Caitlin Clark (19:33)

I feel like I always have had really good perspective on everything that's kind of happened in my life. Whether that's been good, whether that's been bad. And then obviously coming to the wnba. Like I've said, I feel like I've earned every single thing that's happened to me over the course of my career. But also, I grew up a fan of this league from a very young age. Like, my favorite player was Maya Moore. Like, I know what this league was about. And like I said, like, it's only been around 25 plus years. So I know there's been so many amazing black women that have been in this league. And continuing to uplift them I think is very important. And that's something I'm very aware of. And like I said, I try to just be real and authentic and share my truth. And I think that's very easy for me. I'm very comfortable in my own skin. And that's kind of been how it is my entire life.

Michael Knowles (20:16)

Yes, she gets the applause, but she's getting the applause. Speaking in a pretty liberal way. Even the notion that one can have his own truth or her own truth, my truth and your truth rather than the truth. The truth, by its nature being objective, that's pretty lib. Elsewhere in Time magazine, it says Clark is cognizant of the racial underpinnings of her stardom. I want to say I've earned every single thing. But as a white person, there is privilege. A lot of those players in the league that have been really good have been black players. This league has been built on them. You know, all this stuff we need to elevate black women. Black good, white, bad. All this seems kind of live. Now. You might say, look, she's speaking the language. Paisa Kevai usanzeketrovi. You got to be all things to all men. But at a certain point, where does that leave you? She's using the language of libs. She's spending all her time around libs. She's in a field that is intrinsically liberal, is probably going to leave you a lib. And this is a broader observation that I think is important for everyone to consider. If you spend your life in and around libs all the time. You are most likely going to end up a lib or a conservative if you spend your time all around conservatives, or a Zoroastrian if you spend your time all around Zoroastrians. Human beings are mimetic. We imitate each other. We imitate each other's behaviors and desires and beliefs and we're were mimetic creatures. This is also why sometimes you have a real firebrand politician goes to Washington D.C. to change Washington. What happens? Washington changes. The politician tale as old as time, tale as old as the country, at least. Well, what happened? You were changed. Yeah, that's what happens. Inevitably. Actually, you just acclimate to your environments. That's true, which is why it's so important to create conservative institutions, which is why it's so important to uphold standards and norms for a conservative culture. You cannot be in a place and take on the habits of a place and speak in the language of a place without. Well, without becoming as people are in that place. No one should be surprised when that happens. We just need to make sure that all of that assimilation and acculturation that takes place makes people better, more inclined toward flourishing, a little more right wing. There's so much more to say. First though, go to strongholdrescue.org as Americans, we are blessed to have people like Navy SEALs and Army Rangers and many others to represent and defend us during the worst of times. However, in most countries, when war and violence break out, there is often no one to help the people caught in the middle. That's where an organization called Stronghold Rescue and Relief steps in. Founded by a former Navy seal, Strongholds send small teams of US Vets like former Navy seals and Army Rangers into active war zones to conduct rescue missions and deliver life saving care in the most remote and dangerous places imaginable. At this very moment, Stronghold teams are deployed on the front lines of the war in Burma, assisting tribes facing genocide and ethnic cleansing. Some of these brave men will unfortunately remain deployed over Christmas to meet the urgent need in Burma. Stronghold is able to serve others because it's founded by a subscription model. It's similar to Netflix. Every month, thousands of supporters each pitch in a little bit to keep Stronghold running. If you would like to become a supporter, this is the time of year when you're looking at your donations. You can go to strongholdrescue.org when you become a monthly supporter, you'll receive the same kind of T shirt that Stronghold teams wear during their real world operations and a private Donor this month has pledged to double the donation of every new supporter up to 25 grand right now. Go to Stronghold Rescue. My favorite comment yesterday is from the drummers workshop. Norm's music says if Luigi were at one end, were the one at the golf course, rather hiding in the bushes, the left would have reacted the same way. Well, no, that's not true. The left would have loved him even more. In this case, the libs love Luigi because he allegedly murdered a healthcare executive. Had Luigi murdered the Mango Mussolini, then Luigi would be a national hero, an international hero to the left. It wouldn't be a hero to most Americans, most of whom support Trump. But, oh, man, if he had gone after Trump, they'd love him even more now. Speaking of death, assisted suicide is now the cause of 1 in 20 deaths in Canada. 5% of Canadians who die die by their own hand or by their own hand with the help of a doctor or a nurse or some other ghoul helping to snuff out their life. Most of the recipients are older adults, 96% with a median age of 77. Well, hold on. Median age of 77? That's really. Actually not all that high these days. People live into their 80s, sometimes 90s or 177. That's actually younger than I would have expected. And that's the median. Which means half of them are younger. Half of the older adults are younger. What about the 4% who were not older adults with a Median age of 77? How old were they? 50? 40? 30? 25? Yikes. We're getting these numbers from an annual report by the Canadian government showing that ever since euthanasia, a preposterously titled euphemism, euthanasia means a good death. It's the opposite. It's the worst kind of death. It is the single worst kind of death. You can suffer a death at your own hand. A vile, evil way to die. A good death is a death where you have some notice, where you can prepare your soul, prepare to meet your maker surrounded by loved ones. That's a good death. That's what our civilization has considered a good death for many, many centuries. Not anymore. Now we consider a good death to be one that you don't see coming or one at your own hand, both of which would have been considered the worst kinds of death when our civilization was healthy. The number just keeps growing, doesn't it? Since the establishment of MAID medical assistance in dying in Canada, that was in 2016, more than 60,000 people have killed themselves. More people have killed themselves in other ways, but they've killed themselves through MAID 4.7%, about 1 in 20 of all deaths in the country. This is one of the real moral hazards of assisted suicide. Assisted suicide, or any kind of suicide is wrong because it violates the natural law. It is contrary to one's own good. It creates a duality in man where none ought to exist, where you become your own murderer, where you are the victim of yourself, which is contrary to the unity of the person. It's contrary to the most basic aspect of the natural law, which is to do good and avoid evil. It's an offense to God because God gave you your life. Even if you don't believe in God, you have to admit you didn't make your own life. You're not responsible for your own life. You don't own your own life. It is a gift that was given to you and you don't get to keep it forever. You are a steward of your life and it's offensive to the person who gave you your life, to the one God who gave you your life. This is one of the many moral hazards though of assisted suicide, even beyond why it's intrinsically wrong. People say when they think about assisted suicide, they think that it's some 99 year old person suffering from immense pain that cannot receive any palliative care whatsoever. Now this person doesn't exist. If there's one thing modern medical science has figured out, it's how to manage pain. We're pretty good at that. And not perfect, but we're pretty good at that. But it's not the 99 year old with the pain that can't be controlled at all. Who's just going to be snuffed out five minutes before death. A mercy killing. No, no, no, that's not it at all. Not the numbers we're seeing. The problem with assisted. One of the problems with assisted suicide is not that a few people are gonna kill themselves every year, it's that everyone's gonna kill themselves eventually. The problem, one of the problems with this, I have to keep saying one of the problems because there are many problems with it, but one of the problems with assisted suicide, one of the mistakes we make when we think about it, is we think it's going to be some really small percentage of the population that uses it. No, that number is still growing in Canada. It's only been around a handful of years. The problem is eventually, as it is normalized, you're going to see more and more. At a certain point, maybe most people dying in this way. This is like the giver. If you've ever read the book the Giver, everyone just kind of gets killed by a doctor in the end. It's so normalized, it's expected. And then people who fear that they're a burden to their families, which is almost every elderly person, people who fall into a little bit of a depression, and this particular political climate, it's understandable why people would be a little depressed. People who live in a culture of despair and a culture of death increasingly are going to be inclined to kill themselves, and that's going to be the way we do it. We're going to. We're going to kill ourselves if this keeps up. We often talk about the suicide of the West. This will be the literal instantiation of it. Speaking of despair, Rosie O'Donnell is blaming Donald Trump for giving her herpes.

Rosie O'Donnell (29:42)

Well, hey, everybody, it's Friday all day, as my nana would say. And look what I have on my lip. Everybody's been saying, you have herpes, you have herpes. All this time, and I never had a cold sore in my life, and now I have a cold sore. And it makes me think that perhaps this weird pimple that had a tiny little head was a cold sore, too. And so I talked to my doctor today and I did a video telehealth, and they said that it's not a cold sore. It's some reaction to the sun. Now, I did sit in the sun yesterday, but I had sunscreen on, so I don't know. I will let you know tomorrow if I do, in fact, have herpes, as some of the taunting from the MAGA people in the last couple. Couple of weeks. Hasn't it been fun, ladies and gentlemen, to be standing in direct opposition to everything he is and represents and always have been and always will?

Michael Knowles (30:45)

Okay, hold on. It was a little bit difficult to track her logic there at the end. So I don't think she's saying that Trump and the MAGA people gave her herpes, though if it's some kind of reaction to stress or anxiety, I guess then she could blame it on Trump, but she might just be blaming Trump and the MAGA people for the mockery that she's receiving at the prospect that she might have herpes or. I don't know, it's hard to track. But I do know she started out talking about how she has a blister on her lip and. And she ended up talking about how much she hates Trump. And frankly, I think she could have started out talking about any topic. I think she could have started out talking about the New York Mets or gingerbread cookies, and she still would have ended her monologue talking about how much she hates Trump. Because especially for Rosie O'Donnell, who's feuded with Trump for 20 years now, but really for the libs, broadly, he lives rent free in their minds. They just keep coming back to Trump. It's about him. Everything's about him. The political narrative of the past decade, almost now, has really been about this guy. Sometimes you hear politicians say, it's not about me, it's about the people. It's not about me, it's about the climate. It's about this. No, with Trump, it really is just about him. It is about him. That man lives rent free in their minds. I really like Trump, obviously. I'm a big supporter of Trump from 2016, 20, 20, 2024, but I don't think about Trump nearly as much as these people do. I host a political talk show and have for eight or nine years or something at this point, and I still don't think every day I do my show, I still don't think about Trump as much as these libs do. Astounding. Now, speaking of conservatism, there's a story that I. Look, I really wanted to get to it. I really, really wanted to. I said I was going to talk about it yesterday. I said I was going to talk about it tomorrow. It was about Yale Law School launching this center for academic freedom and free speech. And all the conservatives are excited, but they shouldn't, because neither of those things are conservative. But you know what? I've run out of time again. I've run out of time again. And I want to get to the mailbag. It's more important for me to get to the mailbag than to talk about Yale. There's so much more to say. First, though, go to stopboxusa.com use code knowles. I'm so excited to tell you about a fantastic new product, and that would be my Stop box. As a gun owner myself, I can tell you no more worrying about fumbling with your keys in the dark or dealing with some electronic safe where the batteries might die at the worst possible moment. You're left in the lurch. This thing, the Stompbox Pro, brilliantly simple, incredibly effective. What blew me away was the build quality. This is built from glass reinforced polycarbonate. That is real tough. And the push button locking system is mechanical, so it gives you instant access when you need it. No keys, no batteries, just reliable security with quick access for those of us who take our second Amendment rights seriously while prioritizing family safety. This is exactly the sort of thing that we are looking for. What really sets StopBox USA apart, everything's manufactured right here in America in their own facilities. Right now go to stopboxusa.com, use code knowles and you will get a buy one, get one offer. So you get 10% off plus your free stopbox pro. Stopboxusa.com code knowles are you still even still searching for the perfect Christmas gift? DailyWire + gift memberships are 40% off right now. It's a ticket to uncensored truth, unapologetic news, premium entertainment for the conservative in your life. With a daily Wire plus membership, they will get a year of daily shows from the most trusted voices in conservative media with limited ads, live breaking news that gives the full story. You will also get access to an entertainment library packed with hit movies and documentaries like Am I Racist? Along with can't miss series like Dr. Jordan B. Peterson's the Gospels. Get 40% off DailyWire +gift memberships@dailywire.com giftnow Finally. Finally, we've arrived at my favorite time of the week when I get to hear from you in the mailbag. This mailbag is sponsored by PureTalk. Go to PureTalk.com knowlescanadablas you will get an additional 50% off your first month. Take it away. Hey, Michael. I'm Josiah and I'm 17.

Rosie O'Donnell (35:15)

I'm Dominic and I'm 17.

Michael Knowles (35:16)

And we're really big fans of the show.

Rosie O'Donnell (35:18)

But we just had a question.

Michael Knowles (35:19)

We were talking with some friends and we have a friend in class who.

Rosie O'Donnell (35:23)

Is a female but pretends to be a male.

Michael Knowles (35:26)

We don't want to call her by her fake name, but we don't know.

Rosie O'Donnell (35:29)

What her real name is. And we definitely don't want to call her by the false pronouns.

Michael Knowles (35:33)

But is it all right to call.

Rosie O'Donnell (35:34)

Her by her fake name Miles? What would be an alternative if we didn't want to call her by her fake name? Anyway, thank you.

Michael Knowles (35:42)

We really appreciate it.

Rosie O'Donnell (35:43)

Yeah, thank you. God bless you.

Michael Knowles (35:44)

Thank you. Really good question, guys. And one that doesn't have an easy answer because you don't know her real name. I guess what I would do if I were in your shoes, it would be very difficult for me to use the fake name Miles if she were going by Skylar or something. Maybe you could, because some names are ambiguous, even like Evelyn or Evelyn, you know, Evelyn Wool. But Miles, that's a fellow's name. There's no doubt about that. And one of the reasons that you don't want to call the girl by the boy's name is not just to stand on your high horse or even just to maintain your principles, which is an important thing to do, but it's also, you don't want to be guilty of scandal by affirming this poor confused girl of a delusion that is really harmful to her. I think you actually would be harming her and you would be harming a lot of other people if you were to call them by some fake name, the name of the opposite sex. Certainly you wouldn't use the pronouns. So what would you do? If it were me, I would avoid using the name. Or I would, I don't know, maybe use the last name if you can. I don't know if her name is Millie Smith or something. Say, oh, yes, the lovely Smith over there or something. It's very difficult. It's very awkward. This is why. This is one of those issues that's so polarized and polarizing is you can't even speak about it. When you speak about it, you are taking a side. I remember some years ago, a friend of mine, one of a handful of friends who have really written me off because she's very, very liberal, very, very liberal. But we were chatting and we were talking about Bruce Jenner or something like that, and we were having a conversation and she referred to Caitlyn Jenner and she, she and her. And Caitlyn Jenner and I was referring to Bruce Jenner and he and him. It was very awkward. You actually can't speak. And whichever one gives up first on the name and the pronouns is implicitly conceding the debate. So I would in charity, but in justice also, I would avoid the name right now. Go to silencershop.com knowles the Second Amendment safeguards our freedom from tyranny. As responsible gun owners, it is our job to stay sharp and protect those rights. That is where Silencer Shop comes in. America's leading provider of firearm suppressors. Silencers are completely legal. Silencer Shop makes getting one easier than ever. They offer the largest selection of top brand suppressors. Their expert team handles all the paperwork for you. Are you ready to enhance your firearms? Visit silencershop.com knowles today silencershop.com knowles silencer shop the easiest and best way to get your suppressor. Hey, you. Next one. Hi, Michael, it's theshuckmeister. Since assisted suicide is being pushed, I would like to ask if it's at all possible to have a death with.

Rosie O'Donnell (38:51)

Dignity by your own hand.

Michael Knowles (38:53)

Now I'm a Catholic, I believe it's.

Rosie O'Donnell (38:55)

Deeply mortally sinful in union with the Catechism.

Michael Knowles (38:57)

However, a little known Catholic poet you.

Rosie O'Donnell (39:00)

Might have heard of called Dante has a bit of a nuanced take. The first man that Dante and Virgil meet in Purgatorio is Cato the Younger.

Michael Knowles (39:07)

The famed Roman statesman who chose to unalive himself rather than compromise to Caesar. He's not condemned to the circle of violence against self. In some ways he's venerated by Dante.

Rosie O'Donnell (39:17)

Guarding the foot of Mount Purgatory.

Michael Knowles (39:19)

This is especially confusing because Dante has a strong respect to Caesar in his writings. Why do you think it is?

Rosie O'Donnell (39:25)

And did people like Cato or even.

Michael Knowles (39:27)

Socrates die with dignity by their own hand? It's a very, very good question, a very challenging question. But my answer is I think Dante used a little poetic license here. The issue is Dante puts the suicides in hell very clearly and they're skin has been cast off and it's on all these gross trees because they had no care for their bodies in life. But he puts Cato, who as an exemplar of liberty for Dante, in purgatory. He's guarding Mount Purgatory. And Cato also killed himself rather than see the total collapse of the Roman Republic. So what do we make sense of that? Well, Dante is focusing on an aspect of Cato, his defense of liberty, and he's not really answering for the suicide. St. Augustine deals with this issue too. Is Cato, is it good, is it defensible that he kills himself in defense of liberty, or is it disreputable? And Augustine's very clear. He says no, it's bad. Don't defend him for killing himself. That's wrong. But St. Augustine is writing a work of theology. Dante is writing an epic poem that contains a lot of theology, but it's about more than theology. And so I would say it's poetic license and not in any way defense of suicide. Next question.

Caitlin Clark (40:41)

Hi, Michael. My name is Josephine and I'm a Jew living in Romania. My husband and I are currently going through IVF and I've been struggling with the bioethical dilemmas of the disposal of unused embryos. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Christians believe that since life begins at conception, the disposal of unused embryos is tantamount to murder. Us Jews have a different perspective and I'm curious to hear your opinion. In Judaism, we believe that IVF is okay, provided that the sperm and the egg be from the husband and wife, and thus they frown upon surrogates, egg and sperm donors. Thank God that's not something my husband and I are doing. We are using my egg and his sperm, but because of fertility issues, we are unable to conceive naturally. Secondly, for life to begin, you require the egg, the sperm and the womb. Without the womb, it is not yet a life. The embryo will not continue to grow on its own without an incubation in the mother's womb. Meaning that it is morally okay to dispose of unused embryos. I think this would not include the possible scenario in the future where scientists are able to grow the baby in an incubator outside the mother's womb, since the womb provides for much more than just an incubator. What do you think of this perspective from a comparative religious view? Thanks for all that. You do love the show.

Michael Knowles (42:00)

Really good question. Sorry to hear about your fertility struggles. I don't think that argument quite holds up. You rightly recognize that there are bioethical issues for ivf. I know it's tempting. I would discourage you from doing ivf. I would encourage you to try other methods. They tried to sell my wife and me IVF for two years and they really push it and they make it seem like that's the only option and it's not. Two years in, we got our first kid. Now we've had a couple more since then and it was through other methods for my wife, she ended up taking a shot for a week and self administered shot and that was it. So I'm not saying that will work for you, but this is how they lure you in. They say it's the only way you want to have a kid. No big deal. Yeah, there are some bioethical problems, but who cares? The ends justify the means and it's all sorts of moral reasoning that is weak. But the weakness of your comparison here is you say, look, in order for a child to grow, you need the sperm and the egg, but you need a womb. You need an environment for the baby to grow in. So if you create the child outside the womb, if you deny the womb to the child, then you have no obligation to keep the child alive. Now there are other problems here because in order to procure the sperm, you might need your husband to engage in an intrinsically evil action. So that would complicate the ethics here, right? And you would have to undergo some invasive surgery. You say that the sperm and the egg have to be joined from a husband and a wife. But there are mixups at the IVF factory all the time. Happens frequently. So you Might end up in a case where you've got a kid who has a mother and a father who don't even know each other or where you have a baby who's been implanted in the wrong woman. These things happen. They're in court right now. So that would complicate the ethics there. But let's say you actually did get it. A husband and a wife and the sperm and the egg together. But you say, look, I'm going to deny this baby. I've conceived this baby outside the womb, which is naturally impossible, but using a little wizardry, we did it, but I'm going to deny the baby the womb. So it's okay to kill the baby? Well, you could just fast forward nine months and observe that in order for a baby to grow, a newborn baby to grow, the baby needs a home. If the baby is left exposed on the street, the baby's going to die within a matter of hours at most. So is it okay then to leave the baby on the street? A newborn baby. You have a newborn baby, but you're going to deny the baby the home, just as you would deny the embryo the womb. You're going to leave them out there and look, nature is going to run its course. Are you not morally culpable for that? Of course you would be if you'd left a little baby out to die of exposure. Of course you would be. So I don't mean for my advice to be in any way harsh, but I think that the. I've never heard a compelling ethical argument for ivf, and I've heard many, many good arguments as to why it's not acceptable. And the only arguments I've heard for it are that it's. People want it, they really want a kid, which is a natural longing. But I don't think that an end, no matter how good the end is, I don't think that justifies immoral means. Next question.

Rosie O'Donnell (44:59)

For the last few years, conservatives have been saying, look at how bad the inflation is under Joe Biden. Think about how much worse it could get under Kamala Harris. That's why we need Donald Trump in the White House. But now all of a sudden, conservatives like yourself are saying, oh, it's not about the prices. They're going to get worse under Trump, of course, because of the tariffs, but he's going to create long term sustainability. Long term sustainability. This seems to be a massive goal shift to me. And I would like you to define what you mean by short term pain. Because to me, in the realm of politics, short term means more than four years at least. Are we going to be experiencing a situation where Democrats are going to have justification, justification for saying, look how bad the economy was under Trump, which is going to run counter to our electoral goals? And if that's going to run counter to our electoral goals, the fight for long term sustainability is going to be moot point anyway. So which is it? What should we be arguing for? Thanks.

Michael Knowles (45:54)

I don't think there's any contradiction at all here. I don't think Trump has hit the ball on this at all. Just consider the deportations. Trump says he's going to deport 10 million people. You deport 10 million people, that is going to cause labor costs to rise, especially 10 million people, many of whom are practically indentured servants. That is going to cause labor costs to rise. It doesn't take an economist to realize that. So those costs were going to go up If Trump ran on tariffs, he said, I'm going to slap tariffs. He was very open about tariffs and he used tariffs in the first term. That is going to cause the costs of certain goods to rise, though it's also going to create an incentive for goods to be manufactured at home, which, which would be at lower cost. So I don't think he's hit the ball at all. The difference here is that the Democrats brought us inflation because of their irresponsibility, short term loss and long term loss. Trump has plenty of economic measures that will reduce certain costs in the short term, like unleashing American energy, just to use one important example. But he has other economic programs that might increase certain costs in the short term in certain areas, but in the long term will bring costs down and make us more secure nationally. So you have the Democrats, short term bad, long term worse because of their irresponsibility. For Trump, you have short term, maybe it's a mixed bag, long term better because of his responsibility. Those are not the same things. Okay, it's fake Headline Friday. The rest of the show continues now. You do not want to miss it. Become a member, use code NOCENTANADABLAS and check out for two months free on all annual plans.