

00:17:41.500 say, we don't think that these votes would have changed the results of the 2020 election.

00:17:45.880 However, they could have very serious impact in the future.

00:17:49.020 And so we need to, we need to take a look at them.

00:17:54.500 Thomas said something here that I have been saying since the 2020 election.

00:18:01.100 Actually, I have argued with many conservatives on this point since the 2020 election.

00:18:07.960 And Thomas, you know how much I hate to say I told you so.

00:18:10.440 Thomas seems to be on my side of this question.

00:18:12.980 Thomas wrote, and actually a little footnote on the case.

00:18:14.900 He says, we are fortunate that many of the cases we have seen alleged only improper rule changes,

00:18:20.200 not fraud.

00:18:21.360 But that observation provides only small comfort.

00:18:24.300 An election free from strong evidence of systemic fraud is not alone sufficient for election

00:18:31.760 confidence.

00:18:33.300 Also important is the assurance that fraud will not go undetected.

00:18:37.900 This line, I want you to highlight this line.

00:18:40.560 I don't know how you're going to highlight it in the air as you're listening to this

00:18:43.280 in a podcast, on the radio, or on YouTube.

00:18:45.600 But make note of this line.

00:18:47.400 An election free from strong evidence of systemic fraud is not alone sufficient for election

00:18:54.840 confidence.

00:18:55.700 When some of my friends on the right, in the days after the 2020 election, were demanding,

00:19:03.020 they said, we need the evidence, we need the evidence, we need the evidence.

00:19:05.320 I agreed with them.

00:19:06.420 I said, yeah, you know, the Trump team obviously needs to make the case in court and they're not

00:19:10.240 going to be able to make the case if they don't have evidence.

00:19:12.400 However, this election looks pretty crooked to me, folks.

00:19:15.720 It seems like there was a lot of irregularity going on.

00:19:18.680 And what some of my friends, even on the right, would say is, if you can't provide all of the

00:19:23.460 evidence, then we must conclude that the election was totally fine and there were no

00:19:27.600 questions.

00:19:28.100 It was absolutely legit.

00:19:29.840 And I said, no, that's not true.

00:19:32.120 You don't get to, in the weeks and months before the election, change practically all the rules,

00:19:37.620 all of the important rules surrounding election integrity.

00:19:40.260 You don't get to violate the state constitution, for goodness sakes, in Pennsylvania to give an

00:19:45.200 advantage to Democrats.

00:19:46.200 You don't get to extend election day into election month, thereby diminishing election

00:19:53.580 integrity and making it more vulnerable to fraud.

00:19:56.300 You don't get to extend the counting of the ballots.

00:19:58.540 You don't get to do all these things that cut at the heart of election integrity and then tell me

00:20:04.100 the burden is entirely on me to prove that there was some shenanigans going on.

00:20:08.040 Now, I'm seeing what you're doing.

00:20:11.700 You're taking away all of the safeguards.

00:20:13.880 Therefore, it is absolutely my right to raise questions.

00:20:16.900 I, it is absolutely my right to not have much confidence in this electoral process.

00:20:22.480 That's what Thomas is saying right here.

00:20:26.000 Justice Thomas, the man, the man left on the Supreme Court.

00:20:31.100 I like some of the other guys too, depending on the day, especially Alito, but Thomas, Thomas

00:20:38.660 is one of the most clear eyed conservatives in the entire country.

00:20:43.260 He's making exactly the same point.

00:20:46.260 And I don't think that there is anything illegitimate or wrong or shameful about pointing out that

00:20:53.480 when you get rid of a lot of the election integrity measures, people are going to lose some

00:20:57.780 confidence in the election. Speaking of frauds, Dr. Fauci, Dr. Fauci is back. Actually, speaking

00:21:04.260 of frauds and things that I hate to say I told you so about, Dr. Fauci is back. He's, he's really

00:21:11.740 losing his appeal, I think by the minute, even among some people who are more in the center and

00:21:17.340 maybe even on the left. Dr. Fauci of 15 days to slow the spread fame is telling us that we will

00:21:24.620 probably need to wear masks, even after the vaccine, after this, after that, until 2022.

00:21:31.660 Why do you think Americans might have to wear masks into 2022?

00:21:36.600 You know, because it depends on the low, on the level of, of, of, of, of dynamics of virus that's

00:21:43.360 in the community. And that's really important because that gets back to something again,

00:21:47.600 that you said, if you see the level coming down really, really very low, I want it to keep going

00:21:53.420 down to a baseline that's so low that there's virtually no threat or not. No, it'll never be

00:21:59.420 zero, but a minimal, minimal threat that you will be exposed to someone who is infected. So if you

00:22:06.220 combine getting most of the people in the country vaccinated with getting the level of a virus in

00:22:12.560 the community, very, very low, then I believe you're going to be able to say, you know, for the

00:22:17.860 most part, we don't necessarily have to wear masks. So I love this. The CNN lady is giving me a lot of

00:22:24.760 respect for, I don't even know her name, but I am getting some respect for it because she is pushing

00:22:28.340 back on Fauci. She says, well, hold on. We'll get the vaccine. We get, why do we have to do this?

00:22:33.360 Because, well, you see, because I want the virus to get down to below zero. I want there to be negative

00:22:40.660 virus in the world so that, uh, of course it can never be negative virus. It can never be zero.

00:22:47.820 So you're always going to need good old Dr. Fauci. Dr. Fauci is always going to have to tell you what

00:22:53.100 to do, but, uh, we'll get a very, very, very low and then we'll eliminate germs and live in utopia. 0.87

00:23:00.300 That's what I want. I say, uh, how about we just, you know, we just take off the masks then. If that's

00:23:06.360 your argument, let's just take it off. This is the sort of thing that the people who said many of my

00:23:13.820 friends, many conservative friends said from the beginning, they said, just wear the mask. It's not

00:23:20.140 a big deal. And I have said basically since the very beginning, the masks are not just dumb, but

00:23:28.760 really bad as a political matter for all of the various left-wing censors out here. I, I, I suppose

00:23:36.820 I need to clarify. I'm not talking about the science because this isn't really about the

00:23:40.860 science. This is about the politics as a political matter. What the people who believe just wear the

00:23:46.580 mask, it's not a big deal. What they thought was, well, if we all wear the masks, we can go back to

00:23:49.960 normal, but the opposite is true. Every minute that we wear the masks is, is more likely to extend

00:23:58.160 the length of this whole lockdown, this epidemic, this social upheaval, because the masks are not a

00:24:03.720 source of comfort. The masks are a sign of visual sign and a very blatant one to everybody that we

00:24:10.660 are in the midst of something really, really crazy and probably pretty dangerous because we haven't

00:24:16.340 done this before as a society. We've never mandated, mandated that we all just put filthy cloth over our

00:24:21.800 mouths, wherever we go and muzzle ourselves outdoors, indoors, anywhere you go. So it, it,

00:24:28.160 it doesn't serve the purpose that the people who said, oh, it's not a big deal. Just do it. We'll

00:24:33.360 get back to normal. Doesn't serve the purpose that they thought it would. As long as we are wearing

00:24:38.360 the masks, Dr. Fauci is in control because the masks are the sign that we're amid the historic

00:24:46.300 unprecedented public health crisis. And all we can do is empower Dr. Fauci, our brilliant, wonderful

00:24:52.460 leader who is venerated as an icon in, in, in many parts of the left. There's Dr. Fauci Day now on

00:25:00.720 Christmas Eve in Washington, DC. Do you remember that? The mayor named it Dr. Fauci Day. Didn't

00:25:06.320 acknowledge, uh, you know, this is Christmas Eve. Isn't that a little, isn't that kind of a weird

00:25:09.300 liturgical calendar? And Fauci himself sort of admits it. We want to get that number low, low, low,

00:25:15.500 but it's never totally gone. And Dr. Fauci has never totally gone either. As long as we empower

00:25:21.440 him in this way. And as long as we radically change our behavior and our appearance, I mean,

00:25:26.140 the most intimate kind of decisions that we make about how we comport ourselves in the world,

00:25:31.440 as long as we entirely defer to him on that, that little dude is in control. You know,

00:25:39.420 we are going to be hearing quite a lot about the authoritarian left on the march from Mr. Shapiro

00:25:45.980 coming up after this. Uh, so go be sure to check that out. Also, we are going to be having our

00:25:50.780 backstage tomorrow, February 24th. It's going to be a ton of fun. There's going to be a lot of stogies.

00:25:55.460 There's going to be a lot of drinks. It's going to be very, very enjoyable. And we have a new show

00:26:00.660 coming out this Friday featuring our very own Ben Shapiro. There are many narratives going on around

00:26:05.260 hot topic issues. It is very difficult to keep track of all the newest controversies and non-troversies

00:26:10.300 that the left pretends to be offended by, which is why you're going to want to tune into Debunked

00:26:14.500 to see Ben expose leftist fallacies in 15 minutes or less. This show will be available exclusively to

00:26:20.020 Daily Wire members. So if you're not already a member, go to dailywire.com slash subscribe,

00:26:24.380 use code debunked to get 25% off. The reasons to join Daily Wire keep on piling up. I am getting

00:26:30.400 crushed by them. It is an avalanche of reasons. Head on over, use code debunked for 25%

00:26:35.260 off today. Head to dailywire.com. We'll be right back with a lot more.

00:26:50.620 I read a headline the other day. Headline said, Boy Scouts welcomes first class of girl Eagle Scouts.

00:26:58.700 My first thought was, no, they didn't. They didn't. The Boy Scouts did not welcome the first

00:27:07.920 class of girl Eagle Scouts. Now, I know that there is an organization called the Boy Scouts.

00:27:17.260 And I know that the Boy Scouts now lets in girls. And I know that there's a designation called the

00:27:25.400 Eagle Scouts. And I know that the Eagle Scouts now have some girls in it. But it is not possible

00:27:32.280 for the Boy Scouts to have girls in the Scouts because the Boy Scouts are the Boy Scouts. And the

00:27:40.440 minute they let in a girl, they cease to be the Boy Scouts. They might pretend to be the Boy Scouts,

00:27:49.900 but they are not. It is not possible. Going back to our friend, old Uncle Aristotle,

00:27:55.500 as we call him around these parts. You cannot simultaneously have a thing and the opposite

00:28:02.840 of the thing and have them be true at the same time. The Boy Scouts can only have boys in them.

00:28:11.560 I can't believe that we have to spend time saying this. But I think the reason we have to say this

00:28:16.580 is because we live in a culture that's very open and very liberal and very inclusive. And there are

00:28:25.540 some benefits of this, but it can be taken to absurdities. And even conservatives embrace all

00:28:31.780 this kind of language. We're open-minded. You know, I'm a free speech absolutist. I, yeah, man,

00:28:36.880 I don't want any sort of exclusion or censorship whatsoever. You need exclusion

00:28:42.980 for societies to make sense. I'm not saying unjust exclusion. I don't want that, but you do need

00:28:51.940 just exclusion. For instance, the men's bathroom must exclude women. Simply for it to be the men's 1.00

00:29:01.380 bathroom, it has to exclude women. Same thing is true of the women's bathroom. If the women's bathroom 1.00

00:29:07.300 is open and liberal and inclusive of men, then it hasn't become an inclusive, open,

00:29:13.480 liberal women's bathroom. It just stopped being the women's bathroom. The same thing is true of 1.00

00:29:16.940 the Boy Scouts. If the Boy Scouts, in the name of liberality and openness and inclusion and diversity,

00:29:22.640 accepts women, you haven't created this more open Boy Scouts. You've just abolished the Boy Scouts.

00:29:29.660 There's been a lot of talk about norm, normal. When are we going to get back to normal?

00:29:36.960 We're wearing masks. We're not seeing our grandparents. We're not having Thanksgiving

00:29:40.220 dinner. When are we going to get back to normal? Norms define normal. We are edging day by day by day

00:29:48.320 that we let this nonsense go on. Day by day by day that we wear the stupid masks. We are creating

00:29:53.620 a new normal. It is, it is now normal to wear the masks and it's abnormal not to wear the masks.

00:30:01.900 And you're, you can't have a society that's free of norms. There's no such thing. I think we like to

00:30:08.260 fool ourselves of that. The left really pushes this idea that you don't need any norms. Nothing,

00:30:13.760 there's nothing that we ought to do. There's, you know, we just do whatever you want as long as it

00:30:17.380 doesn't hurt anybody else maybe. And the right has adopted a lot of that same language.

00:30:22.620 Oh man, I don't care what you do. It doesn't affect me. Live and let live, man.

00:30:28.680 Norms are inevitable. Norms are inevitable. If you are, I think a lot of us want to pretend

00:30:34.260 that, oh man, just who cares if the Boy Scouts let some girls in? You know, it's not such a minor

00:30:39.380 issue. Well, I mean, it's, it is and it isn't. It's a minor issue in that I'm not a member of the

00:30:44.900 Boy Scouts and I have no intention of sending my son to the Boy Scouts. But it's a big issue in that

00:30:50.220 we as a society are now saying you're not allowed to have the Boy Scouts. You're just

00:30:53.700 destroying those sorts of things. And if you, if you follow this gender ideology to its logical 0.78

00:30:59.760 conclusion, not only do you get rid of the bathrooms and the girls sports, you get rid of 0.99

00:31:02.620 girls schools, you get rid of sororities, you get rid of fraternities, you get rid of anything that 1.00

00:31:07.460 makes any distinction between men and women. I don't know about you. I find the distinction between

00:31:14.420 men and women to be one of the things that gives life its joy. You know, one of, one of the things

00:31:20.640 that makes this world kind of nice, that men and women are different. I like women, you know, it's 0.62

00:31:24.440 sort of that, that men are from Mars, women are from Venus. That's kind of one of the playful aspects

00:31:29.260 of the world, the complementarity between the sexes. But we are now being told you can't have that.

00:31:34.180 And if you want a society that does still have that, you have to stand up for that.

00:31:37.440 And that's an exclusive claim. Truth claims tend to be exclusive.

00:31:41.020 But the gender ideology is marching onward. My friend, Ryan Anderson, Ryan T. Anderson at the

00:31:47.580 Ethics and Public Policy Center, he was with the Heritage Foundation for a long time. He wrote a

00:31:51.620 book with, I think, the greatest title I've, I've ever read on a book. The title is When Harry Became

00:31:57.700 Sally, Responding to the Transgender Moment. Just a tremendous, that guy could have scribbled in

00:32:05.740 crayon in between the covers. He still would have sold a bunch of copies. So very, very enjoyable book.

00:32:10.460 I highly recommend it. Amazon took it down. Amazon took down when Harry became Sally because,

00:32:18.700 I don't know, because it's politically incorrect. It's hateful. It's bigoted.

00:32:23.400 You've got one of the most respected for public scholars in the entire mainstream conservative

00:32:30.200 movement, Ryan T. Anderson, puts out this, you know, very academic work on transgenderism,

00:32:38.240 taken down for hate speech. Meanwhile, I just read from Ryan's Twitter account, Apple iBooks is

00:32:46.960 taking it down now. You can't download it. It's going to be banned. I have a book, by the way,

00:32:52.040 I may have mentioned this, coming out on this very topic, why conservatives have gotten this issue so

00:32:57.320 wrong. Why every attempt that they've made to fight political correctness has actually helped advance

00:33:03.060 political correctness over the last several decades. I have this book coming out. It's called

00:33:07.080 Speechless, Controlling Words, Controlling Minds. It is currently up on Amazon. I don't think it's

00:33:11.400 going to stay up on Amazon. I think that when the left understands the thesis of this book and some of

00:33:19.300 the arguments that are made in the book, I think they are going to take it down. So if you want to

00:33:22.220 get it, I would urge you to pre-order it now because I really, I'm not just selling books,

00:33:27.940 though I would like to do that too, but I don't know. If they're going to take down Ryan's book,

00:33:30.920 I can't imagine what the future is for my book or even many other conservative books that dare

00:33:35.820 to talk about anything other than, you know, cutting taxes or something, that dare to talk

00:33:40.140 about any cultural issue. And what we're really talking about here is cancel culture because what

00:33:45.780 you're hearing from some of the squishes who can call themselves conservatives, but also from the 0.99

00:33:51.680 left is, it's not cancel culture to take down Ryan's book. We don't like that book. Amazon has no

00:33:57.800 obligation or Apple has no obligation to host a book that they disagree with.

00:34:02.960 Come on, they're private companies. It's a free market, right? That's not cancel culture.

00:34:09.760 I have said basically from the beginning of this whole thing, this whole show is basically just,

00:34:14.540 I hate to say I told you so, from the beginning of this whole thing, I have said that I don't think

00:34:19.480 cancel culture is a particularly precise or helpful term because it falls into the classic trap of

00:34:27.100 political correctness, which is political correctness is the instrument by which the

00:34:32.020 left attacks traditional standards. It's just an attack. It's just a criticism. You've heard of

00:34:36.960 critical theory. It's like that. It just criticizes and criticizes and criticizes and tries to tear down

00:34:42.620 the old traditional order. Then conservatives respond to that either by acquiescing and saying,

00:34:48.520 okay, well, I'll go along. You know, what's the big deal, right? Sort of the thing on masks.

00:34:52.220 Okay, no big deal. I'll just go along. Or the other way conservatives react is they say, hey,

00:34:57.740 I oppose any kind of standards. I oppose any kind of censorship. I oppose any kind of guardrails

00:35:05.180 on our society. So I'm against cancel culture. And then either way, the left wins because now

00:35:13.940 nobody is defending the old traditional moral standards. I've mentioned this before. You know,

00:35:21.760 sometimes you see this on left-wing Twitter accounts and things. They'll send these memes around.

00:35:27.940 It'll be a picture of Joe McCarthy and they'll say, you know, conservatives were doing cancel culture

00:35:32.320 before it was cool. Conservatives originated cancel culture. And there's some truth to that.

00:35:36.760 McCarthyism, which until very recently was defended by all the mainstream conservatives,

00:35:42.100 the idea that you could root out communists who are working for foreign governments who

00:35:46.520 were seeking to subvert your country, it's not a particularly controversial point of view,

00:35:50.380 though it's been revised through various political activists to say that it would be.

00:35:55.240 That's not wild. That's not extraordinary. That's been true since the beginning of the country.

00:36:00.020 We've always had laws against sedition. We've always had laws against fraud. We've always had

00:36:03.660 laws against obscenity, though they're not really enforced much these days. They were still being

00:36:08.020 enforced even a dozen years ago. We still have, or I suppose now, now going on 14 years ago when George

00:36:15.660 Bush jailed a pornographer because he, because the pornography was so obscene. There are always

00:36:20.960 constraints on language and speech. Do you think that if some guy walks into your office,

00:36:27.960 he's got a Nazi armband on, he walks up to the water cooler and starts screaming,

00:36:32.700 Zig Heil. Do you think that guy has a right to keep his job? Do you think that if he were fired 0.77

00:36:38.380 for that, that would be cancel culture? No, of course you, you absolutely agree as we all do

00:36:43.000 that private associations and businesses and even whole societies have the right to determine their

00:36:49.400 standards and their norms. Just by definition, every society does that. So I don't use the term

00:36:55.920 cancel culture. Cancel, when I use it, when I, when I invoke that term, I'm referring to a very 0.96

00:37:00.460 specific thing, which is what's, what we see going on right now. It's when the left targets

00:37:04.660 conservatives for saying perfectly reasonable things. The difference between my definition

00:37:11.620 of cancel culture and the kind of abstract version is I'm talking about a real thing that's

00:37:16.200 actually happening. I'm describing a discrete specific phenomenon and the substance of them.

00:37:22.300 It's not just the form that matters. It's not just that people are being censored or

00:37:25.080 ostracized. It's the substance. What are they being censored for? What are they being ostracized

00:37:30.060 for? If, if some guy has the, the armband on and he says, Zig Heil at the water cooler,

00:37:36.400 then I don't think it's wrong to ostracize him from the company. But if that, if another guy walks

00:37:41.560 up to the water cooler and he's got an American flag and he says, I'm a Yankee doodle dandy and he

00:37:44.920 gets fired for that, that I am against. That is the sort of cancel culture that we're seeing right now.

00:37:50.280 People saying perfectly mainstream, patriotic, traditional American things and having their

00:37:55.760 lives ruined for that. That, but the substance there really matters. And this brings us to CPAC,

00:38:01.180 the conservative political action conference has been going on for a long time. The American

00:38:04.100 conservative union puts it on. It's always a very fun event. I went last year where we did a

00:38:08.780 verdict episode with Ted Cruz. A lot of, I've been going for years and years. I think I went to my

00:38:13.660 first CPAC 10 years ago. CPAC's title this year is America Uncanceled, fighting back against cancel

00:38:21.980 culture and fun. Fair enough. But they just found out that one of their speakers, this guy,

00:38:27.560 young Pharaoh, who I don't know what he does, but I don't know. He's like some pop culture guy or

00:38:35.080 something. Young Pharaoh has said some very offensive things about Jews and other people.

00:38:41.040 So what does CPAC do? They cancel them from their roster. Now CPAC is being called hypocrites

00:38:47.260 because they're indulging in cancel culture. I don't think CPAC is being hypocritical at all.

00:38:52.760 I think it is the shallowest, stupidest read of the term cancel culture to suggest that you can never

00:38:59.480 have any standards at all. I think it is that that kind of a shallow interpretation that has allowed

00:39:06.060 political correctness to advance for decades and decades. And actually, if you believe the argument

00:39:13.140 in my book, it's been advancing for about a century. There is nothing conservative about

00:39:21.200 removing all the guardrails. Think about it like a country. Think about it just like a country. A

00:39:26.520 country needs borders. That was, that was what Merrick Garland finally acknowledged that Joe Biden

00:39:31.080 thinks about it. He says, look, he believes that it's a country that has borders. All countries have

00:39:35.560 borders. And what borders mean is some people are in and some people are out. A certain area defines

00:39:43.120 what the country is and things outside that area. That's not the country. The same thing is true in 0.57

00:39:48.240 our philosophy. Do you think if CPAC invited someone to speak, forget about, you know, anti-Jewish

00:39:54.380 commons, let's make it even more basic than that. Some guy gets invited to speak at CPAC. And then in

00:40:01.160 between the time he gets invited and the time he speaks, he becomes a liberal Democrat. And he wants

00:40:05.640 to give a speech on how great AOC is and how he can't wait to vote for Joe Biden's reelection or better

00:40:10.880 yet, Kamala Harris. Do you think CPAC has an obligation, you know, in its opposition to cancel

00:40:18.880 culture and obligation to put that guy on stage? No, of course not. If anything, CPAC has an obligation

00:40:24.840 to take that guy off the roster because this is the conservative political action conference and

00:40:30.160 conservatism stands for something. We're debating what that stands for, but, but we, we absolutely

00:40:38.480 must define it. And actually the unwillingness, the cowardly unwillingness to define what conservatives

00:40:43.760 stand for is what has made us lose many, many, many times over the past several decades.

00:40:50.560 President Trump, one of the few Republicans to win in recent years, though then he sadly is no

00:40:57.340 longer president, but he did win in 2016. Trump is going to speak at CPAC and the reports are that

00:41:03.280 President Trump is going to speak on the future of the GOP. There are some reports that he's going to

00:41:09.240 say he's the presumptive nominee in, in 2024. I don't know. They might just be floating that just

00:41:13.980 to get some buzz or some publicity or something. But it does seem likely that he's going to be

00:41:19.080 speaking on the future of the GOP. What is the future of the GOP? I don't know. We're going to be

00:41:26.160 debating that. Obviously I have my preferences. Other people have other preferences, but the one

00:41:30.260 thing I know that it's not going to be, if the GOP has a future at all, is the old GOP of the last 20

00:41:36.880 years. It's not going to be that because that GOP doesn't win any battles. Even when they win

00:41:44.060 elections, they don't win any substantive battles. You lose all the important issues. You lose,

00:41:50.600 you, you, you lose every important issue up to and including the freaking girls' bathroom. You 0.89

00:41:55.860 couldn't even conserve that. Whatever the future of the GOP is, whatever the future of conservatism is,

00:42:01.720 it's going to have to conserve something. Which brings us to an article in Reason.

00:42:09.520 I just read an article in Reason Magazine. Reason is the sort of libertarian website and magazine,

00:42:17.620 and I have a great respect for many libertarians. I am not myself a libertarian, but I have respect for

00:42:24.480 many libertarians, but I don't have respect for libertines. There should be a difference between

00:42:30.360 libertarianism and libertinism, but increasingly there really is not. The article in Reason is,

00:42:36.340 is there a future for fusionism? Fusionism refers to the kind of conservative coalition that cropped up

00:42:44.580 after World War II and defined the Cold War. And it was put together by guys like William F. Buckley Jr.

00:42:51.200 and Ronald Reagan and National Review and God and Man at Yale and all this sort of movement. And Buckley is

00:42:57.480 kind of the central figure. Now, I actually think it's worth reading this Reason article, even though

00:43:05.540 they're wrong in their conclusion. But they say, the fall of the USSR meant the collapse of the common

00:43:11.340 foe that had sustained the fusionist partnership of the kind of traditional conservatives and the

00:43:17.060 libertarians and the war hawks. It was able to trundle on for a while, powered by a reservoir of goodwill,

00:43:22.800 but it has long been running on fumes. In the last few years, the alliance's inherent tensions have

00:43:27.780 come to a head. It's increasingly common to hear that whatever value there may have been

00:43:31.260 in cooperation during the 50s, 60s, 70s, and 80s, the era of good conservative feelings is over.

00:43:36.480 I agree with that. That's a good take. For many libertarians, this is where it goes off the rails.

00:43:41.480 For many libertarians, the Trump years revealed their traditionalist allies to be hypocrites and

00:43:46.700 opportunists, all too willing to sell out the ideals of fusionism in service of an aspiring

00:43:53.160 dictator. Okay, here we go. Am I reading? What is this? Is this CNN that I'm reading?

00:43:57.960 What it would, the libertarians now are going to sound like MSNBC. Conservatives have commenced a not

00:44:03.780 so slow dissent toward authoritarianism. Oh, if that word could be struck forever from the English

00:44:09.180 language, I would, I would pass a law to do it in my authoritarian abilities. It's what a stupid word.

00:44:16.600 It's basically a meaningless word. And they're not so slow dissent toward authoritarianism. Some in this

00:44:21.360 group suggest, for if the philosophy of liberty is to have a future, it must involve building bridges

00:44:27.420 to the left, not to the right. And there it is. Russell Kirk, one of the great conservative writers

00:44:31.760 and thinkers of the 20th century, long warned that the alliance between libertarians and conservatives

00:44:40.080 never made any sense, that conservatives should be very wary of that because ultimately the

00:44:44.800 libertarians were going to break to the left. And the many, many people who I think call themselves

00:44:49.040 libertarian, but they're not really, they wouldn't agree with Reason Magazine. You know,

00:44:52.540 they're really more conservative than all that. They're going to have to pick a side. They're either

00:44:56.320 going to have to go to the left and sound like MSNBC, like Reason Magazine here, or they're going to have

00:45:01.280 to go and be conservative. What they really misunderstand here is, they could change one

00:45:10.080 word in this article and it would make sense. If they changed it to, if the philosophy of

00:45:14.540 licentiousness is to have a future, it must involve building bridges to the left, not the right.

00:45:19.480 But liberty and licentiousness are very different things. Lord Acton, a man revered by true libertarians,

00:45:26.660 by libertarians of many, many decades and longer. What he said was, liberty is not, as many people

00:45:36.740 commonly think it is, the ability to do whatever you want and pursue your appetites however you want,

00:45:42.300 your desires however you want. Liberty is the right to do what you ought. I know this is a shocking

00:45:49.600 statement for a lot of people. Liberty, freedom, is not just the ability to do whatever we want.

00:45:54.700 Because the thing is, if you just pursue your base passions all the time, then you're going to lose

00:46:00.140 your liberty. If you, let's say, you know, I really want heroin. You're going to go out and shoot up a

00:46:05.220 bunch of heroin and you say, oh man, I've never been more free. Do you think heroin addicts have a whole

00:46:09.700 lot of liberty? Do you think they're the freest people? No, they're slaves. They're slaves to their

00:46:13.660 appetites, which gets to the classical conservative understanding of liberty. The man who sins is a slave to

00:46:20.700 sin. We need liberal education to make sense of our liberty, to tame our base passions, to tame our

00:46:25.400 vices, to practice virtue, to develop our and cultivate our reason, cultivate our will, control

00:46:32.800 our will. Then we can be really free. This is what all the founding fathers believed. And the

00:46:39.140 more libertine camp that has found itself on the right, that, that they no longer are like that.

00:46:46.800 Now, I don't think, as some people on the right have said, some conservatives have said, we need

00:46:52.460 to, you know, boot out all the libertarians or anything. I think that's a losing battle. You know,

00:46:56.000 I think that politics is the art of inclusion. You've got to bring people in if you want a winning

00:47:01.020 coalition. So people who say, I'm a libertarian, you know, and they wave their Gadsden flag and they

00:47:05.940 say, darn it, I stand for the American tradition of liberty. Yeah, those guys, obviously, those are

00:47:10.880 conservatives. Those are, those are people who I think make common cause with us. But there's another

00:47:16.440 type of libertarian, you know, the type I'm talking about. If you've ever spent any time around

00:47:20.580 a college campus or even high school, I guess, you, you know, those libertarians where the most

00:47:26.680 important political issue to them is legalizing pot. You know, they forget about, you know, foreign

00:47:32.940 policy, immigration, abortion, any sort of economic policy, trade. No, forget about that. The most

00:47:40.480 important thing is that everyone gets to smoke the devil's lettuce, you know, the sin spinach.

00:47:45.760 Those guys, I don't think they really have a future on the right. I don't think there's,

00:47:50.000 there's nothing really conservative about them. Their understanding of liberty is totally wrong.

00:47:54.440 I mean, those are the kind of guys I think that Reason Magazine is talking about right now.

00:47:58.800 But the thing Reason gets right that I think Trump is getting right in giving the speech at CPAC

00:48:06.340 that all of us are intuiting is that whatever was meant by conservatism in the 20th century up till

00:48:16.000 the end of the Cold War, that was great. That worked. That defeated the Soviet Union. 0.96

00:48:20.160 And then whatever was meant after that didn't really make a whole lot of sense. And when you

00:48:24.500 look back on the Bush years, do you really think like, oh yes, that was the triumph of conservative

00:48:29.140 values in America? No, it was mostly a period of decline and loss of things that we cherish.

00:48:35.240 So whatever is going to come next, it's going to be different than what it was in the past.

00:48:42.100 For, for too long now, I think conservatism has been canceled to use a faddish and sort of stupid

00:48:49.060 word. Conservatism has been canceled by people who want to make conservatism basically the same thing

00:48:54.280 as liberalism and not let us defend any of the things we want to defend and not let us preserve

00:48:58.960 anything resembling the American way of life. We're barely allowed to go outside anymore. And when we go

00:49:04.700 outside, we have to listen to some technocrat egghead tell us what to wear, even on our faces.

00:49:10.120 No, if we're going to, if we're going to be conservatives in the future, we're going to

00:49:13.760 have to conserve the, the traditions and the way of life that we've long cherished in this country.

00:49:20.000 I'm Michael Knowles. This is The Michael Knowles Show.

00:49:21.540 The Michael Knowles Show is produced by Ben Davies.

00:49:50.820 Executive producer, Jeremy Boring. Our technical director is Austin Stevens.

00:49:55.820 Supervising producers, Mathis Glover and Robert Sterling. Production manager, Pavel Vidovsky.

00:50:01.540 Editor and associate producer, Danny D'Amico. Audio mixer, Mike Coromina. Hair and makeup by

00:50:07.580 Nika Geneva. And production coordinator, McKenna Waters. The Michael Knowles Show is a Daily Wire

00:50:12.800 production. Copyright Daily Wire 2021.

00:50:15.520 Today on The Ben Shapiro Show, Democratic Congress people seek to purge media outlets that they don't

00:50:20.740 like. Plus, President Biden holds an empathetic commemorative event for 500,000 Americans who

00:50:25.800 died of COVID and the media go gaga. That's today on The Ben Shapiro Show. Give it a listen.

00:50:29.400 Thank you.

The Michael Knowles Show - February 23, 2021

Ep. 706 - Conservatism Uncanceled

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript