Loading summary
Transcript1 lines
- [00:00]
Michael Knowles
Are you feeling more fulfilled now that you're back to work this Friday? No, I need a vacation. See the movie that critics are saying is an awesome look at that crowd pleasing, fist pumping all out brawl of a film. You're right about that. They're coming after our family. Go fix this. Oh my. Nobody 2, rated R only in theaters Friday. These are questions that take cultures thousands of years to answer. During Answer the Call, I take questions from people just like you about their problems, opportunities, challenges, or when they simply need advice. How do I balance all of this grief, responsibility? How do you repair this kind of damage? My daughter Michaela guides the conversations as we hopefully help people navigate their lives. Everyone has their own destiny. Everyone. Good news and bad news coming out of the courts. The bad news is liberal judges are continuing their 14 year jihad against the Catholic little sisters of the poor, whom they want to make pay for condoms and infanticide. But the good news is the Supreme Court might overturn so called gay marriage. I'm Michael Knowles. This is the Michael Knowles Show. Welcome back to the show. Speaking of gay stuff, the NFL is bringing in a bunch of male cheerleaders. Did they not get the memo? Do they still think it's 2020? Do they still think it's 2024? This is them and Jaguar. They think it's 2024. Guys, you got to catch up. We're in the age of Sydney Sweeney. We're in the age of good genes. We are. The LGBT stuff is done. We actually might possibly overrule gay marriage. But first, the bad news out of the courts. Actually, first, speaking of unjust political systems, if you watched the show yesterday, you're probably wondering why Hitler isn't behind me right now. I had a life size cardboard cutout of Hitler behind me. Really going for that young Zoomer audience base. I had a cutout of Hitler and then I had a cutout of Pope Pius XII, one of the great men of the 20th century who has been slandered and maligned as Hitler's pope. And it's a bunch of bs. The reason I had the cardboard cutouts is because we have a new show and you need to go watch it. You. I'm talking about you now. If you're watching this on Daily Wire, well, you've already got access to it. You should go watch it. It's called the Pope and the the Secret Vatican Files of World War II. But if you are among my beloved hoy polloi on YouTube, on X, on Spotify, on MySpace, on Zanga, on Usenet, whatever you're on. You gotta subscribe. Okay. You have to do this because I think it would be very, very funny if a docu series about Pope Pius XII beat the subscriber numbers that Walsh and Ben have gotten for all their projects and Jordan and all the rest of it. So I think it'd be really, we need forget about what is a woman. We need what is a Fuhrer, what is a Fuhrer? What is a Supreme Pontiff? You need to go watch the Pope and the the Secret Vatican files of World War II. Subscribe. Give me bragging rights over my colleagues. Thank you very. And you'll learn a lot of important stuff, too. Okay? Now, speaking of Catholics and people with religious vocations, the saga goes on. A federal court, these federal courts has just ruled against the Trump administration and ruled against a bunch of little sisters of the poor to make these Catholic sisters pay for condoms and birth control pills and infanticide and abortion. What's that about? Catholic news agency is reporting that a federal court, unclear which one, has ruled against the little sisters of the poor in this long running dispute over the government contraception, healthcare, mandates. That goes all the way back to Obamacare. This goes back to the Obama administration. This is a 14 year saga at this point. Obama passes the Affordable Care act, What was it, 2009? 2009, 2010, something like that. And as part of the Affordable Care act, they made the little sisters of the poor violate not only their moral conscience, violate really basic standards of morality. You're making Catholic religious sisters pay for condoms and abortion completely insane. So in 2017, the government kept going after them. They won at the Supreme Court in 2016. Then the government kept going after them in 2017. This is still going on. The Trump administration is defending them. It tells you everything about our opponents that the American left thinks that the chief enemy is a bunch of little sisters of the poor. Trump is on their side. Which side are you on? A lot of people are asking, well, why? Why does the left have to go this far? Can't we just lay off the little sisters of the poor? This looks so bad for them. Why? It seems like a minor issue. Why, of all the things to care about, forcing Catholic religious sisters to pay for condoms. That's so crazy. Why? Why? Because that's the whole point. Because that's the whole point. That's always been the whole point. Have you not gotten that by now? The left's raison d' etre is to destroy the church. That's how the left was founded. The term left comes from the French Revolution when it was the atheists who wanted to overthrow throne and altar who were sitting on the left side of the National Assembly. That's the whole point of the left. The whole point of the left is to destroy the church and the political order that the church holds up. A political order based on order, based on authority, based based on justice. The left wants to upend all of that because the left's project, the liberal project broadly, is about liberation, emancipation. No kings, no gods, only men. That's the point. So I know there are gonna be moderate Democrats or kind of confused Republicans who say, ah, it's so weird. Why do these random federal judges. Why does the Obama administration, the Biden administration, why do all these people go after this random Catholic religious group? Cause it's not random. Cause this is actually the whole point. Kill the baby bigot, kill the baby sister. That's the whole point. If they can make the little sisters of the poor forsake their God, they can do anything. That's the point. That's what it's about. So the Trump administration's gonna keep fighting, the little sisters are gonna keep fighting. God's gonna win in the end, and God's enemies are not gonn. But this fight is not going away. And the more I hear from these federal judges, the more I'm inclined to a kind of immigration comprehensive reform. You know, the libs always talk about that we need comprehensive immigration reform, okay? I generally oppose it. I generally think we just need to deport all the illegals and not really compromise on anything. But I'm here, here's my compromise. We will keep some of the Guatemalans, some of the Nicaraguans, some of the Venezuelans. We like the Cubans. We'll keep some of the Colombians. I don't know, we'll keep some of them, okay, Some of the illegals who are here. In exchange, we deport all of these federal judges. How's that sound? All of these federal judges. There's one or two out of 700 who decide that they're gonna gum up the works of the popularly elected Trump admin, Gum up the executive based on their misconception of their own importance and authority and their grave misunderstanding of justice. If you allow us libs, if you allow us to deport these federal judges to Nayib Bukele's torture chamber in El Salvador. No, he doesn't have those. He has a very nice jail. But we need him to build a torture chamber. And if we can deport the federal judges there, we can keep Some number of the Hispanics, the illegal, the legal Hispanics can stay the illegal Hispanics. Is that a fair trade? Are you on board for that? Let me know in the comments if you're on board for that. Now that's the annoying news out of the judiciary. There is good news out of the judiciary. You remember the libs a few years ago were saying, my goodness, if we overrule Roe v. Wade, the next step is we might overrule gay marriage. Remember that? And most conservatives were saying, no, that's ridiculous, that's not true. But some conservatives were saying, well, it's probably unlikely, but it would be good if it were true. We should do that. Yeah, obviously we need to overrule that. Some of them, including me, were saying that, well, we might, we might overrule the judicial decision that gave us so called gay marriage. Hold on one second. Go to balanceofnature.com, use promo code Knowles. Folks, you know something that I know. We all know we should be eating more fruits and vegetables, but most of us are not getting nearly enough variety. That is where balance of nature comes in. Because what you put in your body matters. Their whole health System gives you 47 different whole food ingredients. 16 fruits, 15 vegetables, 12 aromatic spices and 4 fibers. We're talking real ingredients. Wild blueberries, kale, turmeric and psyllium husk. When was the last time you just gnawed on a good psyllium husk? Probably not recently. No artificial additives, no sugar added. Just nature doing its job. What I love about balance of nature is the convenience. You take the fruits and veggie capsules with water, you chew them, you open em up and mix them into powder in your smoothies, yogurt. You sprinkle it on your oatmeal you grind it up, cut it with a credit card and snort it up. No, you shouldn't do that. That's not a good way to take it. But the other ways is a good way to do it. Fiber and spice blend also mixes great into drinks. I love it. And everyone around here loves balance of nature, especially Mr. Davies, who knows a thing or two about health. The guy's kind of a gigachad. These supplements are vegan, kosher certified, gluten free. If you check the label, you'll recognize every single ingredient. Right now go to balanceofnature.com, use promo code knowles for 35% off your first order as a preferred customer. Plus get a free bottle of Fiber and Spice balanceofnature.com promo code knowles, do you remember? This whole show is gonna be a little trip down memory lane to tell you about very current, urgent political issues, none of which started overnight, all of which seemed to have begun many, many years ago. There was a lady by the name of Kim Davis. You remember her? Kim Davis was a former Kentucky county clerk. And when activist judges and romantic poets in judicial robes decided to attempt to redefine marriage and find in the Constitution somewhere in invisible ink, a right to intimacy and an apparent indiscernibility of the sexes, that says that, yes, Bill and Steve have every bit as much a right to get married as Sally and Jeffrey. I don't know. I guess the obvious would be Adam and Eve and Adam and Steve. In any case, the judges decided that two fellows were the same thing as a man and a woman. They decided as a matter of judicial fiat that a man is a woman for all intents and purposes, and they tried to redefine marriage. Kim Davis said no, said, I'm not gonna violate my conscience, my understanding of morality, my religion, and also just common sense. I'm not gonna lie and issue marriage certificates to two fellas because that's not an ontological possibility. Nothing against the fellas. Men who are a little light in the loafers have given us plenty of fine things over the years. Broadway musicals, interior design. But they can't get married because that's not possible. Like saying, why can't we have a freezing cold fire? All the pedants who were scientific in the comments who were going to tell me, but actually to a certain degree, no, no, no. Why can't we have a north that is south? Why can't we have an up that is down? Why can't. You're trying to have something that cannot exist. That's why. And so Kim Davis is continuing her case. What is her case? She is asking the Supreme Court to consider her appeal of a $100,000 jury decision against her for emotional damages. Some jury found her guilty for emotional damages, $100,000, and she's appealing. $260,000 in legal expenses. All of this comes down to Obergefell and Kim Davis. Lawyers say the court's decision in Obergefell grounded in the erroneous fiction, unsubstantive due process, is such a decision, such a wrong decision, that the mistake must be corrected. Notice here, it doesn't say the court's decision in Obergefell grounded on the erroneous fiction of gay marriage. That is also erroneous. That is also fiction. That's not possible. But they're going deeper. They said, actually the legal reasoning that led you to the conclusion of gay marriage in Obergefell, namely this concept of substantive due process, that is a legal fiction. That is what you have to reconsider in our appeal. And this is really, really clever because in the Dobbs decision that overruled Roe v. Wade, most of the conservative judges said, this is a narrow decision. We don't want this to expand out to other judicial rulings that don't touch on the abortion question. We're just kind of narrowly deciding this to overrule Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey. That was most of the judges other than Clarence Thomas, who says, actually we do need to revisit a lot of other cases up to and including the gay marriage case Obergefell. Because the problem with Roe v. Wade, one of the many problems, but a very clear one, is the notion of substantive due process. That's how we got the abortion ruling in Roe, that's how we got a lot of dumb rulings, and that's how we got the gay marriage ruling. And so we actually do need to revisit substantive due process. This in principle could give Clarence Thomas his opportunity. Now, what is substantive due process? It's kind of hard to nail down, cuz it's gobbledygook. But the shortest explanation that I can come up with is substantive due process is a judicial trick to prevent people from passing their own laws. That's basically what substantive due process is. A people wants to pass reasonable laws, laws against infanticide, for instance. We say, you know, we think in our community you should not be able to murder babies. We think that would be bad. In other communities, maybe they do murder babies. But in our community, we don't want you to murder babies. And most people agree with that. And then their representatives vote for that in the legislature. And then in come the liberal judges and they say, no, no, no, that's a violation of substantive due process. You don't have the right even to consider passing a law about that because of this process, this procedure, which is not even a process or a procedure. This is one of the other ironies of substantive due process is it refers to process due process, like your right to a jury trial, for instance. But it subverts all of those rights. It says, no, no, no, just in the substance of the matter that you're discussing, it's a violation of rights. But there's no process. It's a process without a process. It's a process based purely on the whims and caprices of some activist judge, which is why Clarence Thomas comes out. He says, we need to revisit this whole thing. There's another irony with the libs embracing substantive due process, which gave us Griswold v. Connecticut, one of the two cases that found a supposed right to condoms in the Constitution. I don't know how many of you have, hopefully in fifth grade or something. You read the Constitution. Did you find a right to condoms anywhere in there? Even if you like condoms, even if you buy condoms? Did you find a right to condoms in the Constitution? No, you didn't? Me neither. Well, because of substantive due process, there's apparently a right to condoms in the Constitution. Did you find a right to murder little babies, Cute little innocent babies? Did you find that anywhere? No, you didn't? Well, substantive due processes. You did. Did you find a right to redefine the bedrock political institution to include a couple of fellas or a couple of ladies or three dudes and a billy goat or something? Did you find that in there? No. Well, substantive due process says that you did, so it's totally bogus. But the irony is the libs embracing this makes you wonder, okay, where does substantive due process come from? You know, the first case that employs substantive due process reasoning at the Supreme Court level is Dred Scott. When the libs are defending substantive due processes, say, well, this is actually. This is not just an innovation of the 20th century. This goes all the way back to the 19th century. You say. Oh, yeah. Where? It goes all the way back to the antebellum South. Oh, yeah, keep going. What case? Well, it goes all the way back to Dred Scott. Goes back to what? Say that. I couldn't hear you. Say that again. The assumption of due process goes to Dred Scott. Dred Scott. What did that case find? What did substantive due process give us in the Dred Scott case? Well, it said that blacks can't be citizens and Congress can't ban slavery in the territories, but nevermind that it was wrongly applied. Okay, so you're telling me this bogus legal reasoning that you're employing to defend all sorts of evil nonsense today began with a bunch of evil nonsense in the 19th century. And you don't know if it was bad then, but it's good now. It was wrong to be harsh to black people in Dred Scott, but it's good to murder babies and to redefine marriage. Okay, this is another one where I know, I've gone at length about this. There are gonna be people in the audience. People who are a little light in the loafers, maybe. People who are squishy on the right, people who are on the left. There are plenty of moderate liberals who watch this show, and they're gonna say, michael, come on. Why do you care about Obergefell? Why do you care about this gay marriage decision? You're not gonna overrule the gay marriage decision. First of all, that's what you all told me about Roe v. Wade for my whole life, and then we just overruled it. It was fine. But second of all, this is not a trivial issue. Just like the left has to go after the little sisters of the poor, the left has to make nuns pay for. They're not actually nuns, they're religious sisters, but most people use those terms synonymously. They have to make people with religious vocations pay for condoms and abortions. They have to do it. That's the end of their political activism. So, too, they have to redefine marriage. It's not a trivial issue. Marriage is the fundamental political unit. This is not just a matter of, oh, who cares what other people do in the privacy of their own homes? This is not a. Not the privacy of their own home. This is a public act with the basic public union articulated by the Supreme Court. If you can redefine marriage, if you can redefine the family, you can redefine all of society. If you can make the little sisters of the poor betray their God, you can do anything. If you can redefine the basic constituent piece of the entire political order, you can do anything politically. That's what this is about. Those are the stakes. And I don't know that the right understood those stakes back when Obergefell was decided. The left did. I don't think the right did. I think the right kind of does now. And I think Clarence Thomas certainly has the gullions to decide this case properly. Justice Alito, I'm confident, does. Do the others. I hope. I hope Barrett and Kavanaugh and Gorsuch and Roberts have the fortitude, the courage, the vision to state what is obviously true. What every culture has known for all of human history is that marriage involves a man and a woman. If we don't know that, if we no longer know that in our political life, we don't know anything. We don't know anything. They know that. Every even semi reasonable person knows that fact. One question that we have is, will the political order allow us? And I think, yes. Yeah, we'd been going way, way down the sexual revolution pipeline all the way to mutilating little kids and pretending they're the opposite sex. And then that stopped. That stopped about a year, year and a half ago. And then we started tugging on those questions. This was the point of my CPAC speech, that we need to eradicate transgenderism from public life entirely because it's either true or it's false. If it's true, then it's true for everyone. And trans kids. If it's false, well, now we need to rethink a lot of that sexual revolution. And perhaps most important among those issues is marriage. Now, speaking of gay things, the NFL not getting the message, adding male cheerleaders. Hold on one second. I have many pearls of wisdom to cast before you, but first you need to go to shopbeam.com knowles sometimes I've had trouble sleeping. Whether it's because I was up too late having stogies with the fellows, whether it's cause I'm on the road, whether it's because I'm not in my nice comfy bed at home. Well, happily for you and for me, we found Beam's Dream Powder. Beam is proudly founded in America, run by people who share what we believe in. Hard work, integrity and delivering results. It's a healthy nighttime blend packed with science backed ingredients shown to improve sleep so you can wake up refreshed and ready to take on the day. Unlike other sleep aids, there's no next day grogginess, just great restful sleep. Because Dream is made with a powerful blend of all natural ingredients. Reishi, magnesium, L theanine, apigenin, melatonin, lots of other things that are hard to pronounce but that are natural and delightful. Tastes fantastic. It's no wonder Beam has already logged 17 and a half million better nights of sleep for people who refuse to settle for mediocrity. Here's the deal. Beam is giving our listeners the ultimate patriot discount. Up to 40% off. Try their best selling Dream Powder. Get up to 40% off for a limited time. Shopbeam.com knowles use code knowles at checkout. That is shop B-E-A-M.com knowles use code knowbles for up to 40% off. Sleep better. Wake up stronger. Show up ready for your family, your work and your country. Because when you're well rested, you're unstoppable. And country needs more people like that. I'm more of a baseball guy, okay? I haven't even been watching baseball lately because the Yankees have not been not been at their peak performance. I'm not a football fan and so all I knew about football was football was really tough and macho, gladiatorial combat. And then, I don't know. Every time I check in on football, I see they're disrespecting the American flag. They're promoting weird racial stuff like Black Panther activism. They're promoting weird LGBT rainbow stuff. And now they don't even have the impressive, beautiful cheerleaders. Now they're adding a bunch of fellas. I'm not a football fan. I don't watch football. I watch baseball. And baseball doesn't have this. Baseball's made some errors in recent years. They got a little too into blm, but otherwise, generally, baseball stays kind of normal. Hockey stays kind of normal. Football, though, I think we have to conclude professional football. The NFL is one of the furthest left institutions in America. Isn't that bizarre? You wouldn't have thought that 10 years ago, but I just, look, I go down the list. They protest the American flag. They disrespect the national anthem, they promote the weird rainbow stuff. I guess a lot of sports leagues promote the rainbow stuff, but they hire these flamboyant, gender bending cheerleaders. It's not even male cheerleaders in big puffy sweaters or something. It's really flamboyant, effeminate male cheerleader. What is the audience for this? The NFL is chasing a left wing audience. They don't realize we don't do that anymore. That was seven months ago. The Jaguar TV commercial was seven months ago. Transing everybody was like, 18 months ago. We're in Sydney Sweeneyland. Now we're in American Eagle land. American Eagle shows a little bit of Sydney Sweeney's skin and just tells her to look beautiful and talk normal. And their market cap goes up. $200 million in one day, jumps 10% NFL. I don't know. They didn't get the message. I do not understand people tuning into the NFL at this point. They just don't get it. They just don't get it. Now, speaking of men in show business, this one hurts personally. Jimmy Kimmel, he got Italian citizenship. A lot of people I know are thinking about where they can get citizenship. I do have Italian. I did get Italian citizenship. You do? Oh, that's amazing. I do have that. And what's going on is as bad as you thought it was gonna be? Way worse. It's so much worse. It's just unbelievable. Like, I hate Trump. Oh, I hate Trump more. I hate him the most. I hate him even more. I hate him so much. I would betray my country for him. Yeah. I hate him so much. I've pledged allegiance to a foreign country. Yeah, Yeah. I hate dual citizenship. I hate it. I don't. I hate that Jimmy Kimmel is now a citizen of my ancestral homeland, one of my ancestral homelands, the. The patria. You know, that's unfortunate. But I'm not a citizen of Italy. I like Italy. I was just in Italy for a week. But I don't want to move to Italy. I don't want Italian citizenship. I hate dual citizenship because it's not possible. This is another one of these things. It's the gay marriage of geopolitics. It's not possible simultaneously to be loyal to two countries. I don't like it. I don't like it when the libs say, I need to get dual citizenship in case Trump becomes a tyrant. I don't like it when conservatives say, oh, isn't it cool? My great grandpa came from Sicily and now I'm an Italian citizen. I don't like that. There is one case that is frequently defended in public as a good application of dual citizenship, and it's for the sort of unique, ancient nomadic tribe the people set apart, namely the Jews. They say, well, it's good for Jews to have dual citizenship in Israel because Jews have been persecuted throughout history. In fact, this is a theme of a great show that you should go watch, which is called the Pope and the the Secret Vatican Files of World War II. You should go watch it now only on Daily Wire. Plus, if you're not a member, join. And when we get a lot of subscriptions for this show, then I can beat Ben's numbers and Matt's numbers for all the special extra content, and then I can feel really good about myself. So, anyway, the Pope and the Fuhrer, the Secret Vatican falls, World War II. The one exception I've heard to this. Well, because the Jews historically have been persecuted, and they are kind of a people set apart. And they've been nomadic for going on 2,000 years now. And because of that, it's okay for them to have dual citizenship. And I say, look, I kind of get it. I get that the Jews just have a unique historic experience. They just do. You would think that people who love the Jews, even the people who hate the Jews, would accept this, would understand this. They're just. They are people set apart. If you believe the Bible at all, for better or worse, they're set apart. And so I get the argument, but even there, I would say, no, maybe Israel should have some kind of secondary measure where if A country ever really turns on the Jews, Jews can easily acquire Israeli citizenship. I would get that. I would totally understand that. But even in that case, I would say dual citizenship doesn't make sense. You can't simultaneously be loyal to two countries. More broadly, you can't simultaneously be loyal to two things of the same kind. So you could be loyal to your religion and your country. You do that. You could be loyal to your favorite sports team in your country. You could be loyal to your sex and your favorite pizza place. You could be loyal to things that are not of the same kind. But you can't simultaneously be loyal to two baseball teams. You can't simultaneously be loyal to two countries. I hate this stuff. I want to, if not abolish dual citizenship altogether, greatly restrict it. I don't want the Jimmy Kimmel's of the world becoming Italians. Go to Italy then. Go to Italy. See how you like it. Look, I love Italy. It's very beautiful. I speak Italian. I have a lot of friends in Italy. I don't wanna live. You spend two weeks in Italy, you say, all right, I need to go back to places with like functioning market dynamics and that, have kids and stuff like that, you know, it's your country or it's not, you know, and in modernity we have this idea that we're all just kind of abstracted individual citizens of the world. We don't have any loyalty to anything. We don't have loyalty to our own families. That's just not. That's not true. This ties into the marriage issue also. We are primarily members of a family. We are not primarily individuals. You did not make yourself. Your parents played a direct role in making you. I'm not going to go. This is a family show. I'm not going to get more specific than that. But you didn't make yourself. And you have obligations to your parents and to your family and by extension to your country. Because patriotism is an extension of filial piety. Okay? Losing Jimmy Kimmel from America, that would not exactly constitute a brain drain, would it? I don't think so. But there is a brain drain happening. And as according to a new study just came out. This is from Bloomberg. Artificial intelligence is apparently making us dumber. I really like that picture that we. If you're only. If you're only listening to the show right now, you're not watching it. You should watch. First of all, you should subscribe to Daily Wire. But it's just like a picture of a goofy looking looking doctor. It's like the Most on the nose, goofy anyway. Okay, I like that. But that's what's happening. AI is making us dumber. Now. A lot of people are observing this. Like, in school, kids cannot be expected to do any schoolwork anymore because the computer can just do it for them, can write term papers for them in a minute, can do equations for them, solve problem sets, can do. I mean, it's an existential threat to education. But this is true also, apparently at the highest levels of the professions. So AI, we're told, is going to transform science for the better. We're all going to live forever because AI is going to figure out all the diseases that we even potentially have. So there was a study to see if this were true. Health care professionals used AI to see if they could better predict precancerous growths in the colon. Tough job. I don't know who would sign up for that, but they said, okay, we're using AI. We're going to see if the AI makes you better at detecting colon cancer. And it did. The AI improved the ability of the medical professionals to predict colon cancer. Then the study took the AI away and found that when you took the AI away, the healthcare professionals got 20% worse at predicting colon cancer worse than they were before they tried the experiment in the first place. The use of AI at any time made the doctors worse at their jobs. The use of AI made people dumber. What does this mean for you? How dumb are you going to get? How frequently do you use ChatGPT to write your emails? We'll get to that momentarily. First, it is summer's last stand. Days are getting shorter. Grills are getting cold. The traffic in Nashville is kicking up. Coffee shops are already trying to seasonally gaslight you with pumpkin spice. Not everything's so bad. Be first in line for everything. Coming to DailyWire before the fall chaos hits. Start with my series, the Pope and the the Secret Vatican Falls. For World War II. We crack open 80 years of Vatican secrets that the history books forgot to mention. This fall, the Isabel Brown show premieres. It's a new voice for a new generation of conservatives. Plus, the decade of the Daily Wire anniversary celebration celebrating 10 years of upsetting all the right people. You get all of it. Plus news from the most trusted voices in conservative media and unfiltered, uncensored opinions that you can't get anywhere else. Summer ends. Freedom does not get 40% off. A new annual Daily Wire plus membership right now. Join millions just like you@dailywireplus.com My favorite comment yesterday is from D Day 1914. This is a family show. I need custody of the eyes, said Michael Knowles, with Hitler right behind him. That's true. That's kind of an odd juxtaposition. If you want to see more Hitler though, or more Popeius xii, you need to watch the Pope and the the secret Vatican files of World War II, only available to Daily Wire plus members. Head on over there right now and use code Knowles and you'll get a discount or something. And I can beat Matt and Ben. And that's the most important thing, isn't it? AI is making us all dumber. This is not even that is not new. We have this idea, we're just so flattered with ourselves. In modernity we say, wow, we're so much smarter than everyone that came before us. We can do so much more. We're so special. We're so special. Not only is technological improvement not new or special or novel, the observation that technological improvement will make us dumber is also an ancient observation that we seem to have forgotten. I am reminded of Plato's work, the Phaedrus, in which Socrates is relating a story of King Thamus talking to the Egyptian God Thoth Duth in the text, Thoth, this God of the arts. Here's what he says, brief little passage. When the Egyptian God gives to man writing letters the ability to write down their ideas, he says, this discovery of yours will create forgetfulness in the learners souls because they will not use their memories. They will trust to the external written characters and not remember of themselves. The specific which you have discovered is an aid not to memory, but to reminiscence. It's not going to help their memory, it's going to hurt their memory, but it will allow them to better reminisce. Well, maybe it'll be good for nostalgia, but it won't be good for their actual memory. He goes on, you give your disciples not truth, but only the semblance of truth. They will be hearers of many things and will have learned nothing. They will appear to be omniscient and will generally know nothing. They will be tiresome company having the show of wisdom without the reality. Oh man. True millennia ago and just as true today. How many people I remember learning this in school, they said, you know, Michael, you kids, you're smarter than Aristotle and Plato. You're smarter than Socrates, you know so much more. You have the entire wealth of human knowledge available at your fingertips because of our cell phones or laptops. That's sort of true. That's dubious too. But let's say it's true for the sake of argument. Yeah, I have that all available at my fingertips, and I don't do anything with it. And I actually don't even know how to do anything with it. I don't even know how to start asking questions. I've noticed this not to sound like an old man yelling at the sky. I've noticed this even in my professional life. People don't know how to write anymore. Editors don't know how to write. People whose job it is to write don't know how to write. When I say they don't know how to write, I'm not saying they're not Hemingway. I'm saying they don't know the basics of the English language. And how could they? That decline in skill has been present for 20 years. How could they now? They never have to write anything. They have ChatGPT. It gives the show of wisdom. This is something that's so annoying. I hate this on X now. Whenever anyone makes a claim on X, people will just respond and say, grok, is this true? As if GROK were smart. As if Grok were really intelligent. These people are so gullible, they don't even understand that artificial intelligence is not intelligence. It's not that it's not impressive. It's not that it's not gonna go. It's literally not intelligence. That's not what intelligence is. And they don't know what intelligence is. They don't understand how to think about things. They don't know how to get down to the first principles that undergird certain debates. They don't realize that there's such a thing as eternal questions that exist in part to make you think, to exercise the very thing that differentiates you from some brute beast. Hey, Grok, is that true? Hey, Grok, is what Michael just said true? Apparently not. If your reflex is just ask Grok for everything, maybe there isn't much difference between you and a brute beast. Some of us. I hope there is a difference. It's not even that impressive. This is the other crazy story that no one. Very few people are talking about in AI. AI isn't even that impressive. It was very impressive when it first came out. Consider it now, though. Has anyone used ChatGPT5? ChatGPT5 just came out, and it's very underwhelming. I'm broadly impressed by ChatGPT. I will sometimes use it for the starting point for research. I don't use it for writing, but I'll use it as a starting point. For research that grok. All the rest of them are fine. Sometimes they make stuff up. You gotta triple check everything. But sometimes it pulls really interesting stuff. ChatGPT 2 to 3, it took seven months. ChatGPT 3 was ten times larger than ChatGPT 2. That's impressive. ChatGPT 3 to 4, that took three years. That didn't take seven months. That took three years. And that was a big advance too. ChatGPT 4 to 5, that took two and a half years. Almost the same amount of time. Very little improvement in some areas. It actually regressed in some areas. ChatGPT5 is worse than GPT4. It's underwhelming. The New Yorker has a piece out on this, referring to Apple, another big tech company that obviously one of the biggest companies in the world. Their researchers released a paper titled the Illusion of Thinking, which found that the state of the art large reasoning models showed performance collapsing to zero when the complexity of puzzles was extended beyond a modest threshold. That the large reasoning models, the most impressive models that we have in artificial intelligence, that their performance drops to zero when you just throw a few little obstacles in the works. 35% of the US stock market right now is tied up in the magnificent seven tech companies which are investing heavily in AI. Those tech companies, according to Ed Zitron, who's a tech writer, those tech companies have spent $560 billion on AI in the last 18 months. Over half a trillion dollars on AI in the last 18months. Revenues are $35 billion. And ChatGPT 5 is not really much better than ChatGPT 4. And maybe we've hit a limit. What all the AI people say is we're going to get to artificial general intelligence. We're going to get to AGI. It's going to be impossible to distinguish between a computer and a human. We're getting there. It's any day now. And I'm a little skeptical of that because most people don't even understand what intelligence is. Most people don't even understand what thinking is. These things, whatever you want to say about them, they're not intelligent for a basic reason. That intellect is immaterial. The brain is material. I'm just talking about you, not the computer. You, your brain is material. Your spinal cord is material. Your intellect is not material for a really basic reason. We can know this for a fact because the mind, the intellect deals in universals. Universals are immaterial. The mind would not be able to comprehend immaterial things if the mind itself were material. Like my eye, I Talked about this on the show about a month or two ago. This is really pertinent to the AI debate and AI development. Your eye is physical. It's material. What does the eye perceive? What does the eye deal in? One thing. Colors. Colors are material. Your mind deals in justice, beauty, delight, morality, good and bad. It deals in universals, it deals in ideas. It deals in things that are not material. So your intellect is immaterial. And. And the robots and the AI are. They're just stuff. They're just material. What this means to bring this all back down to Earth, there is a limit, and we might have hit the limit on how far AI is going to get. And we're probably going to suffer economic consequences for that. I don't want to call a stock market collapse or something like that. You cannot have a situation where 35% of the US stock market is tied up in these tech companies that are dumping all their money into AI and have AI hit its limit and not have that affect the market. And I think the reason all of that is happening is we just fundamentally misunderstand what AI is, what intelligence is, what thinking is, and even how technology works. And it comes from this liberal impulse that says that there are no limits on anything, that we're just all, we're on the brink of flying cars. Oh, we're just on the brink of living forever. Oh, we're on the brink of having perfect knowledge of everything at the same time. They always tell us this. They told us this when the Internet came out. Oh, we're on the brink of limitless knowledge. Five seconds later, you know what happened? Most of the Internet became porn. We say, oh, we're on the brink of limitless knowledge. What if we just turn it all into porn? Did that make us wiser or less wise? I think less wise. How about cars, like the flying cars? Cars are almost exactly the same as they were a hundred years ago, over 100 years ago. Automatic transmission. To me, automatic transmission was the last big, serious development in cars that really, really matters. I think 1921 was when the automatic transmission was invented. The 104 years it's been the same. We have cell phones. We invented the telephone a long time ago. Now we have cell phones. We're gonna have limitless communication, limitless productivity, limitless knowledge. You know what? Cell phones are mostly the parts that are not porn. Just brain rot. Just stupid, dumb brain rot that you spend 80% of your time on your phone just looking at dumb nonsense. It ain't it, man. There's limits And I love that as a conservative, as a Christian, someone who recognizes this is a fallen world. Utopia is not right around the corner. I'm not a radical. I'm not a revolutionary. Those exist on the left mostly, but a little bit on the right. And they're all bunch of dummies. Sorry. Pardon the near detraction, but it's so dumb. These people, they don't think right. They don't even know what thinking is. There are limits in a fallen world. I like that. I think that's good. I think in a fallen world, if there weren't limits, we would have hell on earth forever. So I don't, you know, I don't want that. Three cheers for limits. Here's to reality. Here's to a restoration of reality down to the basic political level, which, of course is marriage. We'll see how that goes. Okay, today is Theology Thursday. The rest of the show continues now. You do not want to miss it. You know what else you don't want to miss? The Pope and the the secret Vatican files of World War II. Become a member right now. Use code KNOWLESKWLAS. Check it for two months free on all annual plan.