B (3:41)

Thanks for having me.

A (3:42)

So Senator, I was at your place of work two days ago and it was very weird because there were many fewer people in the Capitol than there usually are. Traffic in D.C. was great. I could get from Reagan Airport to the Capitol and I in no time. I don't know, to me this government shutdown seemed pretty good. There's some polling that suggests that the shutdown really hasn't worked for Democrats in the way they thought that it would. And so as a result, there seems to be no impetus to actually reopen the government. I mean from the legislature. Where does it stand?

B (4:15)

You know, there's always the danger that government closes down and no one notices. And that's a little bit of why typically people will play it up. You know, you remember when one of the shutdowns, I think this was under Obama, he closed down the overlook on the side of the road to see Mount Rushmore. They actually sent people out there with pylons and tape and roped it off. It actually involved effort because no one is usually there. You just pull over and. And it's a viewpoint. But you know, I think that what hasn't been discussed enough of is the Democrats objections. People gloss over it. They say, well, they're objecting because they want these Obamacare subsidies. Well, someone should discuss what they are. It's if you make $225,000 a year, the Obamacare subsidy gives you $1,500. If you make $100,000 a year, you get $13,000. So the Democrats are refusing to go along with the spending level that they voted for last year. Essentially These are the Biden spending levels. They're refusing to vote again for them because unless they get subsidies for rich people. I mean, really. So food stamps are going to end, you know, in a couple of days, but they're doing this because they want to make sure somebody making $100,000 a year gets a $13,000 healthcare premium subsidy. So I think it's a ridiculous notion and ultimately the Democrats will have to come back to the table. Now, from my point of view, both the plans are terrible. I mean, the Republican plan will add 2 trillion in debt. The Democrat. The Democrat. The Democrat. The Democrat. I would prefer something that I've presented which is called the penny plan, which would actually balance the budget over about a five year period.

A (5:57)

Well, I love that point actually, because when I looked at the proposal, the continuing resolution and then looking ahead to some of the budgetary fights, I thought, this doesn't change all that much. I mean, the CR is literally, as you say, just giving Democrats the opportunity to go along with something they already voted for under Biden. So then what changes do they want? I suspect they honed in on this healthcare issue because it's one of the few issues that they still seem to be above water on. There was a poll came out, I forget who put it out about a month ago, showed Democrats are on the wrong side of basically every major political issue, unless other than women's issues, which are not high priority for most voters, really just means abortion, environmentalism, not a high priority for most voters, and healthcare. So they said, okay, we'll double down on healthcare. But when you dig into the reality of it, there was this problem of subsidizing healthcare for illegal aliens. And then as you point out, subsidies for rich people. So then my question is, if the shutdown isn't hurting Republicans and the Democrats maybe launched it as a Hail Mary, it's not really working for them either. What's going to actually reopen the government? Is it going to be the end of the SNAP program? Is it going to be flights being delayed or canceled? When do we think it'll reopen?

B (7:17)

I think it's going to happen soon because I think the Democrats, their whole history has been criticizing Republicans for shutting down the government. Now that they're on the side of not continuing their current spending levels, I think really they're beginning to break. I think that within a week the government will reopen again. And I think it happens quicker the more of the public understands that they're shutting it down in order to preserve subsidies for rich people. I Mean, this has not been discussed in the mainstream media. Very few people have dug into the details. We're not talking about health care for people making 25,000 or 5,000 or 5,000 or 5000 or we're talking about subsidies for people making $200,000 a year. It's completely insane. And I think if you polled the issue, are you with Democrats on health care? If it means they're closing the government down to preserve subsidies for people making $200,000 a year, it's a loser. But the only reason they're winning on is because nobody has any idea what they're actually advocating.

A (8:18)

It's a great point. Senator Paul. I think you've thrown it into stark relief that, you know, early on we said, look, we all agree this shutdown is about Democrats trying to make some move on healthcare. But then when you dig into the details, okay, how many Americans really wanna subsidize healthcare for illegal aliens? How many Americans think that rich people don't get enough? You know, we need to really focus on the. Won't somebody please think about the rich people? So a great point. I'm seeing some reporting now coming out of the Hill that says that Democrats are starting to get a little weak in the knee. Amazing. I never thought I'd see it in my lifetime that a government shutdown would not be blamed on Republicans and that the Democrats would have to buckle. Senator Paul, please enjoy the light traffic in D.C. while you still can. And thanks for everything you do.

B (9:05)

Thank you.

A (9:06)

Okay, folks, speaking of policy, I wanna tell you about Policygenius. Go to policygenius.com knowles Rising costs have left many Americans overestimating expenses across the board. While people often assume certain products and services cost far more than they actually do, this tendency is particularly evident when it comes to life insurance, where 72% of Americans overestimate the actual cost of coverage. PolicyGenius makes finding and buying life insurance fast, easy and surprisingly affordable. If something happens to you, your loved ones have a financial safety net. See if PolicyGenius can help you find 20 year life insurance policies starting at just $276 a year for a million dollars in coverage. Do not leave your family in the lurch. Don't even have that lingering anxiety that you're probably not even aware of most of the time. What happens? Oh, I hope just take care of it for a very low price. Be responsible. Doesn't have to be complicated. Okay. Policygenius proves that with just a few clicks, you can compare quotes from top insurers. See all your Options laid out clearly. No confusing jargon or guesswork. Secure your family's future with Policygenius. Go to policygenius.com knowles k n o w l e s to compare life insurance quotes from top companies. See how much you can save. That is policygenius.com knowles folks, Christmas pre orders for the custom Mayflower smoking jacket are now live. Now you've asked me, we've done this. We run it now twice. I think we do a limited run of made to measure totally for you. Beautiful bemberg lining. Unbelievable. Three fabric that comes from Como, Italy. Top designers use this mill. Lovely real horn here on the functional buttons. It's real nice. And you will never, you will never see a real smoking jacket even off the rack, not custom in any way. You will never see it for probably even half of or even for double this price. It's a great deal. I know people have been upset when it's sold out. If you want it, order it now. We are doing one more limited run before Christmas. It is your last chance to secure yours for a while. It is as they have always been, made with shepherd's menswear. Absolutely magnificent. Italian milled velvet, all bells and whistles. And I like this too. A nice big fat lapel because it's not only good looking but it's also very functional. So anyway, head on over right now. Mayflower cigars.com you must be 21 years old or older to order. Some exclusions apply. I talked about it a little bit with Senator Paul. Even CNN has to admit this shutdown is not working for Democrats starting with Republicans. How is the shutdown seemed to have affected their political standing. Yeah.

C (12:03)

You might think given that the Republicans are in charge of both the House and the Senate that a government shutdown might actually hurt hurt the Republican brand. But in fact it hasn't if anything helped a little bit. Take a look here. The shift in net popularity versus pre shutdown among the when we're looking at the Republican Party overall that brand actually up two points. That's within the margin of error but clearly it hasn't dropped come over this side of screen. Look at the net approval ratings for Republicans in Congress. It's actually up 5 points since pre shutdown. So what we're seeing here is the Republican brand in Congress has actually improved somewhat compared to where we were pre shutdown despite the fact that Republicans control and that's the math that John Thune and Mike Johnson are looking at is hey, why should we give an electorally speaking when our brand has actually Improved a little bit.

A (12:48)

This is not even just with the Republican base. Cuz you could say, okay, well the reason why the popularity has gone up over all three points is because you know, the Republican base just really, really loves this. So even if the Democrats and independents hate it, you know, it just balances out and actually adds a few points anyway. And no, they're up eight points even with independents. And the reason for this is Democrats thought that this was all politics as usual and nothing's changed in the last five or 10 years. And so the Republicans are always gonna be blamed for a shutdown even if it's the Democrats who shut it down. And I guess the point, and we'll really get to this with JD Vance and Erica Kirk at Ole Miss last night. The point is no politics has changed radically, seismically. And Democrats are playing the old songbook. It's not working anymore, doesn't work on the audience. So Democrats shut the government down because nothing was working for them and they were on the wrong side of virtually every 8020 issue. They thought they had a chance to push this on healthcare using a tactic that always worked for them, that always redounded to the detriment of Republicans and none of that worked. None of that worked. And now you're seeing, Senator Paul thinks it'll be within a week. You are seeing the Democrats even have to backtrack on that. In other words, we are in uncharted waters. Now the CNN pollster, I don't know, I gotta start watching CNN when they talk about the polls, the hard data that are a little more difficult to manipulate than the opinion programming. All the news is great for Republicans, including something we talked about yesterday. I, I said yesterday that Bill Gates has come out. He's one of the greatest climate alarmists in the country, in the world. And he's come out and said actually climate change isn't going to kill us all. And I said don't be fooled. This is not Bill Gates having some change of heart that just he followed the science and the science led him on. This is a realization that climate change as a political issue is not working anymore because they promised the apocalypse. The apocalypse didn't come. Now they have to recalibrate. They're following political metrics, not scientific metrics. CNN backing that up because right now when you hear the Democrats tune changing on climate change, it's going to be following public opinion.

C (15:04)

A lot of people will agree with Bill Gates that maybe this wouldn't be the end of humanity. And I think we've been talking about Climate change now for decades upon decades upon decades. And the worry in terms of climate change. Climate change, simply put, hasn't shifted. It has not reached the majority of Americans. What are we talking about? Greatly worried about climate change. You go all the way back to 1989, it was 35%. 2000, 40%. 2020, 46%. And in 2025, look at that, it's 40%. The same number as we had 25 years ago back in 2000, and then only just five points higher than we had back in 1989. Really, we've just seen consistency on this issue. The bottom line is that the climate change message, that folks who of course believe that climate change is real and is quite worrisome, simply put, has not really worked with the American people.

A (15:51)

So, greatly worried. You say greatly worried. I mean, so people say they're greatly worried. 40%, but how worried, really, is it the biggest thing they're worried about?

C (16:00)

Yeah, it is not anywhere close to being the biggest thing that people are worried about. What are we talking about here? Well, why don't we just talk about top issue facing the US Climate change? Well, I got some numbers for you on the screen right here.

A (16:13)

These two guys are great. It almost is like an onion or a Babylon Bee sketch. Well, things look really, really terrible for Democrats, but how terrible are they? They're totally freaking terrible, man. It just couldn't possibly be any worse. It's good. And why? Why? Because it used to be the case. Back in the heyday of Wokeism, you had 3% of people say, oh, climate change is really a top priority, and now it's down to 2%. But you saw those numbers remain pretty stable going back to 1989. And the libs have been pushing the climate change stuff since the 70s. The numbers don't really change. It got up in the 2000s. That was kind of peak climate change hysteria. And then it just dropped back down again, and it's always 35 to 45% somewhere in there. The one place I would disagree with those CNN pollsters, though, is they say clearly the climate change messaging hasn't worked. And I don't think that's fair to say because you did have the numbers increase into the 2000s and 2000 teens. I remember it. I was there. I remember when people sincerely believed that the Sun Monster was gonna kill us all. I remember when people would not have children. They would decide not to have children because they didn't want to bring them into a world of climate apocalypse. I remember when Greta Thunberg Dropped out of school to sail a boat around the ocean because she thought that was going to forestall the sun monster. It was a kind of inverse rain dance or something. I remember that. I was there. The messaging did work. It stopped working because the climate apocalypse never materialized. It was not a rhetorical problem. It was not a communications problem. It was a fact problem. It was a science problem. The thing they said wasn't true. So that's. So don't let them get away with this. Don't let him say, we just need to find better ways to message around climate change. No, no, no. You lied. In some cases, you were honestly mistaken. I guess some of you were just dupes, but in some cases, you lied because climate change was always primarily a political issue, not some kind of scientific issue. And one of the pieces of evidence for that is that it was always so perfectly calculated that disaster was just on the horizon. You could see it, you could get worried, you could be manip. It wasn't too far into the future that you put it off for another day, and it generally wasn't so close that there was nothing to do and we could just live it up. It was always perfectly politically calibrated. You're in the midst of a political recalibration. It's not because the Democrats just need to figure out a better way to get their message out there. It's that people don't want what they're selling. It's the Smuckers Uncrustables podcast with your host, Uncrustables.

C (18:58)

Okay, Today's guest is rough around the edges.

A (19:01)

Please welcome crust. Thanks for having me. Today's topic. He's round with soft, pillowy bread. Hey. Filled with delicious PB and J. Are you talking about yourself? And you can take them anywhere. Why'd you invite. And we are out of time. Are you really cutting me off? Uncrustables are the best part of the sandwich. Sorry. Crust. Now you're seeing a shift on the right as well. This was just magnificently embodied Last Night by J.D. vance and Erica Kirk at the Turning Point Stop in Ole Miss. Really, really pleased to see the Vice President joining Charlie's widow here, because I think J.D. vance is probably the one figure on the right with the stature and the temperament and the platform to really keep this whole coalition together, which was something that Charlie singularly was able to do. And so I'm really pleased to see him taking time out of his busy schedule to do this. He also did the Q and A at these kinds of events. You Go. You give a speech or you have a conversation. Charlie and I was supposed to be 12 days after he was murdered. We were going to do a little conversation at a campus, back and forth. But then of course, the key to these events is the Q and A. And for someone like Charlie, a civil debater and an activist, for a communicator to go out there and do the Q and A is one thing. For the sitting vice president to just open himself up to anybody, come with any of your questions, any of your comments, any of your complaints is politically a very courageous thing to do. He did not disappoint in his answers right off the top. Very fitting for the occasion and for our moment in history. He was asked about God in the public square.

D (20:52)

Do not, you do not have to completely kick God out of the public square, which is what we've done in modern America. It's not what the founders wanted. It's not good for the United States of America. And anybody who takes tells you it's.

A (21:05)

Required by the Constitution is lying to you 100% correct. JD Vance is a graduate of what I think is still considered the most prestigious law school in the country, even though it produces a lot of crazy people. His whole answer was even better. We don't have time to get to it. But he explained how when the First Amendment was ratified, it does not establish a firm separation of church and state. It says that there will be no religious establishment at the federal level because there were state establishments, there were churches established at the state level. I mean this is the kind of stuff that, that serious conservatives, avant garde conservatives and so more classical conservatives, those seem like opposites, but they actually kind of go together. Cuz everything that was old is new again. We've been talking about this stuff for years. We have basically never seen this articulated by a national politician at the level of a J.D. vance. And he articulates it perfectly. Okay, this is really, really exciting stuff. And he doesn't just stop with Christianity there. He makes a point about liberalism that is so precise and so necessary for understanding how to combat it.

E (22:14)

I am thrilled to hear you articulate Christian values on a stage like this and to remind us that things we take for granted and things we value so much have a Christian origin. So thank you for that. I really mean that.

D (22:26)

However, so much of liberalism, by the way, so much of the far left is a sort of, if you really pay attention to it, it's a kind of perverted version of Christianity. Like there's nothing wrong, of course, with focusing on People who are disenfranchised, for example, that's the focus of liberalism. But if you completely separate it from any religious duty, any civic virtue, then that can actually become, for example, an inducement to lawlessness.

A (22:56)

Yes, yes. Thank you, thank you, thank you. Love it. When was the last time you heard a national politician at this level speaking in this way? In a way that, by the way, is very gracious to the left. Cause what JD Is saying here is not just those liberals are crazy, aren't they? Or those liberals are dumb and we all want the same ends, but we have different ways of getting there or something. Or ah, look at the wacky left. No, he's saying the left is seeking a kind of a good. It's just that the good is perverse because it's this kind of, er, version of the true religion. It's actually tracing the genealogy of liberalism. He's saying it comes from Christendom. And in that way he's tracing the genealogy of our civilization. Says our civilization is Christendom, okay? And the true faith is Christianity and the moral order derives from the Christian religion because it's all true. And then liberalism deviates from that. And that's true. I mean, just as a matter of history, the Enlightenment project was a way to preserve Christendom. It was supposed to be a way to preserve Christendom without all that pesky Christianity, to establish a moral order without necessarily having any firm convictions. And it's because the Enlightenment project follows the wars of religion that occurred after the 16th century. And it just tried to create this secular, rational basis for things that didn't work. And JD Is saying that. He's just saying, look, the liberal ideology, as well as its descendant ideologies like communism or fascism, all these things, they're just perversions of the truth because they go wrong in the first principles. And so people might earnestly be seeking the good with these ideologies. It's just not gonna work. Cause they're getting the first things wrong. That is so accurate. It actually advances the conversation, it moves the ball down the field and it regrounds our civilization where it has to be. And the only thing that really works, which is the truth at all levels, not just economic and social and cultural, but even religious first principles. Cardinal Manning all human conflict ultimately is theological. Now, speaking of religion, I want to tell you about Ave Maria mutual funds. Go to Ave Mariafunds.com Michael M I C H A E L. You should not have to compromise your values when it comes to investing. Why would you put your money into companies that go against what you believe in. That is one of the many reasons that I love Ave Marie Mutual Funds, why I am proud to serve on their board. They've been around since 2001, founded by George Schwartz, and today they manage nearly $4 billion in assets with more than 100,000 shareholders. What sets them apart is simple. They refuse to invest in companies tied to abortion, pornography, embryonic stem cell research, or those tied to Planned Parenthood. Whether you are saving for retirement, your kid's education, or you just want to grow your wealth responsibly, Ave Maria Mutual Funds offers a range of options so you do not have to compromise. Learn more today@avemariafunds.com Michael M I C H A E L that is avemariafunds.com Michael I strongly recommend you go check them out. I'm a big, big fan of everything Ave Maria. All mutual funds are subject to market risk, including possible loss of principle risk. Request a prospectus which includes investment objectives, risks, fees, charges and expenses and other information that you should read and consider carefully before investing. The prospectus can be obtained by calling 1-866-283-6274 or it can be viewed at www.avemariafunds.com. ave Maria Mutual funds are distributed by Ultimas Fund Distributors, llc. Folks, I want to hear your mellifluous voices, but in order to do so you have to go to dailywire.com then you go to the Watch page. Then you go to the Michael Knowles show page. This should be bookmarked. This should be your homepage. Anyway. Then you click on Submit a mailbag question and then you can either type it out if you're a little more digital digital with your fingers or you can record it. Please keep it to 30 seconds. I implore you, I beg you. I'd love to listen to your memoir, your audiobook memoir, but we don't have time on the show, so certainly under a minute. Keep it to 30 seconds, attach that file and then I'll hear your beautiful voices on Friday. Okay? Moving on from the religious questions JD is asked about immigration, he offers a major upending of GOP orthodoxy.

E (27:16)

My question to you is what is your view on legal immigration? Personally, I have a girlfriend who's studying in America off a visa. Our hope is eventually getting a green card. So what is your view on legal immigration? Should we reduce it? Should we Also, what is your plan for a merit based system?

D (27:32)

Yes, sir.

C (27:33)

Well, I appreciate the question.

D (27:34)

And look, my honest view is that Right now, America, thanks in part to the Biden border invasion, but also thanks in part to a lot of bad immigration policy right now, we have let in too many immigrants into the United States of America. That is just a fundamental reality now. Now, look, legal immigration is. Is complicated because we let in about a million legal immigrants into the United States of America every single year. And I think the evidence is pretty clear that a lot of those immigrants are actually undercutting the wages of American workers.

A (28:07)

For most of my life, there have been two positions you can have on immigration. The Democrat position, especially recently, was legal immigration is good and illegal immigration is good too. The Republican position has been legal immigration is good, illegal immigration is bad. What JD Vance is saying here is we've just taken in too many immigrants. The movement of people into the United States over the last 60 years is the largest movement of people in recorded history. And it's creating social problems. And there are problems of assimilation and social solidarity is breaking down. There are economic problems, problems to workers, and so we have too many right now. This is. I say it's an upending of GOP orthodoxy. It's really a return to classical conservative orthodoxy. Not just conservative in the American context. Conservative going all the way back to Aristotle. Yeah, you can't just flood your country with foreigners. That's gonna create problems. And even the way JD Is talking about it, he doesn't say immigration is always terrible. We need to completely close the border and we need to isolate. He's not saying that. He's saying, yeah, right now, we've just taken in too many. Which means he recognizes prudence as the paramount political virtue. He's recognizing that at some periods you might call for some immigration. At other periods, you're gonna wanna restrict immigration. And he's calling for a reduction in immigration overall. Not just illegal, but legal too. This is precisely my position. This is precisely the correct position. I think this is certainly where Gen Z conservatives are. I think this is where the GOP base is and has been for. For a very long time, even though the politicians haven't reflected it. Brilliant answer from JD I'll just get to one or two more. I'll keep them pretty quick. Here's one. Here is an answer on the question of values. How are we supposed to think about values in America? That to me, I want this answer to be condensed into a liquid form and injected straight into my veins.

D (30:05)

I actually, I think the premise of your question, I don't totally share it because I don't think perfect neutrality is. Is possible. What is it? You talk about History. Was Christopher Columbus a great explorer, or was he a guy who committed genocide against the native populations? These debates, I'm happy to have them. But I reject the idea that there are truly neutral debates. Anybody who's telling you their view is neutral likely has an agenda to sell you. And I'm at least honest about the fact that I think the Christian foundation, this country, is a good thing.

A (30:39)

Straight into my veins. Straight. This is it. This is abolished term limits. Thank you. Thank you. It's obviously true. Serious political thinkers have known this since time immemorial. But there is a lie that goes along with liberalism, that says that liberalism is neutral. It's just neutral. That says that, for instance, secularism, atheism in public is just neutral. This view would have been abhorrent to our founding Fathers, the framers of our Constitution, even the early liberals like John Locke and John Milton. But liberalism pretends anyway. And in some ways, this is a consequence of liberal political philosophy. But they say, oh, it's just neutral. Look, I don't have a partisan view. I don't have invective. I don't have a polemical view. No, no, no. I'm just. My view is the neutral view. But there is no neutral view, because all views come from some premises, axioms, first principles. And what the liberals try to do with their neutral nonsense is they try to smuggle in their false premises, their false premise that, for instance, we can't know the difference between a man and a woman. I mean, that's what they say. Look, our view on transgender, ours is the neutral view. We're not picking sides. Well, you are. By not allowing people to believe what humans have always believed everywhere and what their own eyes tell them about the difference between a man and a woman, that is not neutral. You're forcing a certain view on people. By forcing Christianity to the public square, by arresting pro lifers praying at an abortion clinic, by persecuting nuns, as the Obama Biden administration did. These are not neutral things. By exalting all sorts of perverse ideology, that's not neutral. And JD Says, look, here are my premises. Here's where I'm coming from. I'm basically coming from the same place that the wise statesmen in our civilization have always come from. But, yeah, I think there's a Christian religious foundation. Those other guys, they're not gonna tell you where they're coming from. They pretend it's neutral, but where they're coming from is much more dubious. Okay, last bit on how we Fight the left.

D (32:51)

Okay, so, so here's. Here's something that I want conservatives, I want every conservative to remember. It's an important part of my entire political philosophy, is we cannot be afraid to do something because the left might do it in the future. The left is already going to do it, regardless of whether we do it.

A (33:10)

There it is. There it is. The takeover is complete of the GOP by the conservatives from the squishes. I love this because for years, and I find it nauseating, the squishes have said, well, we can't. We can't wield political power. Because if we wield political power, can you imagine in the future when the Democrats get the power back, when they might use power on us? This after the Democrats have justified the murder of our president, have tried to imprison him four times, kick him off the ballot, imprisoned relatively peaceful protesters, infiltrated Catholic churches under the Biden doj, let their violent criminals off the hook, in some cases encourage political violence against us. This after this, we say, but we can't justly wield the law because then the Democrats in the future might unjustly wield the law, which they're already doing. Vance saying, we gotta have courage and we gotta be able to do things and not just be cowards and squishes and exalt procedural norms, dubious procedural norms at that, over substantive goods. Not gonna do it anymore. This is really good stuff. As you know, I'm an admirer of the Vice President. He's impressed me before. Never more so than last night at Ole Miss. And he did it to honor his very close friend Charlie on stage with Charlie's widow at this major event for the preeminent young conservative organization in American politics. It's just real encouraging. I guess that's how I would have to put it. It's just real, real encouraging. This is a guy who knows what time it is, and he actually has the position and the stature to do something about it. Great stuff. Now, meanwhile, the left, which has just tried to tell me on Capitol Hill that they don't support political violence, they don't condone any of that. A left wing podcaster has gone viral for her hideous comments celebrating the murder of Charlie. Since the daily wire launch 10 years ago, everything we've accomplished has been because of our members. Every fight we've taken on, every piece of truth we've exposed, all of it made possible by their support. Today we are releasing Hiding in Plain Sight, a documentary so critical, we're making it free for everyone on Dailywire because This is a threat every parent needs to understand. Hiding in plain sight is a warning to all of us about the online dangers kids are trying to navigate. Dangers that did not exist when we were growing up and that many parents did not even realize are out there. Well, we all like to believe the bad things could never reach our families. Truth is, digital sex trafficking and sextortion scams are happening right now in our communities and potentially inside our homes again. The only reason we can make this film free for everyone is is because of our Daily Wire plus members. So go to DailyWire.com and watch it for free right now. Share it, sit down with your family, your school, your kids and talk about it. If you're not a member yet, join us. Step into the fight and help us keep delivering this type of crucial content to the world. My favorite comment Yesterday is from Maggies 10. This refers to Zoran Mamdani's aunt Gate. Remember he said his aunt after 911 was the real victim because she felt, felt nervous wearing a hijab on the subway. And I found out that actually she didn't wear a hijab and she didn't live in New York. And he said, oh well, no, it's actually my dad's cousin, my aunt. Well anyway, this comment says maybe his cousin really is his aunt. You aren't accounting for intermarriage. That's a good point. Certain cultures have very, very high rates of cousin marriage. That's true, that's true. Certain cultures do. Not our culture. But other cultures do. You see? 30%, 40%, maybe higher. So anyway, I don't know, maybe Zoran can clarify. Okay. After Charlie was murdered, the left minimized, excused, and in some cases celebrated at all levels. At all levels, from the fringe people to the mainstream people, from the normies to the famous people. At all levels. You saw this. And then they tried to deny it. And we saw this on Capitol Hill. Cuz there was this Senate hearing on political violence that half the Democrats didn't even show up to. And the ones who did show up shed crocodile tears and they said we all condemn political violence. We would never encourage this sort of thing. As they say this, a left wing podcaster, Jennifer Welch goes viral for saying this.

F (37:44)

Horrible.

A (37:44)

Charlie Kirk is horrible. Yes. I'm glad he's not here. You're glad he's dead? Yes. He was horrible. On the campuses, the college campuses. You know what? I do the exact same thing. Would you be glad if I would die? Maybe I'd have to think about it. And she laughs. Her Friend just said she'd be happy if I died. Another one.

G (38:14)

So listen up, Democratic establishment. You can either jump on board with this, or we're coming after you in the same way that we come after maga. That woman out in somewhere middle America saying, charlie Kirk, he was a racist. He was a piece of. There are so many more of us than there are of them.

A (38:36)

I'm inclined to believe her. I'm inclined to believe her because of what I saw from the prominent streamers, from what I saw from the legacy news outlets, from what I saw as Charlie was being killed. You had a Democrat analyst on MSNBC blaming him for it, to say nothing of the normies on Facebook. I think this is right. I think there are a lot more people in left wing activism who were minimizing and celebrating Charlie's murder than there were people condemning political violence. And lest I be accused of pointing to some random woman, because I didn't know really who that woman was. Jennifer Welch. Oh, you're just picking some random kook. She doesn't know anything. She just was seeking attention. She's just going viral for. Well, here's a little clip of Jennifer Welch sitting down with the Democratic leader from the House of Representatives, Hakeem Jeffries.

G (39:28)

Tell your coworkers to come on, too. We've had a lot of them on, and we really like them as well.

A (39:32)

Well, dude, thank you for what you both do.

D (39:34)

Really appreciate it.

A (39:35)

Look forward to staying in close touch. And we're in this fight until we win this fight and end this national nightmare and get America back on track. Yeah, thank you. Thank you for what you both do. I. The most prominent Democrat in the country, just about. I would like to thank you. Oh, that's so nice of you, Hakeem, because we've had a bunch of your colleagues on, too. Yeah, it's not a minor figure, you know, relative to Hakeem Jeffries, maybe. But this is. This is a real person who really represents a lot of Democrats, as we've seen from survey after survey, as we've seen from the comments of the Democrats after Charlie's murder, as we saw two days ago on Capitol Hill when the Democrats, by and large, boycotted a Senate hearing on political violence. That's it. And so what are we supposed to do? We're supposed to sit back and be afraid of wielding political power in a just way because, by golly, the Democrats, we might make the Democrats angry. They're angry. They don't like us. So there are two things we can do. We can either Lash out in a vigilante sort of way, which I would strongly discourage because it's intrinsically unjust. Or we can get rid of one of the old slogans of the right, which is that government can't really do anything and politics is always downstream of culture. We can recognize some ancient classical conservative wisdom that the law is a teacher, and we can wield the law in a just way, not only to protect innocent people, but also to help educate these leftists who are engaged in behaviors that are disordered for society, contrary to the common good, but also bad for them. Individually, I don't think these are happy people, the ones who are out shrieking and screaming and calling for the murder of their countrymen. I don't think they're happy people. We have not only the right to wield the law in a way that helps to protect us and innocent people and America, we have the responsibility to wield the law in such a way that helps to educate these people and pulls them back from the brink of madness or past the brink of madness, which is where they are. We need a little more uniformity in America, I think. I know the left always prattles on about diversity, diversity is our strength. But even the left and Americans, wow, that was a Freudian slip. A lot of truth in that, I think. But even on the right, even on the right, you'll have people exalt diversity of thought on college campuses, for instance, as a good in itself. Diversity of thought is not a good in itself. We like it as a particular kind of good on a college campus because it's uniformly left wing. So diversity of thought is good in as much as it introduces more conservative thought on campus. But diversity of thought is not a good in and of itself. You have on the left and the right, this exaltation of diversity is some kind of great strength. Pete Hagseth, Secretary of War, shows up, speaks to some of our soldiers, and explains the reality.

H (42:38)

In a previous administration, iterations of administrations, there was a phrase, it's the dumbest phrase in military history. And that phrase is, our diversity is our strength. You see, I look out at this crowd and I see a lot of diverse spaces, a lot of faces, black, brown, white and otherwise, from small towns, from big cities, rich, poor.

B (43:02)

I don't know you and you don't.

H (43:03)

Know me, but I don't look at you and see who you are based on the color of your skin. I look at you as a fellow American who bleeds red. Our strength is not our diversity. Our strength is our common purpose.

A (43:18)

Our strength.

H (43:19)

Our strength is our unity. Our strength is our mission. Our strength is our oath to the Constitution that we will defend each other. That's our strength.

A (43:29)

That's what the world sees.

H (43:30)

That's what I saw inside my platoon. That's what I see across this beautiful ship.

A (43:35)

Okay, this is a great moment in the evolution of American conservatism, I think, because notice what is Pete saying here? What Pete's saying is extremely moderate. Extremely moderate. Pete is embracing colorblind meritocracy. I'm sure the left is gonna try to call it racist and whatever, but it's completely the opposite. This is as moderate as it gets in any reasonable amount of thinking. He's saying, as a matter of principle, diversity does not conduce to strength. Uniformity does. Think about, like, a chain. So you don't think about any kind of construction. You want uniformity, not just, like random stuff hodgepodge together. So he says, in principle, uniformity, not diversity, is our strength. And we have a colorblind meritocracy in the military. And what is your strength is not your race or whatever. It's your common purpose as Americans. It's embracing a kind of civic nationalism. This is very, very moderate. And it's viewed as a major shift because it is. Because we have heard this diversity is our strength stuff for over 30 years. And it was actually a Republican who coined that phrase. I think it was Dan Quayle, when he was vice president to George H.W. bush, coined that phrase, diversity is our strength, during a press gaggle in Japan. Okay? So you can't even just blame the left for it. It was the right, too, and it was always totally preposterous. It's led to a total breakdown in social solidarity. And now you have Mr. Mainstream. I mean, this is why I think it's so important that it's Pete Hegseth saying this and that. He's saying this in such a moderate way. Pete is a Fox News host, okay, morning host. This is not a fringe figure or radical figure in any way whatsoever. And he's coming out and saying, diversity is our strength. That is totally nuts. We're done with that. Something has shifted. There has been a major change in American politics. The Democrats clearly have not caught up with that. They haven't paid attention. That's why they lost the popular vote for the first time in 20 years in November. That's why they're losing the shutdown fight for the first time in my lifetime, maybe the first time ever, they haven't figured out that shift. Has happened. J.D. vance is, I think, a little bit more on the bleeding edge of that as he showed last night at Ole Miss. But you're seeing it everywhere. You're seeing it everywhere. And the way Pete put it, no one would, no serious person would dispute that. That's an 8020 issue right there. That's yet another 8020 issue that this administration is on the right side of. Now. Speaking of diversity. Clip going viral this one really. As we hear all the fear mongering about the end of the SNAP program and the ongoing shutdown, here's one of the people who's really upset about problems with the SNAP program. This is an Iraqi refugee whining because the government's taken away his cheese. Without the government support, I cannot stay maybe a month or two months. Pima County Chairman Rex Scott told News.

H (46:39)

For Tucson he's deeply concerned about the impact on local refugees.

A (46:45)

Really, really concerned. How can he stay if he doesn't get. If you don't pay for his food? Now remember, we're talking about shifts to the Republican coalition and political vision. For a long time it was this hardcore libertarian, exalting the free market, Ayn Rand kind of vision that was very opposed in principle even to welfare programs. I think that's deader than disco and it's certainly not my view. My view is more infused with classical conservative concepts, Catholic social teaching. I have no problem in principle with a social welfare system. The way our market is set up, there will always be some degree of unemployment. So actually, just as a pure matter of justice, you need to have some kind of unemployment insurance. And we have a responsibility to take care of the poor. And we live in society. Man is inclined to live in an ordered society. That's one of the primary precepts of the natural law. There are all sorts of reasons that in principle it's good to take care of the poor. Oppression of the poor is one of the sins that cries out to God. Now there are questions about how best to do that, you know, what's most efficient and what actually it seems like it's helping people, but it might hurt people. But I think we would all say if someone's severely disabled and elderly and mentally handicapped and has all, probably they should be entitled to some kind of social program, right? Maybe. So long as it doesn't crowd out the church and the family. Yeah, I agree. What about this able bodied Iraqi who's in America for some reason, I don't know why he's here. I don't know what brought him over here. Maybe there's a good reason, maybe it's a bad reason. Why can't that guy get a job? Why can't that guy do any work? If he won't work, why is he here? How many other people who won't work are here who otherwise could? How much of the exploding cost of groceries is due to the fact that we pay for a lot of people's groceries and not just the people who really need it, who can't fend for themselves, but for that guy, an entitled, able bodied foreigner who's in America taking your money and whining when the government is shut down and he can't get the government cheese. Wow, this shutdown is really redounding to the detriment of Democrats in multiple ways. Shows they're on the wrong side of a ton of issues. It shows they've lost their chief tactic. And I think it's revealing a lot of the problems with the programs that are already in place, the ones that they're seeking to expand. Let's see here. But he can't stay in the country if we don't keep paying for his stuff. All right, okay, deal, Deal. You drive a hard bargain, Mr. Araki, but okay.

F (49:35)

This episode is brought to you by LifeLock. It's Cybersecurity Awareness month and Lifelock has tips to protect your identity. Use strong passwords, set up multi factor authentication, report phishing and update the software on your devices. And for comprehensive identity protection, let LifeLock alert you to suspicious uses of your personal information. Lifelock also fit fixes identity theft guaranteed or your money back. Stay smart, safe and protected with a 30 day free trial@lifelock.com Podcast terms apply.

A (50:03)

Today is Theology Thursday. We will have a very, very important Halloween panel. The rest of the show continues now. You do not want to miss it. Become a member, use code Knowles Canada WLAS and checkout for two months free on all annual plan.

B (50:20)

Sam.