Loading summary
Transcript152 lines
- [00:00]
A
Well, good evening, everybody, and welcome to Wired In. I'm Cabot Phillips coming to you live from Daily Wire hq. Thanks for spending your Wednesday with us. On today's show, we'll talk with a former White House press secretary about the state of the MAGA movement and the power struggle raging within the Republican Party. We'll get you the latest on the midterm races that'll control the fate of Congress. We'll debate Ozempic, Andrew Tate. We'll hear about the Democratic lawmaker who says the World cup is, you guessed it, racist. And we'll tell you about a WNBA superstar who is now standing up against men in women's sports. And of course, stick around till the end of the show for our live listener. Q and A. If you're a Daily Wire member, get those questions in the live chat now. I'll be looking for them. If you are on Apple or Spotify, head over to DailyWire.com subscribe. Join us today and get in on the fun. All right, let's do this thing right. Roll that graphic. And just a reminder for you lovely folks at home, Wired in is now streaming live at 4pm Eastern Monday through Thursday. Get your daily coverage of the news happening right now, insight into why it all matters, and hear from experts who are in the story. Become a member and join the live chat@dailywire.com all right, let's kick things off in Washington with our D.C. bureau Chief, Tim Rice. Tim, I don't know what's going on today, but they told me you don't get your special camera. So you're, you're a man of the people once more.
- [01:34]
B
I'm honestly just gonna go. No, no, I'm kidding. Happy Wednesday, Cavett. Lots to discuss. Great to be here.
- [01:39]
A
It is always great to have you. Let's start out west. Last night in Arizona, there was a big primary election that took place. Tell us who came out on top and then more importantly, what it tells us.
- [01:52]
B
Yes. So we're just gonna go top to bottom. Everyone get out your pads and pencils. Try to keep up. Representative Andy Biggs, a Trump backed Republican who currently represents Arizona's 5th congressional district, won the Republican gubernatorial nomination. He is now in November going to face off against incumbent Democrat Governor Katie Hobbs, potentially the most vulnerable incumbent Democratic governor in the country. This is the woman who lost to Carrie Lake by just percentage point in 2024. So Andy Biggs is on his way to a competitive but leading Republican race for the Governor's mansion in Arizona. The next big primary was who is going to replace Andy Biggs as the Republican nominee in the Arizona 5th. That is going to be Sheriff Mark Lamb, another Trump backed and popular figure in Arizona and on social media. This is a guy who has run on a law enforcement record. He's gonna be tough on crime, he's gonna be tough on immigration. He's been accused of certain things har scandals, nothing too, too bad but could be debilitating. He is denied all wrongdoing. He is likely going to win his race. That is a. The Arizona 5th is a solidly Republican district. So unless something really horrible comes out about Sheriff Lamb, he will likely be cruising to Congress. And then the most fun I think race of the night is the Arizona first. Arizona's first congressional district where former Arizona not St. Louis Cardinals. Former Arizona Cardinals kicker Jay Feeley won the Republican primary with a largely self funded campaign, pitching himself as a Washington outsider. There is not yet a Democrat running in that race or they have not settled on a candidate. So something to watch for sure. Can't really say how he's going to fare. The first is a little bit more of a mixed district than the Arizona 5th, but we don't know who he's running against yet, so we'll have to wait and see. But all around a very big night in Arizona. Really good signs for Republicans. These are all strong candidates. The turnout was good. These guys all have President Trump's endorsement. Arizona again can be solidly read, but as we saw with Katie Hobbs versus Kari Lake will occasionally swing Democrat. But all in all, I think Republicans woke up today feeling very good about the midterms or at least feeling very good about what happened in Arizona.
- [04:07]
A
The other fascinating story about Jay Feely, who was a longtime kicker in the NFL, did some on air camera work as well with the NFL. The guy that he beat in the primary, I believe I saw a report, was one of his old team doctors. So they had some interesting backstory there. Tim, whenever people are talking about governor's races and you know, the gubernatorial election, sometimes I get frustrated and I think why can't we just say governor's race? Where do we get this gubernatorial thing? So let's do some trivia here. Do you know why they're called gubernatorial elections?
- [04:44]
B
I really don't. I have to imagine it's somehow the German's fault.
- [04:47]
A
Oh, I've got you on this one. It's because the Latin word gubernator was the word for a steersman, someone who was steering things. And the Latin root was a G U B and that's where this comes from in the Old English. I didn't actually know that. I looked that up while you were talking just so I could try and make it look like.
- [05:08]
B
That's very good. That's good trivia. That's good trivia, though. I appreciate that.
- [05:12]
A
Yeah, There we go. Okay, let's get back to the real news. Down in Texas, Democratic candidate James Talarico looking to turn the state blue in the Senate for the first time in decades. He went viral this week, not for good reasons. For his campaign, he held a town hall with predominantly black voters in Houston. He did not receive the warmest of welcomes. Let's play one of the clips from that event. I appreciate you being here and I
- [05:50]
C
appreciate you traveling in.
- [05:54]
D
Stay here.
- [05:55]
E
You answer our question. Cause you suffered the consequence. I'm happ.
- [06:00]
A
I'm happy to engage. We'll come to here in just a second. I appreciate you being here and I
- [06:08]
C
appreciate you traveling in and I appreciate
- [06:10]
E
you for my people.
- [06:11]
F
Not.
- [06:13]
D
That's wonderful.
- [06:13]
A
I think that's wonderful.
- [06:15]
C
And
- [06:18]
D
it's all right.
- [06:18]
B
It's all right. It's all right.
- [06:19]
G
This is.
- [06:20]
B
This is what this conversation is supposed to be about.
- [06:26]
A
He says it's all right, it's all right. I'm totally fine. Please continue yelling at me is basically what he's saying there. What do you make of this video? Do you think this is, you know, indicative of a real struggle that Talarico is going to have with winning over black voters who will be crucial to his nomination?
- [06:44]
B
I think that it's less indicative of his struggle to win over black voters because I think that African American voters in Texas, especially in urban areas, are lean, heavily Democratic. I don't think, and I might be wrong on this, I haven't checked the latest polls, but my sense is that they're going to swing for the Democrat. No, they're not gonna vote for Ken Paxton necessarily. I think what this is more indicative, which is not to say that it won't pose a problem for Talarico, but I think what it's more indicative of is this is a problem for the Democratic Party. Right. The Democratic Party has stoked identity politics and racial essentialism and encouraged it in its voting bloc and encouraged it in a lot of its races. A lot of current Democratic members of Congress got elected hold their seats right now because they yell at people the way that those rally goers were yelling at James Talarico. Right. So it's kind of a Gordian knot for white progressives like Talarico. To cut through or untangle, because what is he gonna do? Right? How is he going? He can't talk back to them. He can't ask them to quiet down. He can't say, let's focus on something else. Immediate accusations of racism. Immediate accusations of talking over a black woman, which in the Democratic Party is the worst possible thing you can do. So, look, will this. Does this pose a problem for his campaign? Absolutely. Will it be insurmountable? Will it detract from him getting. Will it hinder him from getting black voters? I don't necessarily think so. But this is a real issue. There's no real way out of it. There's not a rhetorical way out of it. There's not a political way out of it short of the Democratic Party just kind of ripping up the playbook and starting over whole cloth. So that clip is. I think that's a clip that we'll come back to look at throughout the midterms and maybe for the years to come, because that is really indicative of a major issue that Democrats have.
- [08:32]
A
And I must disagree with something you said that the left would accuse him of being racist. That's not something we see very often on the left, accusations of racism. Now, I might be proven wrong by this next clip. I want to play of Jasmine Crockett talking about the World Cup. Listen to what she blames for why World cup fans were choosing one team over the other.
- [08:56]
D
Saw all of these people of color that was playing for all these teams. And ultimately, if you recall the last two teams, it was Argentina and Spain. And it seemed like the vast majority of the world was rooting for Argentina or actually against Argentina. Right. And why was that? Just give me an explanation, if you could guess. If you'll just let them finish the answer.
- [09:21]
A
Spain had the best team.
- [09:22]
C
Maybe that's why they were rooting for them.
- [09:25]
D
There's also a racist history that.
- [09:27]
A
Mr. Baier, Mr. Bayer, you're recognized.
- [09:30]
E
Thank you.
- [09:30]
G
Thank you, Jasmine.
- [09:31]
A
Ms. Crockett, that was almost a half hearted attempt on her part where she knew, hey, I want to make this about race. But I could almost see in her eyes that she didn't even really believe it. She just knew. Oh, this is what I have to say. Is she onto something here?
- [09:46]
B
It's all, no, she's. Of course she's not. But it's also amazing because obviously we don't have time to play the whole rambling clip, but after that, she kind of tries to back it up and she doesn't actually explain it. She Just sort of says, if you follow her logic, she just starts talking about how America is an inherent racist country. So it's like something, something people rooted for Spain because of the 1619 project. It makes absolutely no sense. It's also just so funny. I think what she was trying to get into was something about the relative number of black players on each team. But as anyone who watched the World cup this season knows, right, this is not the Olympics. This isn't like the players aren't all necessarily members of the country. So every team, some teams have more black players than other others. But a lot of times none of them are necessarily from the country. It's not just playing on the Argentine team or the Spanish team does not necessarily indicate that you're Spanish or Argentine. Also, maybe there's some sort of weird intra racist thing between Spain and Argentina, the colonizer and the colonized. But this was the World cup final. The entire world was watching. I dare. I challenged Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett to find me a single American, not of like royal Spanish descent who tuned in and said, you know what? I'm going to root for the Spanish because they're whiter than the Argentines.
- [11:05]
A
You know what?
- [11:06]
B
No one cares.
- [11:07]
A
I think she, I think she is onto something and that soccer fans are deeply racist. And for that reason, in solidarity, in solidarity against racism, I will not be watching soccer for the next four years. I will only watch American football and it's because I'm fighting racism. Because soccer fans, we know they're deeply problematic.
- [11:27]
B
I will join you. I'm going to join you in your boycott. Four years, no soccer. You heard it here first. Ok. Join the protest.
- [11:33]
A
We are, I believe, now seven weeks away from football season. The Dallas Cowboys report to training camp next weekend. Who's counting though? I don't know. No big deal. Tim Rice, always a pleasure to talk with a good red blooded American who gets fired up about the same stuff I do. Thanks for coming on, man.
- [11:49]
B
Anytime, buddy.
- [11:50]
A
That was Daily Wire D.C. bureau Chief Tim Rice. And let's turn now to our next guest, who I'm very excited to welcome on it's Sean Spicer, former White House press secretary and host of the Huddle. A fantastic show, which I realize it's probably not great marketing on my part to tell people to listen to another show, but Sean does fantastic work with the Huddle. I often listen to it driving into work myself. Sean, it's great to have you back, man.
- [12:15]
C
Thank you. Look, I listen to the Daily Wire. You can listen to the huddle live at 8:30 Eastern. But you know, if you can, if you're listening to a daily wire program, if you're listening to you or Ben or Michael, that's fine too. There's plenty of time in the day. You've got 23 other hours.
- [12:29]
A
Exactly. And we expect all 24 hours to be spent consuming political news. Sean, anytime you're on, I just love picking your brain on everything. So let's jump around a bit. We gotta start with midterms. 104 days out, we're getting close to this final sprint. You said earlier today on social media that you think there are three reasons for optimism on the GOP side ahead of the midterms. Redistricting, money, and socialism. Can you just walk us through those three points? Yeah.
- [12:57]
C
Look, I think Republicans, message wise, have to do three things as well, which is one, tell them what you did, tell them what you're gonna do, and tell them how bad the Democrats are. And that's the messaging piece. On the logistics front, there are a lot of really lazy, you're not gonna believe this, really lazy legacy reporters. And they say stuff like history is in favor of the Democrats. History is not in favor of anybody. That's why it's history. It's in the past. The reality is there's three reasons, though, that Republicans have a decent shot at maintaining the House majority. The Senate majority is completely separate. There's nine seats at play. Democrats are defending three, Republicans are defending six. The they need four to win. Those are some pretty tough odds if you're a Democrat, which is why I think we're good on the Senate, on the House. Real quick, I got us at about 212 right now. You need 218 for a majority, 18 seats in play. And so the question is, okay, if you basically have to go 6 for 12 to maintain the majority, what's working in your favor or not? There's no question the environment's not in our favor. I think we're fighting a war. That's never a good thing. Gas prices are going up. But here are the three reasons, and you alluded to this in this post that I put out, number one, redistricting. We picked up probably 12 net seats in that. So again, start any game 12 points up, start a business. $12,000 in the red, in the black. Those are all good things. So we start with about a 12 seat advantage. That's good. Two, we've got about $600 million
- [14:32]
D
more
- [14:32]
C
than the other side. That's a big thing. And the FEC or The Supreme Court just ruled that there can be coordination between the national party and the campaigns at a level that's never been allowed before. It used to be capped at about 100 grand. Now they can do any unlimited amounts. That's huge, especially if you're the party with the massive cast advantage. And what I mean by the third point kind of is what I alluded to with the messaging. The Democrats are not unified. They are having this internal battle about progressivism and socialism and communism that is a battle among themselves. Who are they? What do they stand for? What principles should they be fighting for? And for that reason, when you hear people like Mondami talk about crazy whack job stuff, you guys just played the Jasmine Crockett thing. But then you had the DSA
- [15:24]
B
co
- [15:24]
C
chair on that Fox program earlier this week saying that no one is entitled or should be permitted to make more than a double digit return on any investment. That's just insane. And I think Republicans, that gives Republicans something to talk about, which is, okay, maybe you really don't like us, maybe this or that, but look at the other side. And that's critical in an election to make sure that there's a contrast.
- [15:46]
A
You touched on this a bit at the top. Talking about Republicans need to remind folks of what they have done. Usually when it's the gop, it's the economy and you can just say, hey, look, people trust us more in the economy. Let's lean into that. We know the polling right now on the economy is not strong for the gop. What are the issues that you think they should be reminding people of when it comes to what they've done with the last two years?
- [16:08]
C
Great question. And this is literally could not be simpler. So let's just, you know, if you're a candidate, write this down. Number one, what have you done? So on that big beautiful bill, no tax on tips, no tax on Social Security, no tax on overtime, incentive to buy US cars, tax write off and all that. Those are all good things. They've made people's lives better. The average tax return was $1,100 more this year than it was last year. That's a good thing. Trump accounts, Trump rx. All things that are making your life better, more effective, more efficient, more affordable. Two, what are you going to do? You're gonna continue to lower taxes. You're gonna make a regulatory environment that allows for more hiring, make it easier, is try to take the tax burden off people more then last, what is the other side gonna do? And that's where you get into the crazy and talk about communism and socialism and all that stuff, but you've gotta do all three because people wanna know, what did you do with the trust I gave you? What will you do with the trust that I give you? And what about the alternative? And if you don't do all three, you're gonna. It's like any other stool, it falls down.
- [17:16]
A
I didn't hear you mention immigration there. Do you think that's still a winning topic for voters and for Republicans, or do you think that once people have seen the reality on the ground of what a mass deportation effort looks like, that folks may have soured on it?
- [17:30]
C
No, not at all. In fact, I should have mentioned it. I would. I mean, it is, it's an affordability issue. The less illegal immigration there is, the more jobs there are for Americans, the less housing costs. The demand, you take the demand signal off a lot of these things. So I would include that, but I'd also. We are a victim of our own success. President Trump, one of his sort of the biggest fault he has is how successful he's been. He went and did exactly what he said he would do in record amount of time and the dog literally caught the car. So every once in a while, you're a victim of your own success. And I would say one of the. If I faulted the Trump administration for anything, it's moving so quick. And I get it, this president wants to get things done. He understands they had only four years. But you do need to remind people once in a while of all that you've done. And I think again, think about this. So immigration, which again has an economic, just on the economic front, huge, huge impact. The no tax on tips, no tax on Social Security, no tax on overtime. But then you've also got Trump rx, which is lowering the price of so many prescription drugs, making them more affordable. And many, many drugs that people use all over the place. GLP1s, which are exploding. Brand new poll out of signals showing how many Americans are taking that. And then last is these Trump accounts that are going live now. Unbelievable. I think they are one of the most transformational economic things ever. They allow young Americans to create wealth, generational wealth that can be passed on to them. Anyone else? The government is completely hands off. This is the model.
- [19:04]
A
Yeah. I wanna get to a few serious topics, but first, just one video that made me laugh. I know you've seen it as well. AOC has been stumping four far left candidates around the country ahead of midterms. Even Wading into some primaries. It seems like every stop she's got a new accent. So here's her latest appearance on the ground here in the state of Tennessee.
- [19:26]
D
We cannot afford to leave Tennessee behind. We cannot afford to leave Kentucky behind, Alabama behind, Mississippi behind, Georgia behind, South Carolina behind.
- [19:42]
A
Now, it's not exactly Hillary saying, I ain't in no ways tired. It's still pretty bad.
- [19:48]
C
But she does that one, too.
- [19:49]
B
What do you think?
- [19:49]
A
Yeah, what do you think?
- [19:50]
C
Well, first of all, a couple things. In fairness, she is from southern Manhattan, so maybe no, but in all seriousness, on my show, I played a compilation. I did steal it from someone on the Internet. In fairness, she does the black aoc, she does Hispanic aoc, she does Southern aoc, she does Detroit aoc. I mean, like, she. What's it?
- [20:15]
A
Code switching.
- [20:16]
C
Shifting. Switching. Yeah, she literally, I mean, but what I love about this is, once again, it's like Graham Platner being an oyster farmer. That's just not true. They are the most inauthentic, phony, lying, hypocritical individuals. And the beautiful thing about her accent switching is it just shows how literally ridiculous they are. They literally change their accent depending on who they're talking to. It's a joke. And so I, in some ways, really appreciate it because we can say it a lot of times like they're inauthentic and they're liars, but when they show it to us, it makes it easier to just put the exhibit out there and say, look at this.
- [21:01]
A
And I also think that one reason President Trump has been able to relate with people who you wouldn't expect him to relate with working class voters is because he doesn't pander to them. He doesn't try and talk differently. He doesn't try and talk more folksy. Whatever you say about the man, he's the same brash New Yorker in every single campaign stop. He doesn't code switch like this.
- [21:21]
C
And in private, by the way, and in private, there's no, there's no public version of Trump. He's the same guy.
- [21:28]
A
You would know just about better than anyone. And I want to get your take on, obviously, you served as press secretary. You had to message a lot of very difficult things in a positive way. What would you do, if anything differently than the administration is currently doing right now when it comes to messaging the war in Iran, which looks like it could be the biggest issue ahead of November?
- [21:50]
C
Oh, boy, that is a great question. Because I've said this before, the Iran war is not a political plus. It was done because it was the right thing to do to keep America safe and to thwart Iran from attacking us either by nuclear means or by ballistic means. And the President did not do this for some political gain. And so it's not an easy sell. And sometimes you just have to recognize that you do the right thing. Cuz those are what you do when you're the President. And it's a tough decision. That being said, I do think that the more opportunity they have to get out there and talk about why they're doing what they're doing and what it means because the Democrats are filling the void. And I know the President gave a speech the other day and it was kind of a little, you know, he had a lot of topics to cover. But I do think that getting. They've got, you know, Secretary Hegseth who's up on the Hill yesterday. General Kaine is a phenomenal voice on this issue as well. But they really need to go meet voters where they are. What I mean by that is they gave a hearing. That's great. That gets picked up by, you know, a bunch of cable outlets. But they need to be on shows like this and on my show and going out there and talking to Americans and saying where they can have a little bit longer of a discussion. But they've got a lot of assets. I mean, there's a lot of people in the national security space that understand this threat, et cetera, and they could be deploying. So I would. You just can't dismiss how like, you know, sometimes you have to rush the whole team forward off the line.
- [23:30]
A
One final question. Press Secretary, I think might be the hardest job in America, besides that of President, you know, himself. Do you ever have moments where you wake up in the middle of the night and you almost instinctively think, how am I gonna message this tomorrow? Or you see a story and your mind starts spinning of okay, how am I gonna talk about this? Does that ever happen still? Sure.
- [23:51]
C
On two fronts. One is you think the negative. Boy, I'm glad I'm not waking up today. Just cause it's a tough. Cause it's tough. You're right. And there are days in which you're like, thank God I'm not the one. It's like looking at a mountain and saying, thank goodness I'm not the one who has to climb over it. Not that you can't. It's just that you've done it before and you're like, I know what that's like. I've run three marathons and I Never will do it again. I envy the people who do them now, but I know what it's like. But, yeah, I mean, I just, in my DNA, I'm like, we always get said that sometimes we're mansplaining if we're talking with our wives or girlfriends. And I always think sometimes I'm communicating, explaining where I see a problem. And I try to talk about the strategy, because in ately, that's what I love to do, is to figure out how do you create a compelling and effective message and strategy to affect an outcome. And so I love doing it. I still do it on a lot of fronts, but, yeah, every once in a while I feel like it's like looking at a puzzle that you see at someone else's house and saying, I think I could do that.
- [24:54]
A
Yeah, I have wondered and I can just imagine what the experience was like and what it's like now, seeing the news and having that muscle memory. Sean, it's so great to talk to you. We always love having you on. Thank you so much for making time for us.
- [25:09]
C
You bet. Thank you.
- [25:10]
A
That was Sean Spicer, former White House press secretary and host of the Huddle. All right, it's time for me to be brutally honest with you guys. I'm starting to realize that I might be getting old. It started when I would wake up and for no apparent reason have a crick in my neck that bothered me for days. Or I'd pull a muscle doing an exercise I've done a million times. So rather than assume that I'm invincible, I started actively taking better care of myself. I switched to a new ergonomic pillow. I upped my protein intake. I even started doing new stretching exercises. But as I was making those changes, I realized there was one huge aspect of my body that I was still neglecting. My liver. Your liver is basically your body's filter. It's processing everything you consume while handling 500 plus jobs every single day. And when it's working overtime, it's worth giving it a little extra support. That is where dose comes in. Dose for your liver is a clinically backed liquid supplement that's easy to work into your day. It's just one shot that tastes like fresh squeezed orange juice. It tastes absolutely fantastic. None of this pinching your nose to get it down. You will love it. People who use dose daily can support their metabolism, daily digestion, and reduce sluggishness. And those midday crashes that we all seem to get, Dose supports daily liver function. It helps your liver deal with unwanted stressors and it's made with zero sugar, zero junk and zero calories and it's backed by two double blind placebo controlled studies. So there's actually real research behind it. If you're ready to give your liver the support it deserves, head to DueDaily Co Cabot or enter Cabot to get 35% off your first subscription. Your body does so much for you. Let's do something for it. That's D O S E D A I l y co cabot c a b o t for 35% off your first month subscription. Well, NBA star Sophie Cunningham caused quite the stir this week, becoming the first high profile athlete in the league to come out in opposition to men playing in women's sports. Speaking to espn, Cunningham said, quote, I got a lot of negative feedback about me hating trans. And I'm like, I never once said that. I think that I am here to extend love, but I also think with that love is truth, being honest. And I want to protect young girls in a locker room or young girls in sport who shouldn't have to go against biological men. Joining us now with more is Daily Wire culture reporter Megan Basham. Megan, pretty remarkable that a position like this, which would have been considered the most obvious thing on earth a decade ago, is now enough to create a firestorm. What do you make of her statement?
- [27:46]
E
Well, you know, I actually think it's a little interesting that it would have been more of a firestorm on the other side just a couple of years ago, I think. And this to me exemplifies how much the culture war has moved the Overton to the right now. And I actually think the Daily Wire and Matt Walsh in particular and our film what Is a Woman? I think a lot of that had a lot to do with that because it has created the room for people like Sophie Cunningham to come forward and say these sensible common sense hey, we shouldn't have biological men competing in women's sports. But look, I mean, just a few years ago that would have been an extremely costly thing to say in any kind of professional league. So I think it does show that we have won some culture wars here, if you are a social conservative as I am. But I also think the fact that they're still trying to make an issue of it because when you look at the headlines, it still does say things kind of like firestorm or controversy. And you're seeing that from the legacy outlets who I think want to continue to try to make it controversial. But I actually don't think it's as controversial as they're hoping. I think most people are like, you go, girl, to Sophie, and I'm cheering her, too. But I'm also like, hey, look, I think this war has been largely won at this point.
- [28:56]
D
Point.
- [28:57]
A
Well, I wanted to ask you, what sort of response have we seen? Obviously, the media is going to try and pretend like everyone is angry over this, even if they aren't, but does it seem like the general public is furious over these comments?
- [29:11]
E
No, not at all. And that's why it's interesting. Like, even the tenor of some of these headlines, and I don't have them right here in front of me, but when I was looking at them this morning, I couldn't help but note that it was more like, Sophie Cunningham stirs controversy or something like this. It seemed less assured and confident than the New York Times headlines you might have gotten a couple of years ago, where it was much more obvious that you were seeing pressure from these legacy outlets to get these athletes to apologize for these statements. And a lot of times they did apologize this time. I don't know how to quite describe it other than it feels a little bit more sheepish, like they're still running the stories, they're still doing the headlines, but that confidence that they're going to get her to go up to a podium and apologize is not there anymore. So it feels like they kind of sense we don't have the power and we don't have the leverage that we used to have on this issue.
- [30:00]
A
Sophie, I would like to imagine that you are a wired in listener. Take our advice, Megan. Me? Do not apologize. Don't back down. I'm interested in your take, Meghan. I think you're right that there's no doubt that there has been a shift and that more broadly speaking, that the right is winning on this issue of transgender, you know, sports and locker rooms and transing the kids. Do you think that the battle is sort of on pause and that the left is regrouping and they're going to start pushing this again? Or is this something where they realized, hey, this is a losing issue. Let's just drop it?
- [30:34]
E
I think they have been set back on their heels a little bit. When you look at organizations like the Human Rights Campaign and some of these other, you know, LGBTQ activist groups. You and I have talked about it before, Cabot, that I think they pushed so hard so fast, particularly when it came to this issue of trans and kids, that they did not realize that they were going to get such severe backlash that it has actually cost them some leverage on some of these other issues like gay marriage, because we have now suddenly seen these same sex couples adopting children and, excuse me, buying children. I need to be very careful about my language here because when we talk about this, we're talking about essentially renting women's wombs and it's usually women who can use the money. And so this is the kind of thing that has happened. And I think because of that, we have seen even the general public, like the general public's approval for same sex marriage is down six points in the last few years. For Republicans, it's down 18 points. So I think all of that is part and parcel with the overreach that we saw from the transgender part of the movement. So I think you've got groups like the Human Rights Campaign going, ah, we can't bully corporate America the way we used to. So we need to regroup and figure out how do we put the fear of God into these corporate entities now? Because somehow the conservatives have figured, figured out how to do it.
- [31:53]
A
On the topic of controversies and dare I say, firestorms, you have been at the center of one of these firestorms this week. Anyone?
- [32:01]
E
I wasn't even trying.
- [32:02]
A
Anyone who's been on X probably has seen this. So a little backstory. Conservative commentator Guy Benson, he's gay and he and his partner welcomed a child via surrogacy. And you had some criticism saying, among other things, there's nothing conservative about deliberately creating motherless children. That comment had a lot of people very angry. We saw the Fox host Kennedy come out and make a very crass sexual comment to you. Former Congressman Jorge Santos said, quote, there are plenty of motherless and fatherless kids in the world, and as long as they are raised with love, that's all that really matters. He was going after you as well. Your response to these critics?
- [32:41]
E
Well, anybody who says it doesn't matter if you are raised by a mother and a father is simply ignorant. They haven't looked at the research. We have piles and piles and piles of studies and research going back decades, decades now showing that kids do best when they are raised by a married biological mother and biological father. So that's the ideal. So let's set the ideal here and say, okay, this is how kids thrive best in this environment. Now, we can recognize that sometimes through the selfish or inadvertent choices of their parents, they may not get that ideal. You know, divorce happens, people get pregnant out of wedlock, but the ideal remains the ideal. So what we have now is this trend of particularly Same sex couples availing themselves of our surrogacy lack of regulation. Because keep in mind, when you go to purchase a baby through surrogacy, nobody's checking you, nobody's checking to see if you are on a sex registry or anything else that could be concerning. So it bypasses the adoption process. And that was why I said, I wanna be so careful about my language. Because if you listen to what George Santos says, he's trying to appeal to, hey, some kids don't have homes. Isn't it better for them to be taken in by loving parents who may be, you know, a same sex couple? That's a different conversation than the surrogacy conversation. The surrogacy conversation is creating children. And, you know, I was a little surprised at how hot the backlash was from Kennedy and some of the others in mainstream conservative media. But I think that this is an issue that we're not gonna be able to get away from because the social conservatives are going to continue to have our standards that make the more libertarian wing and this kind of Johnny come lately wing of the classic liberals who I appreciate, I'm happy to welcome them to the coalition. But you have some of those people, I think, wanting to dictate terms of what the conservative movement is going to be about. And my position is social conservatives have to drive a stake in the ground and say, no, we are here to conserve the natural family that is best for children. Because if we don't conserve that, then we're really not conserving anything because everything else flows out of that family policy.
- [34:55]
A
Megan, your bio on X. You call yourself an unabashed church lady? I wish my church had 100 Megan Bashams in it. I wish every church was full of church ladies like you. We love getting to talk with you. Megan, thank you so much.
- [35:09]
E
I always love being here. Thanks for having me.
- [35:12]
A
I'm fired up. That was Daily Wire culture reporter Megan Basham. Well, over on Capitol Hill, Republicans are proposing a new agriculture bill that critics say will offer mass amnesty to untold numbers of illegal immigrants. The Bill, known as HR9535, would offer legal protections and de facto amnesty to illegals who have been present in the United States since May 31, 2026, and meet certain agricultural work history requirements. So in other words, if you came here illegally as long as you've been here for a few months and worked on a farm, you're welcome to stay for more. We're joined by Kevin Roberts, president of the Heritage Foundation. Kevin, it's great to have you back, sir.
- [35:51]
F
Kevin, it is always a pleasure to join you. Thanks for having me.
- [35:55]
A
We love having folks from Heritage on, none more so than yourselves. Let's get into it. Is this actually a mass amnesty bill?
- [36:03]
F
Oh, it is. In fact, as I sit here just a few hours ago, I had some meetings on Capitol Hill. And I can confirm for you both from those meetings on Capitol Hill, but also from my great colleagues who are the best in the business, that it's amnesty. There's no other way of describing this. In fact, I was just reviewing some of the online chatter which some of which said that Heritage is creating this fiction about this being amnesty. But I can just assure you, you said it very well, very succinctly, that the terms of this proposed bill are very clear that there would be amnesty for people who are here illegally after the date that you mentioned. But secondly, I also have to say that the explicitly stated intentions of the bill authors, a couple of whom are Republican members of the US House, are that this be amnesty. Why? Because they've been told by Big Ag, which is no friend of the Make America Great Again movement or the conservative movement, that they simply can't be profitable without taking advantage of this cheap labor. But let me say, Cabot, you know that in addition to always wanting to highlight the problems with Washington, Heritage always wants to offer a solution. There's a solution out of this, and that is for these members of Congress and thankfully just a few members who are Republican who are advocating for this to re implement the Bracero program of the 1960s without the racism. Let me be really clear for those online types who don't like to listen, and the reason that would work is that you would be creating a legal seasonal worker program so that those people who want to work here are able to do so. They're able to go back to their homes, and they're also, of course, able to pay taxes. These are the kinds of solutions that should be relatively easy from our vantage point at Heritage. But for some reason, these pro amnesty types in D.C. simply don't think so.
- [37:51]
A
Yeah, and many of those same candidates that are supporting legislation like this will go back to their district and campaign in a primary and say we support mass deportations and not tell their constituents what they're actually pushing for. And one of the things we hear from supporters of bills like this, they'll say, hey, look, yes, we're on the right. Yes, we don't support illegal immigration, but my constituents are getting killed with higher food prices and we really need to try and Keep prices low, and that means having this cheap labor, and let's just get them on the books. And it's about lowering food costs. Can you flesh out what the response is to that argument?
- [38:24]
F
Sure. I'll flesh that out by at first ascribing a description to it. And that is. It's a disgusting argument. It's a disgusting argument because it relegates people who are equal in the eyes of God immigrants to this country as some sort of lower life form who are mere cogs in the machine of Big Ag or the restaurant industry or the service industry, and that somehow there aren't enough Americans, secondly, who are willing to do those jobs. What we're saying at Heritage is if you want to continue to have the most generous immigration system in the history of the world, which is what the United States has had, that you have to get back to a common sense program, a common sense immigration system that's based on the rule of law and that kind of system, it would overturn this silly argument that there aren't enough Americans to do this, that it's only people from South America or Africa who are willing to do these starting jobs. There are so many American men, about eight and a half million American men, who aren't just unemployed, they aren't even looking for work. As we're having this conversation, we believe that the way you fix all of this at Heritage is to start from scratch and say, let's, number one, re migrate every single illegal alien who has come here over the last five years. Secondly, let's be sure that we re implement all of the great transparency and rule of law in our immigration system so that we can actually have not just an economy, but very importantly, a society that honors the dignity of work, rather than relegating any human being to merely being a cog in the machine by Big Ag or big restaurants who want to increase their profit margin.
- [40:05]
A
Kevin, in the past, in a second term, actually, President Trump has expressed at least tepid support for a plan that would offer some temporary protections for illegal immigrants working in the hospitality industry or working in some farm jobs. Do you think that President Trump is going to come out and oppose this legislation?
- [40:25]
F
Well, I'll let the president and administration speak for themselves. They like to do that. And I think that that's wise because it's from President Trump that we've been able to see this resetting of the table, the resetting of the conversation on immigration. But I can tell you, for Heritage's sake, and I think we're aligned with the administration on this. This amnesty bill is awful. Now, the good news that I will offer you, at least based on the intel that I have for meetings on Capitol Hill earlier today, is that I don't think it's going anywhere. But obviously I think that we can really make sure that that doesn't happen if the president and the White House weigh in. I'll say this just as sort of friendly advice to any policymakers in any office. This bill and bills like it, ideas like what you suggested actually would undermine the entire Trump agenda because the entire Trump agenda is fueled by popular will to make sure that we are right sizing the American immigration system as we have this conversation right now, Cabot There is a higher percentage of Americans in this country right now born in foreign countries than ever before in our history. That has always created every single time that that percentage has gotten to be nearly this high, it's always created a social and political and economic crisis. President Trump deserves credit for beginning to fix that crisis. We definitely don't need to be backtracking on it.
- [41:47]
A
Yeah, Kevin, I want to go big picture for a bit. I know you think a lot about setting the conservative agenda and the conservative response and strategy to what the left is doing, and you are big on going on the offense. We've seen the left embrace these far left socialists and radicals that have gone from fringe to mainstream. What do you believe the Republican response should be ahead of the midterms when it comes to dealing with that rise of socialism?
- [42:15]
F
I think the Republican response needs to stop failing to take these threats from the radical left seriously. And what I mean specifically about that, and I'll give you a solution here in a minute, but I just want to discourage my friends, and I mean that as friends, policymakers in D.C. and around the country who have actually been celebrating because of the political opportunity for the right, the examples of people like Mamdani, these people are dangerous. These people are implementing policies that a majority of voters in those cities are going to think are successful. And so what we need to be talking about on the political right isn't just an education of the American electorate about socialism and communism. We also need to be talking about a robust, ambitious, and dare I say audacious agenda that remigrates every illegal alien in this country, that focuses on a restrained foreign policy that ends the Iran conflict, which we support at Heritage completely, but ends it as quickly as possible so that we can focus on the domestic agenda. That's the way forward and we ought not be bashful, if I might add, One more comment to that list. Talking about affordability. The elites in New York and Washington, of both parties, have failed the everyday American. I just got back from vacation in East Tennessee, and I was asking shopkeepers and people walking around you, just normal people, people in the coffee line at McDonald's, you know, how's the economy going? These are Trump voters. I mean, these are conservatives, Cabot. And they're saying, look, we're with the president, by the way, sir, we love heritage, but we're telling you that there's still something wrong with the economy because we still have too many policymakers who don't understand what's going on. The political genius of Mamdani, with whom I disagree 100%, is that he's put that finger on that with really bad solutions. But until we start talking more about these ambitious ideas that actually meet the needs of the American people, the political rights not prepared for the growing threat from that socialist left.
- [44:17]
A
I'm glad you bring that up. And I wanna flesh this out a bit, because I think there's little doubt that a big reason for this rise of socialism, especially with young people, is that they feel locked out of home ownership. They believe the economy has failed them, so they're willing to try anything. And I've heard some on the right say, hey, all we have to do is just tell them socialism doesn't work. It's enough to win them over by showing, hey, this hasn't worked anywhere else. But these are people who are saying, hey, well, I'm not sure if socialism has worked in the past, but I definitely don't think our current system is working. So do you think Republicans have done a good enough job so far of actually offering this substantive alternative beyond just saying socialism sucks?
- [44:56]
F
No. Republicans have failed at it. And I say that as a friend, as a lifelong conservative. What too many Republicans assume is that, look, it's a rational thought, don't get me wrong. But what too many Republicans assume is that you can just say, you know, socialism's failed everywhere it's been tried. Every communist country has been a failure. The people who are voting for Mamdani, who aren't just entirely on the left, some of them are in the center. Heck, there might even be a few on the right are saying, we don't care what you call it. We don't care what history lessons you offer. We don't care what economics lessons you offer. What has been happening under the leadership of both parties is that you are failing the everyday American. Now, at Heritage, we read reality truthfully So I can acknowledge this truth that I just mentioned to you is. And you, of course, articulated eloquently in order to propose a solution. And the solution isn't just to improve education and to teach the lessons of socialism and communism. We need to be doing that. The point is, Republicans assume that's all they need to do. And that somehow, magically, you're not going to have these Mamdani proteges being elected all over the country. No, we gotta go more than that. And we actually have to address the very legitimate concerns that if you're an American, especially in your 20s or 30s, and you're thinking about the college debt that you have, the cost of health care, the near impossibility of buying houses, especially where AI data centers are encroaching and corporations have been allowed to buy houses, like 22% of the residential housing market in the Atlanta metro area, that you're saying, I don't care if you're Republican or Democrat or an alien from outer space. I want a policy program that talks about my needs, not the needs of K street in Washington, D.C. dC. I'm proud to tell you that Heritage has those answers in what we call the American Opportunity agenda.
- [46:43]
A
Kevin, you said that you vacationed in Tennessee. We love it here in Tennessee. I know you got to spend a lot of time on the Hill. Ever thought about moving the Heritage headquarters here to Nashville? There's no state income tax. It's a great place. There's six nonstop flights a day to D.C. from Nashville. What do you think?
- [47:01]
F
I think if you polled our Heritage colleagues, the overwhelming percentage of them would say, yes, we need to do that. We are called, I think, not just politically, but also from our creator above, to do the work of the people behind enemy lines in Washington. We'll continue to do that. But one of the reasons we keep our sanity and our good Cheer Cabot, is because almost all of us get out and not just touch grass, but go to great places like the state of Tennessee.
- [47:26]
A
Awesome. All right. I'll take that as a maybe. I'm holding out a little bit of hope. We'd love to have you guys here.
- [47:30]
F
I'm telling you. I'm telling you there's a chance.
- [47:34]
A
Okay, you're telling me there's a chance. All right, Kevin, great to have you. We really appreciate it. Anytime we can get you. So you're welcome anytime you want.
- [47:41]
B
I love it.
- [47:42]
F
Take care, Kevin. Thanks for what you do.
- [47:44]
A
Of course. That was Kevin Roberts, president of the Heritage Foundation. Guys, if you're watching Wired in on The Daily Wire plus app. Thank you. If not, you know by now that's where you should be. That is where you get push alerts when we go live, breaking news as it happens, and of course, the latest smart investigative reporting team. The Daily Wire plus app is free and available now on the App Store. Google Play, Apple tv, Samsung, LG, Roku, and more. I got it all down. I got them all. I'm getting better at this. I'm able to memorize all those. Okay, let's bring it back in studio with my colleague who's laughing in my face, Daily Wire Editor in Chief, Brent Scherr. Brent, great to have you, man.
- [48:21]
G
You, too.
- [48:22]
A
We are gonna be doing a little livestream ahead of the White House Correspondent's Dinner. That is on Friday night, right?
- [48:28]
G
Friday night, everyone.
- [48:29]
A
Be sure to tune into that. Last time I tried to convince Brent to drink a little champagne with me on set to get in the correspondence dinner mood, he didn't go along with it.
- [48:38]
G
Good.
- [48:39]
A
Yeah. Mainly because I'm sure you're more of a beer guy. Okay, let's get to some of the big news going on today. We touched on this with Tim Rice earlier this week, but we're now starting to get more details on the charges that are coming out against Andrew Tate and his brother, Tristan Tate. They were arrested in Florida. What are they now facing? Yeah.
- [48:57]
G
And again, these charges. He was arrested in Florida. The charges are not from Florida or the United States States. They're from the United Kingdom, where Andrew and his brother Tristan are both citizens. They are dual US British citizens. What is going on right now? And there's an active hearing going on in Florida, and they are being arrested and held in jail. During those active hearings is an extradition hearing. It is the United States deciding whether or not it is going to send them to the United Kingdom. In that hearing, we've learned a lot more about the charges against them. And similar to charges that we've known about in the past, it has to do with rape, sex trafficking of minors, sex trafficking with the intent of exploitation. There's also charges related to them having indecent images of underage girls. Of course, nobody that's been following these manosphere influencers, if that's what we're gonna call them, is surprised by any of this. They openly talk about how to be a pimp and how to manipulate young women. One of the women that Andrew Tate talks about manipulating the most, he was talking about manipulating when she was a teenager. So these are not surprising charges. Now the question comes to whether we're gonna send them back to England to face charges in where they were actually brought. What came out from his lawyer was his lawyer specifically mentioned Secretary of State Marco Rubio. And Rubio was asked about it today. Cause it turns out the Secretary of State is the only person in the United States who has the power to override an extradition request. I believe we have that clip.
- [50:53]
A
Yeah, let's play that.
- [50:56]
D
One of the Tate brothers lawyers mentioned you by name. Do you plan to get involved with the extradition challenge that they have been.
- [51:02]
A
Mention me by name? Oh, no, look, that. Extraditions. I don't know the details. This particular case, I've been overseas, but, I mean, I know who you're talking about.
- [51:12]
E
I just don't know the details.
- [51:12]
G
Details of it.
- [51:13]
A
These cases have a process that they go through in the courts. My understanding is that they're involved in that judicial process. And so that'll play itself out at this point. And there's no role for us to play at this moment or maybe ever in that regard. But I'm not going to opine on something that's still working through a legal process. Translate that for us.
- [51:32]
G
Yeah. What he's saying is that he's not going to do anything. This is a hard no from Marco Rubio that he's going to get. Get in the way here. There were some hopes in weird podcast bro circles that the Trump administration was gonna block this injustice against Tristan and Andrew Tate. Marco's saying no. What's funny is that a source close to Marco Rubio, while there, he's like, I'm glad he didn't play fully dumb. Like, who's Andrew Tate? He was just like, yeah, I'm not following that. A source close to Marco Rubio told Axios, marco thinks these guys are scum. So that's where Rubio really is for him to step in and block extradition, especially given how severe these charges are and how open about these things they are. The only argument to me that I see as legitimate is England has a terrible justice system and they do misuse justice against people they don't like politically. That's not Andrew and Tristan tape, as you said earlier.
- [52:40]
A
These are guys who described how to be a pimp. Not in the way rappers say it. When they're saying, oh, it means being the big guy, having the girls, they literally mean being a pimp. They have talked, they've offered entire courses, I believe, online about how to enroll women in a sex worker program and how to entrap them, basically, and how to manipulate them. And. And in some ways, I guess financially threaten them. And so Senator Rubio or Secretary Rubio, if he's saying these guys are scum, if that is his take, that is the correct take.
- [53:08]
G
Yeah, I co sign the Secretary of State. Yes, fully. These guys are scum. I just watched some videos posted by Milk Bar TV this morning. It's like minutes and minutes of Tristan Tate talking about how he manipulates virgins and is an expert on doing this. They are scum.
- [53:26]
A
Yes. You will not see me shed a tear if they do end up behind bars. And as someone who has been behind bars in the United Kingdom, I can speak very clearly about what is that.
- [53:35]
G
Yeah, I told you, they go after political opponents.
- [53:37]
A
Exactly. I do just wanna warn folks, if you got your kids listening, the next story does have some very gross themes. I just wanna warn our audience. But the Daily Wire does have some important reporting that is consequential. This is not sensationalist stuff. This is a very consequential story involving a Senate candidate in Nebraska. On the left, what have we uncovered at the Daily Wire?
- [53:57]
G
Yeah, the Senate candidate is Dan Osborne. He's out in Nebraska. It's actually a somewhat competitive race this midterms against Pete Ricketts is the Republican senator there. So Dan Osborne is actually an independent because Democrats don't run very well in Nebraska. But Democrats have fled from the race to kind of clear the field for Dan Osborne. Osborne, he's not full Andrew Tate, but he has faced a slew of sexual scandals in the past. He ran for office last cycle and he was caught with an account on Ashley Madison, which is the account for people who want to cheat on their spouses. His Twitter handle was also liking hardcore pornography. He was also getting in hot water this cycle for improperly using campaign funds. He had paid thousands of dollars to his daughter for assisting the campaign. Now, Daily Wire reporter Drew Berkheimer found that that daughter, who is openly a Gothic dancer. It's gothic exotic dancing, also had an account on a website called Strip Chat. I think it's Strip Chat. It's kind of in that only fans esque realm of the Internet where she's openly offering sexual acts and pictures, videos, even messages rating.
- [55:27]
A
Yeah, we rating your.
- [55:30]
G
That you want them to in your DMs. This says daughter. Given that he's paid her and that he has his own sexual scandals in the past. It's just like, man, where do they find these people? We have Graham Platner, we have Eric Swalwell, we have Ruben Gallego. I mean, it's like, what I didn't know there was this low in the barrel to scrape.
- [55:57]
A
And the candidate himself is in hot water because he can either throw his daughter under the bus and say, well, what she does is her own decision. She's not affiliated with the campaign. That would expose. Okay, if she's not affiliated with the campaign, why were you paying her thousands of dollars from your donors? Or he could say, yes, that money rightfully went to her because she was a campaign staffer. And then it's okay. Well, your campaign staffer is engaged in this pretty disgusting behavior and he's in a tough spot.
- [56:23]
G
We reached out to them. We didn't hear back from either the senator or his daughter. We did see very quickly after we reached out that, that his daughter or somebody deleted a bunch of pictures from her Instagram account which prove that the pornographic account is very much hers.
- [56:44]
A
Yeah.
- [56:45]
G
So they saw this story. They did not respond to the Daily Wire for the story. But this is what happens in Senate elections. You get a lot of things coming out when the eyes of the world, the eyes of the Daily Wire get put on these people who want to be the senators deciding all the important things that you and Kevin Roberts were just talking about. This is the vetting process that the country does, and it's important.
- [57:10]
A
And as you said, this race was one the Democrats had their eyes on. You wouldn't think Nebraska would be too close, but there were Democrats who were very optimistic about their chances. We will see what this does to impact the race. Daily Wire Editor in chief Brent Scherr. Pleasure as always, man. Thank you.
- [57:24]
G
Yep.
- [57:24]
A
And again, everyone, tune in Friday night for the Daily Wire's live coverage of the White House Correspondent's Dinner. Brent and I will be doing a little pre show for that. You don't want to miss it.
- [57:34]
D
All right.
- [57:34]
A
Our next guest is conservative commentator, writer, and mother of six, I might add, Bethany Mandel. Bethany, it's great to have you on. Thanks for joining.
- [57:43]
D
Thanks for having me. I'm hiding in my bedroom away from my six children.
- [57:47]
A
I love. I only have two right now. I would love to get to six. I'm just imagining what that is like in the household. I must confess, pretty much every week, Bethany, I find myself reading one of your pieces, many of which are published on the Daily Wire. So I would love to just run through a couple of my recent favorites and get your take. So let's do it. Let's start with your latest, which just posted on Daily Wire today. You talk about escaping what you call the post literate trap. Tell us what you mean by that.
- [58:15]
D
Yeah, so there was an incredible piece that was published at the Atlantic about the death of reading. It was really chilling. It was 26 pages. So you have to actually be a little bit of a boomer and print it, which is what I did to get through it, and it was really scary. The numbers of adults who are reading for pleasure, the numbers of children who are reading for pleasure and what that does to your brain and how being a literate human being who reads more than just TikTok captions, that wires your brain in a certain way. And when you stop doing that, it rewires your brain. And we're seeing the effects of that in a generation of kids who are growing up doing nothing but playing on screens 24 7. And so it was a really interesting piece. And I had observed in my sort of personal life over the course of the last few years that I felt like this was a real hole. We homeschool our children according to the Charlotte Mason method for anyone listening who understands, you know, homeschool philosophy. And it's like 92% of what I do, maybe 90% of what I do, is I give my kids a book, and I say, go read it, and then come back to me and talk to me about it. And I realized my kids are reading more than I am, and they're. They're much more literate than I am. And as my oldest has gotten into middle school, I'm realizing, like, I would like to read the books that she's reading, or I can't read the books that she's reading when she's, you know, delving into Plutarch with her dad. And so I realized, like, I have a deficit as someone who is a public intellectual. I'm kind of a faker. I'm a poser. I should be reading more, and not just for work. Not just because I'm, you know, reviewing Elise Stefaniks, but which was great. But I need to be reading more for pleasure and modeling that for my kids. And so the piece that I wrote for you guys was basically how I retrained my brain to become a reader again after basically 10 years of my brain being mush after having six children in nine years.
- [60:08]
A
And you compare that process to running and to getting into marathons and 5Ks. Can you talk more about that?
- [60:15]
D
Yeah. So I made a mistake right in the very beginning where I was like, I'm gonna make myself read this really hard transl. Plutarch that my husband is working on with our kids. And I was falling asleep, like literally falling asleep with the book in my bed. And I thought to myself, like, I should do a couch to 5K program, but for reading. And so I shut down on the Sabbath, I sat down on Saturdays and I was forcing myself to read. And one of the sort of tricks that I used was actually getting on social media for book recommendations. And so, so I started feeding the algorithm on Instagram where I was going through book talk, like book Instagram, bookstore accounts. And I would try to find. Usually it was like young men, honestly, who would recommend five books, for example. And of the five books that they recommended, I really liked two of them. And I remember liking them like Grapes of Wrath or east of eden, you know, 100 years of solitude, whatever it was. I remember those books and thinking I really enjoyed them them. And if they recommended those books alongside other books, that was a guy I wanted to follow for more book recommendations. And so I used social media as sort of a gateway into getting those book recommendations. And then I just sort of jumped back in. And it's been wonderful and so much more edifying to sit at the. At the library playground reading a book to myself as my kid is playing than scrolling on my phone, which is what I spent basically 10 years to.
- [61:42]
A
And I love how you talk in the piece about how it really is like a muscle and like exercise in so many ways in that you. Except instead of building muscle, you're actually building your attention span and how you can see as you start to read more, it becomes easier, it becomes more enjoyable. But also you see the benefits start to spread, not just to your vocabulary, not just to the way you think, but also to your ability to focus and think. And I love that you touched that. I encourage everyone. Go read Bethany's piece. It's on the site right now in the upstream section. Let's get to another piece of yours that I've been very excited. This one published last month and I've been very excited to talk to you about it because it's on Ozempic. You wrote in the Daily Wire about your own experience with GLP1s and specifically how you're grappling with what you call the question nobody wants to answer. Just flesh that out for us.
- [62:31]
D
Yeah, so it's funny, I'm actually texting my friend right now who just texted me. I just took my first shot and I wanna say that I am not being sponsored by Zepbound, but if Big Pharma wants to reach out to me, I feel like I've earned it. So if they want to start sponsoring all of my GLP content, Lord knows I've earned it. So I went to the doctor a little over a year ago. It was May of 2025, and general blood work. I've had again six babies in nine years, and I had not been to a doctor that was not a midwife or an obgyn in, like 10 years for a general checkup. And so she ran blood work and called me back and said, and you never want to get the call after you do blood work. And she called me and said, you're perilously close to diabetes, like, really scary close. And both my parents had diabetes, and it's something that's always scared me, and it was actually part of why I went to the doctor to just check my numbers to make sure. And what I was fearing was the reality that I was perilously close to diabetes. And she said, you need to lose a lot of weight very quickly. And I was like, well, I would love to do that too. And so she recommended doing Zepbound. And I was on the lowest dose for many months, and I was really scared of the diabetes. So I also changed my diet drastically, and I started going to the gym. And on the lowest dose, which was actually supposed to be just a. An introductory dose where you're sort of going on the on ramp. I lost, like 35 pounds, maybe more, maybe 40 pounds. And then I stepped up because my insurance company thought that that's what you should do, even though I was losing a lot of weight, whatever. So I've end result is I lost 60 pounds in, like, nine months. And I don't think I've been this thin ever in my adult life. And. And the question that I had in the piece was basically looking at people like Kelly Osborne and Demi Moore who are very clearly way too thin, scary thin. And I don't want to get to the point where I'm scary thin. I don't want diabetes. My blood work is amazing now, and I'm so grateful that I'm not perilously close to diabetes. But the question is always how thin is too thin? And I think that as a society, we've gone through these cycles of what we think about weight. And so it went from like, the heroin chic of the 90s to all of a sudden, like, fat was great and we were all fat positive. And now that the availability of GLP1s is what it is, people are like, actually being thin is kind of great. Forget My commitment to the fatness now that I don't have to be fat anymore anymore. And so I think that as a society, we're sort of grappling with the availability of these medications and what to do once you've reached a point where, like, how thin is too thin and what is the goal here? And so as a woman especially, that's a hard line to cross because my generation grew up on heroin chic. And so we need to figure out when. When enough is enough.
- [65:47]
A
Yeah, it's a fascinating article. Again, I encourage everyone to read that one as well. Read everything Bethany writes. I had in my notes, like five more questions on this specific topic I wanted to ask you, but we only have time for one more topic. So I wanna get to another thing that you've been weighing in on, and this is the debate over homeschooling. Obviously, you are an expert on this topic, given all of your experience in homeschooling, your handful of kids. And you wrote an interesting angle about how the view of homeschooling is actually kind of representative of a broader divide in the way that folks think about the world and think about parenting on the left and the right. I'll just say again, can you flesh that out for us? Because it was really interesting.
- [66:29]
D
Yeah. So I'm actually writing a column about this for the New York Post and the next day or two, but I see. So the argument sort of started with Jennifer Welch, who's this like, shrill, terrible commentator on the left. And she, on her podcast about a week ago, said the only people who homeschool are fundamentalist crazy Christians who are patriarchal and they're stupid and they're lazy. That was the argument for why they homeschool. And I laughed because I'm Jewish, I work full time, and my house is certainly not the patriarchy. I love my husband very much, but he's not telling me what to do every single day for sure. Although I am pregnant and barefoot in my kitchen very frequently. That's really where it ends. But there is this inherent deep self loathing on the part of liberal women. It's misogyny to its core, and it's a hatred of all things feminine. And so you look at homemaking, they look down on it. They look down on motherhood, they look down on women who want to be with their children full time. And this is something I've been a stay at home mom slash homeschooling mom my entire motherhood journey. My oldest daughter is almost 13. And this is a theme that comes up Again and again, in the very blue areas where I live, people are liberal. Women especially have some real deep, deep self loathing about everything that makes them a woman, whether it be making a beautiful home, all these things. They see all of it as the patriarchy and something that needs to be fought against and we need equality in the home. They complain about the mental load, and they're fighting so hard against very basic biology that goes back to thousands of years ago of how humans, humans existed in the hunter and gathering time. Like we were the gatherers and y' all were the hunters. Like it's in this house we believe in science. Like that is evolutionary science. And they just, they're so in denial about it. And they think that, you know, they just push hard enough they can push back against the logic and the evolutionary science behind it. But we are hardwired to be very different people in, in our homes, the husbands and the wives, and they think that they can outrun the science and you can't. Sorry.
- [69:04]
A
I would encourage everyone to go read Bethany's work on the Daily Wires Upstream and also go check out her substack where she writes more about this kind of mindset, divergence between the left and right and parenting and homeschooling. Bethany, I have an hour's worth of questions I would love to keep asking you. So that just means we'll have to get you back on in the near future.
- [69:22]
B
I know.
- [69:22]
D
I was about to say we would
- [69:23]
A
love to have you.
- [69:24]
D
Love it.
- [69:24]
A
Thank you, Bethany.
- [69:25]
D
I would love that. Thank you.
- [69:26]
A
Awesome. All right, that was Bethany Mandel again, everyone. Go check out her work. And this was Wired in. Thank you guys so much for watching. If you're on Apple or Spotify, I would encourage all of you to go join our live member Q and a@dailywire.com subscribe. I will see all of you tomorrow. Thanks for watching.
- [69:51]
E
It.