Ketanji Brown Jackson (7:57)

The parent can choose to put their kid elsewhere. You don't have to send your kid to public school. I'm struggling to see how it burdens a parent's religious exercise. If the school teaches something that the parent disagrees with. You have a choice. You can homeschool them.

Michael Knowles (8:16)

You have a choice. You can homeschool. Hey look, the left is in favor of homeschooling now. Boy, my head is spinning. The left, which has spent decades deriding homeschooling the left, which has spent a century or more trying to force your kids into public school and have them learn exactly what they want them to learn. Now they're saying, no, you can homeschool. You have a choice. You don't have to go to that public school that your tax dollars are funding. You don't have to go there. But it's kind of funny how this argument only ever goes in one direction, because I remember another case that was working its way through the courts for approximately 12 years and that was the case of Jack Phillips, the owner of Masterpiece Cake Shop. Jack Phillips, who owned probably the one bake shop in all of Colorado that did not want to create custom cakes, custom art pieces for so called gay weddings and weird trans ceremonies and all the rest. And this guy was ruthlessly targeted by the gay stoppo for a dozen years and by leftist lawyers and leftist judges for a dozen years because he was the one guy. He didn't even say people who identify as homosexual and transgender. He didn't say they can't come into his store. He didn't say they can't buy his cakes. He just said that he was not going to use his artistic skills, skill to create custom pieces to participate in ceremonies that he considered immoral and contrary to his religion. This guy had his life practically ruined by these people for a dozen years. You don't need to go to that cake shop. Never factored in to the arguments from the left. And it was difficult to find a cake shop in the state of Colorado that would not participate in so called gay marriages and transgender ceremonies. In the case of the school district in Maryland, this is the public school. This is a school that these parents tax dollars are funding. And now all of a sudden the left says you don't need to send your kid to public school if you don't want your 4 year old indoctrinated into creepy sex stuff, then you know, just homeschool. Never mind that homeschooling is expensive. Never mind that homeschooling is difficult in a society that is accustomed and feels it necessary to have two incomes. Never mind all of the burdens. Never mind that the parents are already paying for the public school and they have a right to not have their 4 year olds exposed to obscene content in preschool. No, no, no. Now all of a sudden, no, no homeschool, please. Come on, you don't need to be here. When it's convenient for the left, everyone must be brought to heel. Everyone must be forced as a matter of compulsory law and regulation and Enforcement to do what the left wants. But when the right has a legitimate objection that can't be overcome, then all of a sudden, well, go do your own thing. But this is why homeschooling is great. We're homeschooling. Many of my conservative friends are homeschooling. I love homeschooling, but it's not enough. And I think this is the lesson of Trump. The shift from the Tea Party era to the Trump era is this shift, is this lesson. Yeah. Being left alone to do what we would like to do is good. But we live in society, and ultimately there is no being left alone. We all have to live together. So homeschooling, it's great. It's a good temporary fix. We need to take back the schools. We need to take back the public schools. And it's not enough to say, we're gonna exempt ourselves from your creepy sex curriculum. No, no, no. We're gonna kick your creepy sex curriculum out of the school. When you violate our laws and our regulations and our standards and norms, we're gonna punish you through the civil authority. And we're taking back our schools, and we're taking back our courts. And if you got criminal judges, we're gonna arrest those judges, and we're taking back our society. And if you to be here, and if you're an illegal alien criminal, you're going back, and we're going to make a deal with Nayib Bukele, and you're going back to a prison in El Salvador, and you're not getting out of it anytime soon. Okay? That's the difference. It's the difference between the Tea Party era, focusing on that notion of negative liberty. Isaiah Berlin, the negative liberty to just be left alone. Please leave me alone. Please, I just want to be left alone. Well, you didn't leave us alone, and now we're not gonna leave you alone, okay? Because you know what? Left. You are right. We live in society. No man is an island unto himself. And so, okay, we're gonna participate in society. And maybe you shouldn't have pushed us so hard because you might not like the standards and norms that we are going to restore so that we can have a good, flourishing, great country again. That's the moment we're in. We're gonna get back to my very important point in one moment. First, though, go to livemomentous.com while other brands chase trends and flood the market with endless options, Momentous takes a different approach. They rely on research and expert guidance to focus on what truly matters. Mastering the fundamentals with unwavering consistency, then tailoring supplementation to your specific goals. Momentus sets a new benchmark in the supplement industry through their commitment to transparency and trust. Working alongside human performance specialists, they develop formulas that have earned both NSF and Informed Sports certification, providing the reliability that there are 200 plus professional and collegiate athletic customers depend on not just the pros, but also amateur athletes like Mr. Ben Davies here, who is legitimately Davies is jacked, all right. He's a pretty. And Mr. Ben Davies absolutely loves Momentous. I love Momentous too, but he, you know, he's really putting it to excellent use. Momentous uses the highest grade creatine monohydrate available and essential supplements for both men and women seeking peak physical and cognitive performance. What are you waiting for? Head to livemomentous.com, use code KNOWLES for 35% off your first subscription code KNOWLES@livemomentous.com 35% off your first subscription Speaking of legal standards, this is the most important thing Trump has done. It's an executive order. It just came out and virtually no one is talking about it. But it is the most significant executive order Trump has ever issued. I'll just give you the one line summary of it. Under the Policy section of this Executive Order, it is the policy of the United States to eliminate the use of disparate impact in all contexts to the maximum degree possible. What is disparate impact? Most people probably have never heard of this. If they have heard of it once or twice on the news, they don't know what it is, trump explains in the Executive Order. And I'm going to greatly pare down the Executive Order to just a handful of paragraphs that really sum it up. It opens up a bedrock principle of the United States is that all citizens are treated equally under the law. But a pernicious movement endangers this foundational principle. A key tool of this movement is disparate impact liability, which holds that a near insurmountable presumption of unlawful discrimination exists where there are any differences in outcomes in certain circumstances among different races, sexes, or similar groups, even if there is no facially discriminatory policy or practice or discriminatory intent involved. And even if everyone has an equal opportunity to succeed, disparate impact liability all but requires individuals and businesses to consider race and engage in racial balancing to avoid potentially crippling legal liability. It not only undermines our national values, but also runs contrary to equal protection under the law and therefore violates our Constitution. I'll tell you how this works well, I'll tell you how this should work. If it were applied equally, a lawyer would look at the NBA and would say, okay, the country is 60% white people, 12 or 13% black people. The NBA is 175% black people, at least among the players. I don't know about the coaches and the executives, but among the players, it's about 10,000% black people. So there's something wrong here. There must be racial discrimination in hiring. They're discriminating against white people on the basketball court. Now, of course, disparate impact is never applied this way. It is only ever applied to benefit black people or Hispanic people or racial minorities of a favored group to the detriment of white people or, I don't know, I guess sometimes Asian people are damaged by these racial policies as well. That's how it works. So you go in, you say, okay, here's a random company, and the executives are, let's say, I don't know, 90% white and 10% black or 5% black and 5% Hispanic or whatever. And you say, well, okay, well, that just on its face, that's evidence of racial discrimination. Now, it could be a mayonnaise company. Black people don't like mayonnaise that much. Doesn't matter. Could be a swimming company. Black people don't really swim. It doesn't matter. At any time you go there and you see any differences in racial representation, some leftist lawyer can go in and say, this is evidence of racism, even when there's no evidence of that whatsoever. Okay? And it's just a way for leftist radicals to bully companies and to impose a radical racial agenda and ideology that the left has had for a long time. Trump is coming out and saying, enough of the madness. Because that agenda actually contradicts a more fundamental agenda in the United States, which is equal protection under the law, which is our constitutional rights, which used to be freedom of association. We don't really have that anymore, but at least involves some degree of being able to operate without being presumed to be some kind of awful, hateful bigot who's intentionally harming people and excluding them from society. Really, really big thing, as Trump says, this is a key tool of this leftist movement that has sown so much discord into the country and really damaged our country. It's so undermined a bedrock principle of the country, and he just slips it in there. So it would be great if some of these executive orders could be codified into law. The Congress is having trouble doing that because it's A tight majority. But what we're seeing now with the Trump admin, because much of what they can do is just through executive action, we're seeing what the country could look like. Here's just a little test. Here's what we could have. And if we do want that to survive into the next administration, we need to codify these things in law. Meanwhile, the left is already preparing its presidential candidates. And this one, well, I warned you about this a week or two ago, but my prediction, my Nostradamus prediction appears to be correct. And, you know, this is after I made Democrat Senator Chris Van Hollen actually bring a meme that I had created to life when he went down and had that romantic lunch date with Kilmar Abrego Garcia. And, well, this would appear to be another one. You know, I hate to say I told you so. AOC just put out this political commercial. Tell me what you think she's doing here.

Ketanji Brown Jackson (20:12)

You know, Idaho, I am so touched being here. I'm a girl from the Bronx. To be welcomed here in this state, all of us together, seeing our common cause. This is what this country is all about. Don't let them trick us into thinking we are enemies. Don't let them trick us into thinking we can be separated into rural and urban, black and white and Latino. We are one. And Idaho, I know that looking around here, it can feel impossible for Republicans out here to be defeated. That's not true. It's simply not true. And from the waitress who is now speaking to you today from this podium, I can tell you impossible is nothing.

Michael Knowles (21:04)

She's running for president. In case you're the one person out there who didn't catch it, she's running for president. What is AOC doing in Idaho? Some people think she just wants to challenge Chuck Schumer or someone become a senator from New York. That's when you campaign in Albany. That's when you campaign in Buffalo. She's in Idaho, and she's showing these big crowds with all the presidential lighting. She's doing the thing that all the consultants for the presidential ads tell you to do, which is introduce yourself to the people. Opens up, hello, Idaho. I'm a girl from the Bronx. She's pretty famous, so people know that. Oh, no, you gotta introduce yourself. And then you have to bring people together. AOC is known for rather divisive rhetoric, class warfare, intense leftism, being dismissive and derogatory toward people on the right. But not in this ad. In this ad, she's just doing her own imitation of Barack Obama in 2006. There's no red America. There's no white America, Blue and purple and orange America or United States of America. This whole kind of nonsense routines of the most divisive, nasty figures in politics, pretending that they're all gonna come bring us together and sing Kumbaya. That's what she's doing. They're gonna divide us into white and Latino and black and white. But we're all united. We're united. When is AOC's the great uniter now? Yeah, because you have to be when you run for president. And that lady's running for president. And the Democrat party is so bereft of leadership, she might get the nomination. I have much more to say on this topic, but first you have to go to netsuite.comknowles what does the future hold for your business? Ask nine experts, you'll get 10 answers. Bull market, bear market. Inflation's up, inflation's down. Hey, has anyone invented a crystal ball? No. Until then, over 41,000 businesses have found a way to future proof their operations with NetSuite by Oracle, the number one cloud ERP. Imagine having your accounting, financial management, inventory and HR all seamlessly integrated into one fluid platform. That is NetSuite. With this unified business management suite, you're not just juggling numbers. You're wielding a powerful tool that gives you the visibility and control to make quick, informed decisions. It's like having a map in a maze of market uncertainties. Real time insights and forecasting. Check. It's like peering into the future with actionable data at your fingertips. Here's a game changer. You'll be closing your books in days, not weeks. That means less time drowning in paperwork, more time focusing on what matters, which is steering your business towards success. Time is money, honey. We are very proud to partner with NetSuite because they're leading the way in future proofing operations. Speaking of great opportunities, download the CFO's Guide to AI and Machine Learning at netsuite.com knowles. The guide is free to you at netsuite.com knowLes netsuite.com knowles Folks, the Yes or no game has sparked more honest conversations. It's created more heated debates than just about anything else at game night. And for one couple, it has helped shape their relationship. Quote when my husband and I first started dating, we went through the entire original pack and the conspiracy expansion pack. It really helped our relationship as it was an easy, non awkward way to get through some tough questions about our worldviews and get that out of the way. You could say I pulled him a bit more to the right. That is a real testimonial from a yes or no fan. It helped those people, and it will help to build your relationship, too. Will it help my relationship with my producer, Mr. Davies. Are you ready to play? I'm so ready. Okay, here we go. So you got the pack right here. This is really nice. Really beautiful. And then look at the. These are really. Look at these nice cards. Look at the colors. Did a good job on this. The prompt. You guess what? I think a partner should agree to a prenup. Nah, this is a little bit of an easy one. What do you think, though? I actually don't, because I'm trying to think of the extreme case. You're right about my guess. I am opposed to prenups just sort of on their face. And I assume you're against prenups generally, but what if it's some super duper rich guy who's already established he's a widower, he's got 10 kids and $50 million, and then he marries some woman? I'm trying to think. Is there any exception for you, would you say? I think you would say yes. In certain cases, a prenup is acceptable. Unless you're making Michael Knowles money now. I don't think there's any reason ever, ever to do that, really.

Ben Davies (25:57)

Ever.

Michael Knowles (25:57)

That's great. So you gotta be making, like, 30 grand a year in company bills from the Daily Wire, plus the promise of dental insurance down the road in order for you to really start considering a prenup. I think if you own a cigar company, you should have that off the table, but other than that. Yeah, that's fair. That's fair. That's all right. I got it. You knew me better than I knew you in this. That's fair. Okay. This is the biggest edition yet with over 125 bold new cards and prompts such as divorce does not exist. Happy wife, happy life. That one. Sorry. Yeah, that whole phrase just causes phlegm to come up in my throat. Contraception is gay, and other prompts order now@dailywire.com shop. That is dailywire.com shop. That's a lot of sh. Sounds right in a row slash shop. You know, New York, and you need New York. You know, you need unique New York. Sally sells seashells. Okay, that's enough. That's enough. Who's the leader of the Democrat party? Okay? You don't want it to be aoc. Who is it? Who is it? Even George Clooney. No, Less a Democrat than George Clooney, the Democrats top guy in Hollywood. The man who took out Joe Biden with a New York Times op ed that was probably ghost written by Barack Obama, if we're all being totally honest about it. George Clooney just sat down for an interview. He identified what is, in his mind the biggest problem for the Democrats. They don't have anybody that's as charismatic as him. He's charismatic. There's no taking that away from him. He's a television star. If you're a Democrat, we have to find some people to represent us better who have a sense of humor and who have a sense of purpose. Okay, for starters, the new hair is kind of weird because he had gray hair and now he has this jet black hair. However, people are making fun of him for it. I kind of like it because it's very old Hollywood. George Clooney has always been this kind of pale imitation of old Hollywood. He's one of the few guys who could credibly claim to be a movie star. He ain't John Wayne. He ain't Gary Cooper. Has he ever really opened a big movie? I don't know. He's been in a lot of movies. But nevertheless, I kind of like that he's doing this throwback to old Hollywood. These guys in the 70s who put, you know, just pen ink in their hair and, you know, there's something kind of charming about it. Okay, that's the first part. Second part, he says that Trump's big advantage over the Democrats is that he's charismatic. And he is charismatic. He's got a great personality. He's a TV star. Yes, of course. Biggest personality in the room. Of course. But Clooney is missing it here, and the Democrats miss this point at their own peril. So I don't really care if you're a Democrat listening, please don't tell the strategists the secret. Trump did not win because of his personality. Trump won because he offered different policies. That's it. Some people voted for Trump because of his personality. Some people did not vote for Trump because of his personality. The personality, I think, was essentially neutral. Trump offered a different political vision in 2016. First, a different political vision from the other Republicans. They all wanted more and more free trade, more and more globalism. Trump said, no, we're going to impose tariffs, trade restrictions. We're going to turn from globalism to nationalism. That was a different view all the Republicans ran on. Maybe they would talk about securing the border, but they basically said, you know, migration We're a country of immigrants. It's, you know, we gotta get a little tighter about the border. Trump comes down, he says, these migrants are rapists and murderers. That's different. That's a different kind of view. All the Republicans were still defending the Bush era of foreign policy. Bombing the Middle east, trying to build Madisonian democracies there. Trump said the Iraq war was stupid. You might even defend the Iraq war. I'm just pointing out Trump offered a different substantive policy vision. I remember Ann Coulter said this at the time. She said everyone thinks that people voted for Trump for his personality despite his policy, when actually it's the opposite. They voted for Trump for his policy despite, in some cases his personality. And the libs can't really face that because if they say, oh, it's just cuz he's more charismatic, then the libs don't have to change anything. Then the Democrats can just keep their party exactly as it is and they just need to get George Clooney to run. Who knows, Maybe George Clooney wants to run for president. He's obviously interested in politics. He's one of the most politically active people in Hollywood. Maybe that's why he dyed his hair. Maybe he's trying to set himself up for a 2028 run. But the Democrats will not be successful if that's the lesson they take. If what they think is, no, no, we're perfect the way we are. We just need to be a little, we need to smile more on camera or something. You're gonna lose. You have to deal with the reality that the popular vote went to the guy who ran on mass deportations, the popular vote went to the guy who ran on tariffs, the popular vote went to the guy who ran against the transgender insanity. You gotta deal with those issues. But as long as you're going down and canoodling Kilmar Abrego Garcia in El Salvador, stroking his hair and saying, it'll be okay, we'll be able to import you and the rest of MS.13 back into America real soon. You're gonna lose. The more you push and push on peddling LGBT insanity to 4 year olds, you're gonna lose. And I don't care how charismatic your politician is, I don't care how charismatic Trump is, you're gonna lose because of the issues, not because of the personality. Now, speaking of uncharismatic Democrats, Michelle Obama is back in the news. She is finally explaining some of her strange behavior earlier in the year. Michelle Obama has disappeared from public life until now. Now she wants some more attention. But Barack Obama showed up alone to Jimmy Carter's funeral. Michelle Obama didn't show up. Michelle Obama didn't show up to the inauguration. Right? Where has Michelle Obama been? This is very unusual for a former first lady not to show up to the handful of events that they are expected to show up to by virtue of their position. The funerals of past presidents and major events of state, such as the inauguration of a new president. Here's her explanation.

Michelle Obama (32:39)

My decision to skip the inauguration, you know, what people don't realize, or my decision to make choices at the beginning of this year that suited me were met with such ridicule and criticism while I'm here really trying to own my life and intentionally practice making the choice that was right for me. And it took everything in my power to not do the thing that was right or that was perceived as right, but do the thing that was right for me. That was a hard thing for me to do.

Michael Knowles (33:16)

It was hard for me to not do the right thing. It was really hard for me to do the wrong thing. And I should be applauded for that. I did it. I succeeded at doing the wrong thing. Aren't you proud of me? You see, because people thought I should do the thing that was good for everybody, where I took other people into consideration by virtue of, at the very least, all the things other people have done for me made me the first lady of the United States. And because I'm supposed to care about the common good, but I wanted to just be really, really selfish. And it was hard to be selfish, but I was selfish. Please give me a round of applause. That's what she's saying. And it's not just her. I'm not just singling out Michelle Obama. You hear every lib talk about this. Kim Kardashian said this. Kim Kardashian, mother of how many children? Wife A few times over, Kim Kardashian said, you know, in my 40s, I'm just going to really focus on me. Excuse me. No, that's not what you do in your 40s. That's not what you're supposed to do. You focus on you when you're a little baby and then you focus on you even when you're a kid and a teenager and probably even into your early 20s. Unfortunately, when you're 40 and you have a lot of responsibilities and you have people who depend on you, that's not you time when you're the first lady of the United States. Look, that comes with a lot of privilege. You get to live in the White House, you get a lot of money when you leave the White House. You get protection, you get adulation, you get cheering crowds. But there is a cost to that. You're supposed to serve the public. You're supposed to not always put your selfish interests first. But you hear this Obama, down to Kim Kardashian, down to your rebellious liberal cousin or sister. You know, I'm just gonna focus on me. It's so hard. You see this on Instagram. It's so hard. Sometimes the hardest thing to do is to put yourself first and to love yourself. And you need to heal yourself. And you just need to forget about other people. Don't do what's right for them. Do what's right for you. You, you, you Me, me, me all through the night I, me, mine I, me, mine I, me, mine Me, me, me, me, me. Well, a man wrapped up himself makes a small package indeed. This is. She is talking about selfishness. And the left broadly talks about selfishness as though it were a virtue, as though it were difficult. I'm selfish, too. I try not to be selfish, but I am selfish. I'm very selfish. It's very easy to be selfish. It's very hard to be charitable and to think of others. But that's what we have to do. One for our own good. Because if you become totally selfish, you'll destroy yourself. You'll make of yourself a God, and your God will disappoint you. But also because we're a political animal, we're a social creature. We're born into the context of community. Really, it's bad enough when your totally uneducated, rebellious liberal sister posts nonsense like this to Instagram. Here we have the former first lady of the United States saying exactly the same thing. But that's it. To me, this is the big distinction between the right and the left certainly today. And probably that's what it's always been. Contrary to what you've heard about the bleeding hearts, you know, caring, wonderful liberals, the liberals ultimately, ultimately are focused on the self, and the conservatives, ultimately, ultimately. I know we, you know, sometimes we like low taxes and all the rest of it, but when you really get down to it, we have a conception of the common good for the country that is truly about the common good and not just the amalgam of private interest in Pascal's Pensee. Blaise Pascal, one of the great geniuses of modernity, the best known for Pascal's Wager, where he says, you should believe in God because it's just a rational bet to make. But Pascal said our concupiscence as such that we try to manipulate our concupiscence, we try to manipulate our selfishness so that we create enough incentives that it will be good for everyone. And we confuse that with charity. But that's not really what charity is. The left and the right have both done that to some degree. We try to create systems that will channel our private interest toward helping others. You know, in many ways that's kind of what capitalism does. But that's not real charity. And at least for the right, we have a conception of charity that we often fail to live up to. Hypocrisy is the tribute, vice base to virtue. For the left, they've actually redefined charity as to be selfishness. Any wonder we are where we are, and any wonder that that political party which has been exposed so clearly in recent years, is finally being kicked to the fringes of politics? At the Daily Wire, we ask the hard questions. We go get the answers. That is why Ben just went to Ukraine, a nation under fire, for an exclusive sit down with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. And I really hope he handed him a receipt for all that money that we've given him over the years. From US Aid and corruption to, in fairness, Putin's ambitions and the battle for religious freedom. Nothing is off limits. This is not spin. This is clarity. In the Fog of War, Part 2 of the Ben Shapiro with President Zelenskyy interview drops today. All new episode of the Ben Shapiro show, streaming at 11am Eastern Time only on Daily Wire. Plus, my favorite comment yesterday is from slapmybase3825 who says, with everything we have seen in the NFL, from Ray Rice to Michael Vick, does this Shannon Sharpe story surprise anyone? It does not. It certainly I said yesterday, you know, it's not exactly man bites dog. Either way the story shakes out. NFL player abuses women or gold digger shakes down rich guy. Neither of that would neither of those would be surprising. However this turns out. The one difference, though, is in the case of like Michael Vick, for instance, the Pit Bulls never sent text messages explicitly asking for the supposed crime that was committed, which is actually a crime. That's what makes it so interesting. The Shannon Sharp case alleges abuse, which is very wrong and probably a crime. The girl who is alleging abuse, the plaintiff explicitly asked this man multiple times in lurid, graphic, disgusting ways to abuse her, and then he obliged. And then she's saying that was a crime and it is a crime. But that's why the story is so confounding to modern people for whom consent is the sole moral criterion. Finally. Finally, we've arrived at my favorite time of the week when I get to hear from you in the mailbag. Our mailbag is sponsored by PureTalk. Go to PureTalk today PureTalk.comKnowles Switch over and you will get a year of Daily Wire + for free with a qualifying plan. Take it away.

Ben Davies (40:33)

Hello, Mr. Knowles. I have a question about having more children. I know that you've got your kiddos and I would assume that you're planning on having some more in the future. Me and my wife have been married for almost eight years now and we have a young family with two little ones. Recently, my wife and I have discussed when we should have more children of our own. She's still a little reluctant because obviously the women are the ones that have to go through the child rearing and the birthing process. Of course, that's a difficult thing to go through physically. However, her main concerns are about the timing in terms of our older children, our growing up. She doesn't want to miss out on their upbringing as they are growing, growing up. We're a one income family. I work, she stays at home. So she gets to see them more than, you know, if we sent them to a daycare. However, she's a little concerned with splitting her attention three ways instead of two or four ways instead of two. How would you go about dissuading her concerns to make sure she's just as every bit on board and 100% as I am? I think some motivation from our favorite Daily Wire host would go a long way as well as some spiritual insight. Thanks for.

Michael Knowles (41:33)

Yeah, she's fine. The best gift you can give your kids is siblings. Forget about that. What? She thinks she's not gonna see the kids grow up, but as you say, she's a stay at home mother. She gets to see her kids more than just about anybody in modern society. Forget about that. Come on, she's fine. Have some more kids. That's what I would say. And I've seen it. I actually don't have siblings. I have step siblings who, you know, I'm like quite close with my stepbrother. And so, you know, I got a little taste of siblings, but I don't, I didn't have them growing up. So I saw, oddly enough, I kind of saw both sides of having siblings and not having siblings. And I've just seen with big families, it's just good, it's just, it's better And a friend of mine told me this quite clearly. He has a lot of kids. He says the best gift you can give your kids is siblings. If you had told me, Michael, we're in difficult circumstances. My wife has had two C sections or three C sections, I might say, okay, maybe on doctor's orders, it makes a little more sense to not have Irish twins. Back to back to back. Maybe you could space them out a tiny little bit or something. Okay, I understand that. Or if you said, michael, we're destitute, we don't have any money, my wife and I are both working and we just can't make ends meet, I'd say, okay, well, I understand there's some considerations here. Okay, maybe, whatever. But it sounds like you and your wife are in the perfect position to have a bunch of kids, which is the greatest kind of wealth that one can imagine in a household, especially today. So do it. Have more kids. Have more kids right now. Next one.

Unnamed Caller (43:09)

Hello, Michael. On Tuesday's show, you spoke of that journalist who was praising Luigi for killing that CEO. A few weeks ago in Madera, California, a man shot up a Walgreens killing a man. This might sound like it was a random shooting, but it wasn't. When arrested, the shooter admitted that he had a, quote, general disdain or grudge against pharmacies. In my opinion, this is obviously inspired by Luigi and all the glorification he was given by the left making others believe that it's an acceptable action to kill when you have a grudge against those in the medical field. This innocent man was. Wasn't a rich CEO. He was a cashier trying to provide for his family. And now his wife doesn't have a husband and his kids don't have a father. I wanted to hear what your opinion was as to whether you thought this was inspired by the Luigi case or just a coincidence. Thank you and God bless.

Michael Knowles (44:01)

It could be inspired by the Luigi case. I don't know for certain, but one issue I'll take with the way you presented it is you said, look, this guy behind the counter, he wasn't a rich CEO. Well, so what if he was? It doesn't make it any easier for the poor healthcare CEOs wife and kids that they just lost their husband and father because he was rich. I think he was also a self made guy. I don't even think. But even if he weren't a self made guy, it doesn't change the calculation. It's just always awful. So the real issue here is not that the left is glorifying. Luigi in particular. The real issue here is not even that there is a big turn against the pharmaceutical industry. The issue here is the moral thinking that intrinsically immoral actions can be justified for good ends. That's the problem. And that is thinking that has pervaded our society for hundreds of years at this point, and that even many people supposedly on the right will accept this kind of consequentialism that says, well, yeah, I know I was told thou shalt not commit murder, but what if the guy works for an industry that I really don't like? What if it'll be good in the long run? Maybe you gotta crack some eggs to make an omelet. That moral thinking is far more culpable than these random leftists who are simping over Luigi. I mean, they're culpable, too, and they need to shut up and go pray, fix themselves and be fixed. But that deeper consequentialism, that's a big problem because we're told now that the Ten Commandments are a joke. We mock the notion of the Ten Commandments. We mock the notion that actions can be intrinsically evil. We mock the notion that there is even a transcendent moral order. But we have to behave as though there is some kind of moral order, so the moral order becomes highly ideological and ultimately consequentialist. As long as we get to whatever vision we have for politics, even if it's utopian, then anything we do along the way can be justified, which is a real convenience for people who commit habitual sin. Next question.

Sam Alvey (46:22)

Mr. Michael Knowles, this is your friend and second favorite UFC fighter, Smiling Sam Aldi. I just had to let you know my next fight is in about three weeks, May 2nd. I'll be fighting for karate combat again, but this time in Dubai, and this time for my second world title. Now, of course, I want you back in my corner, but this is quite the trip and you're already away from your lovely, sweet little Lisa too much as is. What I would like to talk to you about, though, is a sponsorship. One of my fondest fighting memories is defending my title with you in my corner. Hands up and breathe. You remember that. And after getting my belt put back around my waist, lighting up a Mayflower cigar with you in my corner. Now, normally, I would charge thousands of dollars to be on a shirt and get full access to my social media, but for you and those delicious Mayflower cigars, I would do it for a cigar. After I get my hand raised, I will light that bad boy up in my corner. In your honor. What do you think, my friend?

Michael Knowles (47:20)

That sounds great, Sam. And now I actually wish that I could accompany you to Dubai because that sounds like a lot of fun, though. You're right. Sweet little Elisa would probably do a little karate combat on me if I took a trip to the Middle east right now. However, that's a pretty good deal, you know, some of you don't know. I did corner for Sam at karate combat, and we had a whole great video about it that, for whatever reason, we weren't able to release yet. Hopefully, we'll be able to get that video out. This was a while ago, but that's a pretty good deal. This is the art of the deal, Sam. Expect some cigars to be coming your way shortly. Especially in Dubai, where they let you smoke in a bunch of places. You can smoke in nightclubs and things like that. This is good stuff. I'm in. I'm in. Old knuckle nulls over here is in Sam. Next question.

Unnamed Caller (48:03)

Hi, Michael, it's the Schuckmeister. I was out to breakfast with a friend recently, and we were talking about the places where we get our news. I mentioned the show, obviously, and he said that he appreciates you, but that you failed a very basic intelligence test. And I'm thinking, okay, what's it gotta be? It's gotta be something super spicy, right? And he said, once upon a time, you called the Great Gatsby a boring book. So given that we recently passed the 100th anniversary of the publication and that I reread it for the first time since high school and loved it, I would like to know, why do you think the Great Gatsby is a boring book? Love the show. Thanks.

Michael Knowles (48:36)

Did I say that? I actually. I'm not trying to run away from my opinion. I just don't recall ever having said that. Because I like the Great Gatsby. It's not my favorite book ever. It's not the greatest book ever written, but I like the Great Gatsby a lot. I like Scott Fitzgerald a lot. Scott Fitzgerald famously said that Harvard men are sissies and Yale is November. Crisp and energetic. So I don't. I think I'm being unfairly accused here. Maybe I said it at some point. I mean, I guess it's boring compared to, I don't know, Crime and Punishment or something, or War and Peace, but I don't. I like the Great Gatsby. What are you accusing me of? What this is. I think I'm being falsely accused and I demand satisfaction today. Speaking of fake news, is fake. Headline Friday. The rest of the show continues now. You do not want to miss it. Become a member. Use code Noel's K wles at checkout for two months free on all annual plans.