Donald Trump just gave one of the greatest press conferences in American history. He talked more in this press conference than Joe Biden has for four years. He spoke quite coherently and cogently.
The press conference was a doozy. It was wonderful in so many ways.
Trump is going to instruct the federal government to rename the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America, and I am here for it. It is fantastic. If you look at a map, about 65% of the coastline along the Gulf of Mexico is in America.
Who&#8217;s going to stop us from renaming it? Mexico? Sure. They can’t even balance the budget or stop the cartels from running their country.
But that&#8217;s not the only item on the Manifest Destiny Agenda for the Trump administration that I love.
I love that Trump has been talking about making Canada the 51st state. I know that Justin Trudeau is out there tweeting how it&#8217;ll never be the 51st state, but he has no say in the matter because when we invade, he will be shipped to work the Panama Canal.
More America is better. Greenland, a vital place territorially, is on Trump’s list. Why not? The United States spends money on the military defense of Greenland, and we have military bases in Greenland. We use Greenland’s northern border in order to protect Arctic shipping. Greenland is very important because as ice melts in the Arctic Circle, there will be brand-new North Atlantic shipping lanes which have drawn interest from Russia and China. Either Russia and China are going to have an impact there, or we are. Arctic shipping has increased, according to <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/saradorn/2025/01/08/why-does-trump-want-to-buy-greenland-heres-what-to-know-as-don-jr-arrives-on-island/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Forbes</a>, 37% over the past decade.
In addition, Greenland is part of the strategically important Greenland-Iceland-UK gap, a choke point that Russian ships actually have to transit to travel from the Arctic Ocean to the Atlantic.
And Greenland has a plethora of untapped mineral resources. Those include copper, iron ore, diamonds, and oil. We should purchase Greenland.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-2112-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show</a></h3>
The people of Greenland have been talking about independence for a very long time. If that were to happen, they would realign with the United States in a heartbeat. First of all, it&#8217;s better to live in the United States than it is to live in a principality of Denmark. Second, as far as security concerns to defend those Arctic Straits against Russia and China, do you think Denmark is going to go up against the Russians or the Chinese?
If that is a matter of national security for the United States, why not sell Greenland to the United States if you are Denmark?
Back in 1775, Denmark and Norway declared Greenland a colony. Greenland was then formally transferred from Norway to Denmark by a treaty in 1814. Denmark started trying to colonize the island in the 1880s.
But before the 1880s, a huge chunk was actually discovered by Americans. Charles Francis Hall saw northwest Greenland during the Polaris expedition, which was from 1871 to 1873. And another explorer named Robert Peary actually claimed much of the North.
The only reason that Denmark has any claim whatsoever to Greenland, as far as the United States is concerned, is because when the United States was interested in purchasing the Danish West Indies during World War I, Denmark required the U.S. to recognize its claim over the whole island of Greenland.
At the time, Peary, the explorer who discovered and claimed much of it, opposed the U.S. giving up the claim because the Monroe Doctrine said there should be no European interference in the Western Hemisphere.
He correctly suggested that we should have purchased the island outright. And then, as it turned out, we had to defend it anyway because in the early 1940s, Denmark had been conquered by the Nazis. Once that happened, the United States basically had to defend Greenland as its own principality because it was the only known significant source of a material called rhyolite. Because Germany was attempting to use the North Atlantic as a base during World War II, the United States actually did apply the Monroe Doctrine on European colonies in the North Atlantic Ocean.
By 1946, the joint chiefs of staff had listed Greenland and Iceland as essential international locations for American bases. In fact, when NATO was in its heyday, Greenland was seen as more important to both American and Canadian defense than some of the Western European countries. That was because the very, very north of Canada, the North American continent, gets pretty close to territory that is controlled by Russia.
In 1951, Greenland and the United States signed a treaty that gave the United States exclusive jurisdiction over defense areas within Greenland. So there is a significantly solid case that the United States actually ought to buy Greenland.
But there’s more. 
President Trump has made clear that he does not want the Panama Canal to be controlled by the Chinese. He&#8217;s half joking when he&#8217;s making fun of Justin Trudeau and talking about making Canada the 51st state, but the Greenland issue is actually a fairly serious proposal. And when it comes to the Panama Canal, there really is a serious problem. The Panama Canal was built with American labor and money. It was turned over idiotically by one of our worst presidents, Jimmy Carter.
The Panama Canal has run significantly worse since we turned it over to Panama. The Panamanians have turned over both ends of the canals to Chinese companies who could easily shut off the entrances and exits to the Panama Canal. 40% of all American container traffic goes through the Panama Canal. That&#8217;s a lot of American commerce moving through the Panama Canal.
If the United States were ever to get into a conflict with China, most shipping would cease because China would try to take control of the Taiwan Strait and the Strait of Malacca, which is basically the tip of the South China Sea. That would shut off another shipping route. If they could shut off shipping in the Western Hemisphere, they could absolutely cripple the American economy.
<h3><a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">JOIN THE MOVEMENT IN &#8217;25 WITH 25% OFF DAILYWIRE+ ANNUAL MEMBERSHIPS WITH CODE DW25</a></h3>
On foreign policy, Trump was asked about what he&#8217;s going to do if the hostages are not freed by Hamas by the time he takes office in just 13 days. 
President Trump <a href="https://www.mediaite.com/news/trump-vows-all-hell-will-break-out-if-hamas-hostages-not-released-before-he-takes-office-do-i-have-to-define-it-for-you/">answered</a>:
<blockquote>Do I have to define it for you? Look, all hell will break out. … If they’re not back by the time I get into office, all hell will break out in the Middle East. It will not be good for Hamas and it will not be good, frankly, for anyone. All hell will break out. I don’t have to say anymore, but that’s what it is. And they should have given them back a long time ago, they should have never taken them, there should have never been the attack on Oct. 7. People forget that, but there was, and many people [were] killed.</blockquote>
This is strength. Joe Biden never had any moral clarity about this because he&#8217;s a fool. Donald Trump, on the other hand, has moral clarity about this.
And this is the correct approach. If Hamas is not afraid, they&#8217;re not releasing the hostages. It is that simple. There&#8217;s nothing else that is going to make them release the hostages other than dire threats and action and allowing Israel to do exactly what it needs to do in the Gaza Strip.
And then Trump was asked about the possibility of a preemptive strike on the Iranian nuclear facilities if they were to ramp up their nuclear production. And Trump gave the correct answer on this one too.
Again, Trump gave more answers in this one press conference than Biden has given in four years. He made more intelligent statements in this press conference than Biden has ever said in his entire career. That’s because Biden was, is, and will be a dullard. 
President Trump explained that if Iran were to attempt a nuclear weapon, he wouldn’t tell the reporter what he would do because he&#8217;s the president, and he&#8217;s not going to tell some dumb reporter what he&#8217;s going to do because it&#8217;s a stupid question. That is correct.
Speaking of other good things, President Trump also had some words about Biden&#8217;s attempts to shut down drilling for oil off pretty much all of America&#8217;s Eastern seaboard on his way out. Trump said, we like to produce energy in America. American energy independence has made us less dependent on some of the worst places in the world. That is a good thing. And Biden is throttling America&#8217;s energy independence.
A great press conference.
He’s better than he ever was.

President-Elect Trump Holds Press Conference At Mar-A-Lago

Trump Gives The Best Press Conference Ever

Ben Shapiro

Canada

China

Denmark

Donald Trump

Greenland

Gulf of Mexico

Hamas

Hostages

Humor

Joe Biden

Mar-a-Lago

Opinion

Panama Canal

Presidency

Key Speakers At The Meta Connect Event

Massive MAGA Win: Facebook Reverses Its Censorship

Daily Wire

Facebook

Fact Check

Mark Zuckerberg

Social Media

Social Media Censorship

Two major issues are going to come up in the Congress of the United States this year because Republicans do not actually have a supermajority in the Senate, which means they have to use a process that is called reconciliation. 
Reconciliation can only be used on budgetary bills and matters, which means it can only be used once, or possibly twice at the most, inside of a year.
The big question for Republicans in the House and the Senate is whether they are going to create two bills and vote on them separately over the course of the year.
One is going to be a border bill that&#8217;s going to attempt to increase border security and complete the building of the border wall, to change the law where necessary in order to make it easier to deport illegal immigrants. That would be bill number one.
Bill number two would be making the 2017 Trump tax cuts permanent.
There are basically two possible strategies here. One strategy would be to separate those two bills. In some ways that might be better, and in some ways it might be worse. 
The other strategy would be to wrap them up into one giant bill. This method would cause more compromises to be cut than might be cut if the bill was separated into two. That’s because piling everything into one bill on border matters and tax matters and having an up or down vote creates more crap in the crap sandwich.
It&#8217;s like an omnibus package that includes tax matters and border matters.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-2110-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show</a></h3>
Many conservatives are concerned about this. The House Freedom Caucus is upset because it will take additional spending on the border in order to secure the border. The Trump tax cuts may lead to short-term lowering of federal revenue into the tax coffers, so their question is how to offset that in terms of spending.
Meanwhile, Republicans would also like to increase the defense budget in the face of a vastly aggressive China.
If all of this gets wrapped in one bill and Trump says to the American body politic and to the constituents of all these Republicans, “Listen, the bill has a lot of stuff I don&#8217;t like, but it has a lot of stuff I do like. I&#8217;m ‘yes,’ on the bill. Everybody else should be ‘yes’ on the bill,” Republicans will be pressured to go ‘yes’ on the bill, even if there&#8217;s more crap included in the crap sandwich.
The alternative, which is to separate the two bills — the border bill and the tax bill — is that neither may pass. It may be an opportunity for people to signal their discontent on matters regarding Trump&#8217;s approach to the border. If you&#8217;re on the left wing of the Republican Party on tax matters, there&#8217;s going to be some pretty serious battles inside the Republican Party with regard to the state and local tax (SALT) deduction that allows taxpayers to subtract a portion of their state and local taxes from their federal taxable income.
The 2017 tax cuts asserted that if you paid taxes in California or New York, that didn&#8217;t mean you could deduct the taxes you paid on the state level against your federal taxable income. That would have been a sort of affirmative action program on taxes for blue states. That got removed.
But there are a lot of people, Republicans from New York and California, who would like to restore the SALT deductions in the tax code, and that&#8217;s going to be an open battle.
So strategically speaking, the question is, do you go for two purer and smaller bills, or do you go for one less pure, bigger, beautiful bill?
Because Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) is working with such a slim majority, he would prefer one bill because he wants to get everything that Trump wants. His choices are: get less of what Trump wants and less bad stuff, or get more of what Trump wants and more bad stuff.
That&#8217;s the nature of the bargain here. There is no third choice where you get all the great things that you want and none of the bad things that you don&#8217;t want. That’s not how it works with a majority this slim in the House and a pretty slim majority in the Senate as well.
This is a matter of strategy. It&#8217;s not a matter of principle. Johnson is very conservative. So too, for example, is House Ways and Means chair Jason Smith, a Republican from Missouri and a very conservative member of Congress. He&#8217;s also calling for one big bill. The idea would be get this bill rammed through by April — and do it fast. Do it quickly, because as we all know, the midterms are going to come up in a couple of years, which means Trump has two years to get everything he wants done.
And that really means he has one year to get it done. By the time he hits his second year, everybody will already be running for reelection, and they will have their eyes on their next race.
Smith pointed out that practically no parties have succeeded in passing two reconciliation bills in the same year in decades.
The bottom line is: Johnson is, in fact, a very good strategist. So is John Thune (R-SD), the Senate Majority Leader.
<h3><a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">JOIN THE MOVEMENT IN &#8217;25 WITH 25% OFF DAILYWIRE+ ANNUAL MEMBERSHIPS WITH CODE DW25</a></h3>
When Republican congresspeople talk about how we are not solving our national debt with these bills, they are damn right: We&#8217;re not solving our national debt with these bills. There is no need in pretending that anything being proposed is going to solve the national debt. The reality is that the national debt is never going to get solved until the entitlement programs that no one is going to touch are, indeed, touched. Until you touch Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, you are not going to be able to tackle the national debt.
So what does that mean? Those tax cuts better be made permanent because otherwise Democrats are going to reverse those at the first available opportunity, thus destroying the possibility of economic growth that could help facilitate solutions to issues like the national debt.
The border bill better be passed now because Democrats sure as hell aren&#8217;t going to pass a good border bill if they are in charge or if they gain control of the House of Representatives.
So, understand what Johnson has to do.
And he will get it done.

Opening Day Of The 119th Congress On Capitol Hill

The Urgency Of Time: Why Mike Johnson Must Do What He Has To Do

Congress

Federal Government

House Republicans

Mike Johnson

National Debt

Republicans

U.S. House of Representatives

The reason Donald Trump is president-elect is not just because he is a unique, out-of-the-box historical figure — although that is true.  
The biggest reason Trump is president-elect is because Joe Biden was dead his entire presidency, and everyone knew it. The media lied about it, and the White House lied about it.
Now it can finally be said by those people since Biden is exiting office. 
This should be the biggest presidential scandal in history. In the scenario with Woodrow and Edith Wilson during Wilson’s second term — when he basically had a stroke and was completely incapacitated while Edith ran the country — there was not a lot of transparency to the public. The media was fairly small. Such a scenario did not require the collusion of thousands of people to cover up what was happening with Woodrow Wilson. 
Situations like what happened with Biden have never occurred in the modern media age, but it happened and the cover-up was extraordinary.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-2109-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show</a></h3>
The 25th Amendment should have been applied to Biden. His Cabinet should have said he was no longer capable of holding office and made Kamala Harris president, but they didn&#8217;t have the stones to do it. 
Instead, they&#8217;ve allowed this diminished president, this person whose brain is not functional, to continue in the office of the presidency of the United States, the most important office on planet Earth, simply because they didn&#8217;t have the actual guts to oust him.
So instead, they hid it. They hid it from the American public. 
And we all knew it. We all knew it. 
The amount of damage their subterfuge did to the Democratic ticket this year is almost incalculable because no matter how many times Democrats call the Republicans liars or threats to the Republic, no matter how much they say Trump is not normal, it turns out that the least normal thing is keeping a corpse in the White House like Weekend at Bernie&#8217;s, wheeling him around for a press conference, pretending he&#8217;s sentient while the rest of the public can see everything that&#8217;s happening. 
It was one of the great Emperor&#8217;s New Clothes moments in American history.
The Wall Street Journal <a href="https://www.wsj.com/politics/biden-white-house-age-function-diminished-3906a839" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a>:
<blockquote>To adapt the White House around the needs of a diminished leader, they told visitors to keep meetings focused. Interactions with senior Democratic lawmakers and some cabinet members—including powerful secretaries such as Defense’s Lloyd Austin and Treasury’s Janet Yellen—were infrequent or grew less frequent. Some legislative leaders had a hard time getting the president’s ear at key moments, including ahead of the U.S.’s disastrous pullout from Afghanistan. </blockquote>
That was early in Biden’s tenure. The disastrous pullout from Afghanistan was September 2021. So pretty much from the moment he entered office, he was so diminished that the Cabinet members or members of the legislature were not meeting with him.
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/gift-guide/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE</a>
It&#8217;s not as though anything important was happening enduring his presidency, such as the pullout from Afghanistan, the Hamas October 7 massacre of Israelis, or inflation at a 40-year high.
Biden and the Democratic Party couldn&#8217;t be bothered because they were so high on their own supply. They believed the American public hated Trump so much that they could pretend this mummy was president of the United States and functional, even though we could all see he was not.
And the media went along with it.
I&#8217;m not sure if there&#8217;s a bigger political scandal or a bigger media scandal. As I&#8217;ve said many times, there is a Democrat media human centipede in which the Democratic Party decides what issues matter most and the media then repeat them ad nauseum. 
The legacy media are just stenographers for the Democratic Party.
According to the Wall Street Journal:
<blockquote>Senior advisers were often put into roles that some administration officials and lawmakers thought Biden should occupy, with people such as National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, senior counselor Steve Ricchetti and National Economic Council head Lael Brainard and her predecessor frequently in the position of being go-betweens for the president. </blockquote>
<blockquote>Press aides who compiled packages of news clips for Biden were told by senior staff to exclude negative stories about the president. The president wasn’t talking to his own pollsters as surveys showed him trailing in the 2024 race. </blockquote>
They treated him like a toddler. They treated him the way I treat my four-year-old. They prescreened all the material they gave him in a world in which everything was hunky dory as though no one could see he was diminished. The White House operated this way even as the president and his aides pressed forward with his reelection bid.
After the debate with Trump, the reason the media turned on Biden was not because a light bulb had gone off and suddenly they realized he was not mentally capable.
What happened is that they were embarrassed. They were embarrassed because it had become clear to everyone just how incapable the president of the United States actually was. 
For the media, it&#8217;s always been about their profile with the American public. They thought they could get away with it. And then Biden embarrassed them, they didn&#8217;t like it, and they turned on him. 
We all pointed out Biden’s senility. We knew all of this. 
This is the part that makes it scandalous: We all knew it. It was all right there. They are so brazen in the media. They were so brazen in this White House. They thought they could get away with all of it. 
They urinated on the leg of the American public, and they told us it was raining.

The Greatest Scandal In Modern Presidential History

Biden Administration

Legacy Media

Complete chaos has now broken out in the Congress of the United States with conflict between Speaker Mike Johnson on one side and President Trump and Elon Musk on the other.
What the hell is going on here? 
First, politics is a battle between principle and pragmatism. What you want and what is possible are two different things. Anybody in my job who says the pragmatic considerations are simply a lack of will or a betrayal of principles does not understand politics. That, or the person is lying.
Many people are doing this today. When Congress comes up with any sort of deal, some suggest that is a violation of principle: “If only they had acted with Nietzschean willpower, they could have gotten 100% of what you wanted.”
That is a lie. 
Conversely, anybody who says pragmatism ought to lead to complete abandonment of principle is also lying. Anybody who says, “Listen, I didn&#8217;t give away the store because otherwise you wouldn’t have gotten anything,” is usually lying. 
The art of politics and the difficulty of elective politics is finding the balance between what you want — principle — and what you can get — pragmatism.  
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-2108-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show</a></h3>
That is what has been happening in the House over the last 48 hours.
A continuing resolution is currently being considered. So what exactly is a “continuing resolution”? Basically, it&#8217;s stopgap funding. Why now? Because Congress is unable to pass a real budget with Chuck Schumer as the head of the Senate and with a very, very slim House majority for Republicans. Remember, Joe Biden is still technically the president.
I have been thoroughly enjoying watching the entire legacy media suggest that Elon Musk is actually the president. They are off by at least two orders of magnitude. Joe Biden is the actual president. Trump isn&#8217;t even the president yet. 
They say Trump isn&#8217;t the president; Musk is the president right now. 
The actual president of the United States is a senile dotard whom Democrats refused to oust as the actual president, despite his senility. But that guy can still stand in the way of anything Republicans pass in the House, and he can veto legislation if he doesn&#8217;t like it.
So, what is the actual position right now with regard to the continuing resolution? <a href="https://www.wsj.com/opinion/118th-congress-spending-blowout-budget-continuing-resolution-pbms-ethanol-cc0b07b6" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Wall Street Journal</a> editorial board correctly assessed it, writing: 
<blockquote>In lieu of passing a real budget, the House and Senate have agreed on another continuing resolution, or CR, that will extend through March 14 in the new year. The only virtue here is that the government won’t shut down if the CR passes, and it will give the new GOP Congress a chance to use budget rules to pass a “reconciliation” bill next year with 51 Senate votes.
This means Chuck Schumer won’t be able to extort more spending if Republicans want at least some of their priorities to pass. But Mr. Schumer is going out with a CR bang, and the GOP is once again forced to take it. Some Republicans want to blame Speaker Mike Johnson for getting too little in exchange. But as long as they refuse to vote for a CR, the Speaker has no choice other than to count on Democratic votes to pass it. And that means bowing to their policy priorities, which is spend and spend.
This is how Mr. Schumer wants it. The GOP House actually passed nearly half of appropriations bills this year, and Susan Collins and Patty Murray passed almost all the Senate bills through the Appropriations Committee. But Mr. Schumer refused to bring them to the floor. He wants the end-of-year jam session when everyone wants to leave for Christmas, and he prevailed again.</blockquote>
That&#8217;s how giant omnibus packages come about. So what is actually in this package? A bunch of pork. They could have passed a clean continuing resolution, which would have continued discretionary spending at prior levels, basically until Trump takes office. 
But they didn&#8217;t do that. Instead, they decided to load it up with $100 billion for disaster relief funds (which is overkill) and $10 billion in farm pork.
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/gift-guide/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE</a>
By the way, this is something many Republicans wanted — this farm pork bill, including Donald Trump and JD Vance. They both wanted that farm bill spending included. 
There are conflicting interests between the parties who are involved in this negotiation. Trump&#8217;s mandate is to take action. He wants to clear the decks before he becomes president of the United States.
Trump would love to enter office with all spending off the books, so he doesn&#8217;t get blamed for the spending at present or blamed for an increase in the debt ceiling. Johnson&#8217;s mandate is to try to get most of what Trump wants, even if that means making some concessions, which he must do by negotiating with his own caucus.
The idea that Johnson has the singular ability to pass a bill himself ignores the fact he has an incredibly slim majority in Congress. 
One of the most annoying suggestions people in my position very often make is that the person who is charged with leading a coalition of widely disparate interests can singlehandedly ram things through. The only instance in my lifetime a leader was able to do that on the Republican side was Newt Gingrich — for about two years. Then, his own Republican caucus basically ousted him.
Politics is the art of balancing principle and pragmatism. So on the one hand is President Trump, who wants the things that he wants, so he is in favor of the continuing resolution. He wanted farm spending. He also wanted disaster relief spending. 
On the other hand is Johnson, who wants to do the things Trump wants him to do.
But who&#8217;s actually going to be the guy who has to negotiate the deal?
Johnson’s job is to cobble together the coalition to get 70% of the loaf of bread. He represents pragmatism, while Musk represents principle 
Everyone knows that in order to get 70% of the loaf, 30% excrement comes with it. 
I am not defending the bill; I would not vote for this bill were I in Congress. I wouldn&#8217;t vote for farm spending. I think that makes the industry significantly less competitive and efficient. I would not vote for a giant disaster relief package because, frankly, I think much of disaster relief should be done at the state level. I don&#8217;t see why California needs to subsidize Florida or why Florida needs to subsidize California.
But let&#8217;s be clear about what happened here: The bill was pre-cleared and pre-negotiated between the White House and Congress.
Then Musk, whose job is to identify the principle, came along, stated it, and created all sorts of backlash. 
That backlash has been directed at Johnson. But that is a misdirection. This is all a complicated negotiation that happens when disparate interests are involved. 
Again, a lot of the heat has been brought to Johnson.
You can yell at Mike Johnson. It&#8217;s fine. He&#8217;s a politician. He&#8217;s used to taking it. He&#8217;s the Speaker of the House, which is legitimately the worst position in American government.  
I am stating what I have said about Johnson, McCarthy, Paul Ryan, and John Boehner, going back years and years: Anybody who says any of these leaders have the capacity to singlehandedly ram through all of the things you want without giving up any of the things you don&#8217;t want is lying to you.
They are not telling you the truth.

Donald Trump, Elon Musk

Trump, Musk Team Up To Kill Pork Bill

Elon Musk

New details are emerging about the suspect in the shooting that took place at Abundant Life Christian School.
The Washington Post has <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2024/12/17/madison-wisconsin-school-shooter-natalie-rupnow/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a> on the “troubled home life” of the shooter:
<blockquote>The 15-year-old girl who killed two people and wounded six others at her small Christian school here Monday had a turbulent home life, according to court records, which show that her parents divorced and remarried multiple times and that she had been enrolled in therapy. …
“There are always signs of a school shooting before it occurre[s],” Madison Police Chief Shon Barnes said at a Tuesday news conference, where he asked the public for patience as authorities investigated [the suspect’s] social media activity and state of mind leading up to the rampage. 
The teen is one of just nine female school shooters in the last 25 years, according to a database maintained by The Post. She is also among the younger recent shooters. … [The suspect’s] father is a Christian who often shared pictures of his dogs and his daughter, according to a review of his Facebook profile. …
But one post, from August, has attracted more scrutiny than others. In it, a photo appears to show [the suspect] wielding a gun and taking aim at a firing range. </blockquote>
Obviously, this means the Left is going to name and focus on gun control as the chief issue.
But, it seems to me, there is a bigger issue here: family turmoil.
I know these are the issues we are not supposed to discuss in American life. We are supposed to believe in a libertarian social ethos that says: When parents have a child and they break up for their own well-being and for the preservation of their own happiness, that has no impact on children whatsoever.
This has been a lie since it started in the 1950s and 1960s in the United States. The divorce rate in those days was significantly lower than the current divorce rate. Today, the divorce rate in the United States shows roughly half of all marriages end in divorce.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-2107-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show</a></h3>
Many people will divorce and remarry multiple times. According to The Washington Post&#8217;s review of court records, the suspect&#8217;s parents first married in 2011, about two years after she was born. All social science demonstrates that living together before marriage is often a bad idea because it is an indication that people are not willing to make the commitment to marry before having a child.
Marriage should be the predicate for sleeping together and then having children. I acknowledge these are old-fashioned ideas, but they existed for a reason, just as social institutions did. It was deemed a smart idea to get married before living together because it channeled sexual passions into family building.
A man had to give up his waywardness and make a commitment to a woman before getting one of the things he wanted out of the relationship with the woman. And it meant a woman would have to be pretty discerning about just with whom she chose to have sex, as doing so could result in pregnancy.
The opposite perspective has been quite bad for the West in general. We have declining birth rates, unhappy families, broken families. None of this has been a boon to the West as a general matter, despite all of the West&#8217;s promises that a libertarian sexual ethos would make everyone happier.
Zero evidence exists that a libertarian sexual ethos makes everyone happier. General happiness surveys across the West show a radical decline since the 1970s, particularly among women who are supposed to be the people most liberated by the new sexual ethos.
In this particular case, the mother of the suspect had been previously married and divorced; then, she had another daughter with a different man, to whom she was never married. Court records indicate this girl had other permanent legal guardians. The half sister is now 20-years-old. The suspect&#8217;s parents divorced for the first time in 2014, agreeing to joint legal custody of their shared daughter, but specifying she would live primarily with her mom.
From the Post:
<blockquote>The couple remarried in 2017 and divorced for a second time in 2020, again agreeing to share custody but, the court records show, dividing [the suspect’s] time more evenly between them. During this period, [the suspect] would spend two days with her father, two with her mother, then three more with her father, before reversing the schedule the following week.
Shortly after [the suspect’s] parents split up for the second time, the couple remarried once more. But by April 2021 they were petitioning for a third divorce. A judge granted it a month later but noted that “parties [were] admonished concerning remarriage,” according to court records.
After seeking mediation to determine custody of [the suspect], they agreed in July 2022 that they would share legal custody but that the girl would now live mostly with her father. By this time, [the suspect] had been enrolled in therapy, which was supposed to help guide decisions about which parent she would spend weekends with, the records show. 
The 2022 custody papers said [the suspect’s] parents were on cordial terms. “The parents report a generally positive co-parenting relationship,” the document reads, “and will continue to communicate with one another by text messages and phone conversations.” </blockquote>
Let&#8217;s get real: It doesn&#8217;t matter if mommy and daddy get along when they&#8217;re not living together. What matters is the impact on the child.
This is what happens when the actual value of marriage is substituted for a transitory perception of passion and romance. Marriage is not built predominantly on feelings. It is predominantly built on duty. 
I know this is a strange idea to many people who are living in the post-modern West. But the reality of the world is that marriage was built on commitment.
Marriage itself is an institution that requires fealty to the institution, not merely to the other person who is part of the institution. This bizarre notion that marriage was supposed to be about a sort-of formalization of romantic love as opposed to a shared value system that was capable of building the next generation is a wrong idea.
And it has been a mistake for the West to embrace that.
Romance is an enormous part of marriage. But it is not the chiefly important part of marriage when children become secondary as opposed to the primary purpose. Not only is marriage defeated, but the children are also defeated.
The idea of romance being the primary focus of marriage took hold during the Romantic Period in the 19th century. But it turned out that human biology thwarted the plans of romantic love to overcome the institution of marriage. The institution, like all institutions built by civilization, was built by human beings in order to channel human passions. Then, they were made sacred by human beings in order to civilize their passions.
We build entire civilizations in order to channel those passions in positive directions. One of the most fervent passions people have is the passion for sexual relationships. It&#8217;s very powerful.
It can also be incredibly destructive. This is why marriage is such an important institution. The institution of marriage channels that passion toward the production and rearing of children, as opposed to simply leaving little boys and girls all over the landscape without proper mothers and fathers in functioning households.
Treating women poorly is what happens in a free-love system, which is how women currently feel. They feel men treat them like trash.
And many of the men are looking at the system saying it’s a consensual system. What&#8217;s the problem?
The answer is that the consent women are typically looking for is not merely sexual consent. It is consent to a long-term relationship that is meaningful, spiritual, and purposeful.
When a society lacks these things, the result is tremendous human suffering, true human suffering.
<h3><a href="https://get.dailywire.com/gift-guide/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE</a></h3>
This belief in a concept of “free divorce, easy living, get back together, break up, get back together, break up, find new partners, and the kids will just be fine, because, you know, kids can take it,” is a blight.
The kids can take it? No, you can take it. You&#8217;re the adult.
Is what happened in the school shooting the parents’ fault? Given the fact they were living the way they lived, it’s a reasonable question.
If you treat your children like a bizarre form of chattel, shuttling them between parent and parent because you want to live your best life, guess what? Things go wrong.
Once you have kids, you are no longer first priority. You&#8217;re not even second priority. As a father, you’re third priority. First priority: your kids. Second priority: your wife. And then comes you.
A disproportionate number of people who commit these types of acts are children of broken homes. And it turns out a disproportionate number of people who commit violent crimes are also products of broken homes.
Longstanding social science data indicates delinquency radically increases when no father is present in the home. Crime radically increases; teenage pregnancy radically increases.
This is what happens when a society decides it is very important to disengage from the institutions and civilization that channeled passions and, instead, just humor those passions and let everything else be left by the wayside.
I think the American people are ready for a serious conversation about what the good life looks like. There&#8217;s a lot of talk in politics these days about the common good and what we all hold together. What is it? What is sacred? What ought to be put beyond political debate?
It used to be beyond political debate that family comes first.
I think the American people are tired of all this, tired of the deep libertarian sexual ethos. I think we are in the middle of what could be a cultural renaissance.
That kinship principle — to be with your family in your home, to raise your children so that their children will have healthy children, to build familial wealth over the course of generations, to sit on the porch when you&#8217;re 80 years old with your grandkids playing in the yard, to know you lived a good, dutiful, purposeful life and will continue contributing to future generations — that is what Americans yearn for.
Because without it, the country falls apart.

Wedding cake visual metaphor with figurine cake toppers

No, Divorce Isn’t ‘Fine For The Kids’

No, Divorce Isn't 'Fine For The Kids'

Children

divorce

Family Values

Fathers

Marriage

Parenting

School Shooting

Western Civilization

Right now, we are watching an international wave of conservative victory. It’s happening across the world. Part of this wave is a result of President Trump. Part of it just includes President Trump.
Justin Trudeau is now likely to resign. His liberal government has now crumbled, largely because of a tweetstorm initiated by President Trump on Truth Social mocking Trudeau as the governor of the 51st state and also suggesting he&#8217;s going to tariff the living hell out of Canada if he, Trudeau, does not give in on some trade deals.
An article in the UK Daily Mail reported on this, <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14199087/Justin-Trudeau-brink-resigning-liberal-government-collapses-canada.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">writing</a>:
<blockquote>Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is on the brink of resigning as his liberal government crumbles around him, according to CTV News.
Trudeau, 52, is &#8216;considering his options as leader&#8217;, sources have told the broadcaster, while his Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland revealed she will quit.
Freeland quit on Monday after clashing with Trudeau on issues including how to handle possible U.S. tariffs, dealing a huge blow to an already unpopular government.
In a stinging resignation letter, Freeland dismissed Trudeau&#8217;s push for increased spending as a political gimmick that could hurt Ottawa&#8217;s ability to deal with the 25 percent import tariffs U.S. President-elect Donald Trump says he will impose.
The resignation by Freeland, 56, who also served as deputy prime minister, is one of the biggest crises Trudeau has faced since taking power in November 2015. 
It also leaves him without a key ally when he is on track to lose the next election to the official opposition Conservatives.
Trudeau quickly came under pressure to go from the New Democrats, the smaller opposition party which earlier this year pulled its unconditional support of the minority Liberal government but has continued to back the prime minister on some legislation through parliament.
&#8216;I&#8217;m calling on Justin Trudeau to resign. He has to go,&#8217; party leader Jagmeet Singh told reporters.</blockquote>
This does not mean a new election will be held immediately. Pierre Poilievre, the leader of the Conservative Party — who would skunk the entire Liberal Party in the next election — is, of course, looking for a new election. He should be because Trudeau’s Left-wing agenda has become unbelievably unpopular in Canada.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/bss-ep-2106-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show</a></h3>
He has called on Trudeau to resign, saying yesterday:
<blockquote>Mr. Trudeau is being held in office by one man, Jagmeet Singh. A fifth of Liberal MPs have written a letter for him to resign. His Deputy Prime Minister has walked out on him. His Housing Minister has quit — that on top of numerous other female ministers who stormed out after his appalling mistreatment and abuse and dishonesty towards them. Eighty percent of Canadians have lost confidence in this Prime Minister. So why is Jagmeet Singh making the entire country wait for him to get his pension? That is the question today.</blockquote>
The real reason these other parties aren&#8217;t voting for a snap election is because they&#8217;re afraid all of the losses to Trudeau would accrue to Poilievre. So, right now, the Canadian government is basically on the brink.
Because Canada is a coalitional system, they require a majority of the Canadian parliament to vote for a motion of no confidence in order to bring down the government. But right now, the Canadian parliament is split between a wide variety of parties. The Left-wing parties have been hesitant to call a new election because they will not do better in a new election, and Poilievre will become prime minister — probably with a sheer majority of votes in Parliament. That is all that is holding Trudeau in office at this point.
The reason he is unpopular is because he has pursued every bad policy possible to pursue. In fact, this little rebellion inside his own party has been instigated by the fact he wants to spend, spend, and spend. He wants to create a massive budget deficit in order to address the fact that he is about to be hit with Trump&#8217;s tariffs.
But this is not just happening in Canada. It is also happening in Germany. The Wall Street Journal has <a href="https://www.wsj.com/world/europe/germany-heads-toward-early-elections-after-scholz-loses-confidence-vote-093b3196?mod=hp_lista_pos1" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a> that Germany is headed to an early election, writing:
<blockquote>Embattled German Chancellor Olaf Scholz lost a confidence vote on Monday, the first step in a sequence of events that will lead to early elections next year—and the latest symptom of mounting political instability in Europe.
Monday’s vote came after the dramatic collapse of Scholz’s strife-ridden coalition government last month, which added a political crisis to the economic slump that has gripped the country for the past two years. 
Without a majority in Parliament, Scholz called a confidence vote—which he fully expected to lose—to clear the way for the dissolution of Parliament and a new vote, now expected in February. Germany’s post-World War II constitution instituted a multistep process for early elections in an attempt to prevent the endemic political instability.</blockquote>
However, if there were to be a new election, Friedrich Merz would likely take over. Merz is a center-Right politician who is very pro-America. Scholz is a center-Left politician. Merz is a representative of the same party as Angela Merkel, who was Chancellor of Germany from 2005-2021. However, Merz hated Merkel&#8217;s immigration policy, which condemned the center-Right to a decade of wilderness.
The Journal goes on, writing:
<blockquote>Opinion polls show the center-right Christian Democratic Union, led by veteran conservative politician and businessman Friedrich Merz, as the likely winner of the ballot on Feb. 23. Yet the party is unlikely to command a big enough majority to govern alone or with the FDP, the other center-right party in Parliament, and will likely need to form an alliance with one or several center-left parties, forcing it to dilute its pro-business and law-and-order agenda.</blockquote>
The bottom line, however, is that the winds have shifted across the world. The West is tired of stagnation. The West is tired of conciliation with Left-wing forces who are, in turn, conciliatory with radical Islamists.
<h3><a href="https://get.dailywire.com/gift-guide/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE</a></h3>
The West is finally standing up on its hind legs.
Some of the leaders of this new movement include, obviously, President Trump; Giorgia Meloni, the Prime Minister of Italy who is apparently going to attend the inauguration of President Trump; Geert Wilders in the Netherlands; and Viktor Orban, the Prime Minister of Hungary; among others.
Leaders of the center-Right to those who are libertarian are moving in a similar direction. Why? Because chaos and instability are pleasures of the luxurious wealthy. When things are going really well, you can afford dumb ideas. When things are going poorly, it turns out that you cannot.
And so it is very heartening to see Western countries turn away from the foolish redistributionist, self-hating Left-wing policies and turn toward something better.
It is a very good thing. This change is, indeed, in part due to Trump, but it is not only due to him. It is gaining traction across the world as people begin to realize how dumb Left-wing policy has been.

CANADA-POLITICS-TRUDEAU

Trump’s World: Trudeau On The Brink, Germany Moves Right

Trump's World: Trudeau On The Brink, Germany Moves Right

Conservatives

Germany

Justin Trudeau

Leftists

Liberals

Pierre Poilievre

Tariffs

There are, apparently, numerous strange drones flying around America, particularly the East Coast and military bases.
And we keep hearing from the government that it&#8217;s not a big deal.
They&#8217;re not sure what they are, they say. They&#8217;re not sure what to do about it, but it&#8217;s no big deal.
But here is my problem. 15 years ago, I might have believed the government was honest. I would have been more apt to think, “Hey, they know what they&#8217;re doing because no way in hell this government would allow, say, foreign drones or even domestic drones to simply hover around military facilities en masse for weeks on end. There&#8217;s no way they would do that.”
Then, Joe Biden became president and allowed a Chinese spy balloon to cross the entire continental United States without shooting it down. Only after he got called on it did he proceed to shoot down several balloons by using Hellfire missiles.
So, yes, I&#8217;m skeptical.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-2105-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show</a></h3>
That doesn&#8217;t mean these are Chinese drones, Iranian drones, aliens, or anything similar. Perhaps it&#8217;s just people who are mistaking airplanes for drones. That&#8217;s quite possible.
But I don&#8217;t trust the members of our government to tell us the truth — even if they know the truth — because they have not in the past.
In a piece titled, “What We Know About Mysterious Drone Sightings,” CNN <a href="https://edition.cnn.com/2024/12/15/us/drone-sightings-east-coast/index.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a>:
<blockquote>Mysterious flying objects overhead. Concern and confusion. And calls for military intervention. This isn’t the plot of “War of the Worlds,” but rather the result of numerous possible drone sightings in recent weeks. The flying objects have been spotted over residential neighborhoods, restricted sites and critical infrastructure.</blockquote>
If they&#8217;re floating above residential sites, I tend to think these are probably simply domestic drones, people who are hobbyists or something of that sort. But when reports of large swarms of drones apparently flying near military bases in Virginia or New Jersey surface, I start to have some questions.
CNN continued:
<blockquote>Reported drone activity prompted at least one airport – New York’s Stewart International Airport – to temporarily close its runways for about an hour on Friday night. 
At around the same time, airspace above Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio was restricted because of drone activity while authorities monitored the situation, base spokesperson Bob Purtiman told CNN affiliate WHIO. …
“This has gone too far,” said New York Gov. Kathy Hochul on Saturday, adding last month she “directed the New York State Intelligence Center to actively investigate drone sightings and coordinate with federal law enforcement to address this issue.” … 
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said he’s asking the DHS to deploy special detection systems that use 360-degree technology to detect drones.</blockquote>
The reality is it&#8217;s actually quite difficult to track drones in the same way that a missile is tracked. This has been a problem in Israel, for example, where the Houthis have launched several drones.
The American government does not have a sufficient response to this as of yet. Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said: 
<blockquote>There’s no question that people are seeing drones. And I want to assure the American public that we, in the federal government, have deployed additional resources, personnel, technology to assist the New Jersey State Police in addressing the drone sightings. … We know of no threat or nefarious activity. If we learn of any cause for concern, we will be transparent in our communication of it. </blockquote>
Some of those drone sightings are drones. Some are manned aircraft that are commonly mistaken for drones. Drone sightings apparently have been reported in at least six states: New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, as well as Virginia.
But there are drones elsewhere. I know because I saw one on the southern border. When we filmed “<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/invasion-on-the-southern-border" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Divided States of Biden</a>,” I was with Border Patrol. It was fairly early in the evening, and suddenly, I looked up and saw a drone. I asked Border Patrol what it was, and they told me it was a drone.
I said, “Well, I assume that that&#8217;s our drone from our side monitoring the border.” They said, “No, that is a drug cartel drone.”
There are foreign drones flying over American soil. That is a fact.
I asked Border Patrol why they didn&#8217;t just shoot down the drone, and they said they would need explicit permission from Mayorkas.
It is possible that people are attributing planes to drones or they are experiencing a camera error. Any of that is possible.
But I have very little trust in the federal government that they are doing the job that they were designated to do.
I do not believe members of the Biden administration when they say that they are giving the American people all of the information.
* * *
<h3><a href="https://get.dailywire.com/gift-guide/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE</a></h3>

WH Briefing Oct 1

What The Hell Are All These Drones?

Alejandro Mayorkas

Drones

Drug Cartels

New Jersey

Southern Border

One of the astonishing things about the news industry is that many stories with an outsized national impact turn out to have been completely falsified upon further review. One of its incentive structures is often “firstist with the mostist”; in other words, get to the story fast and report it incredibly quickly. But then, the reporting ends up being false. In retrospect, this does significant damage. This is true in regard to reporting about COVID or Black Lives Matter.
One of the signal examples of this is now being exposed for all the world to see.
18 years ago, in 2006, the Duke lacrosse rape case incited a wide variety of movements that would come into full flower over the course of the subsequent 10 years, particularly during the Obama era. The Duke lacrosse case was an inciting incident for Black Lives Matter and for the #MeToo movement.
In this case, a stripper accused a series of rich white lacrosse players at Duke University of having sexually assaulted her. It became one of the biggest cases in American criminal justice history, specifically because of its ripple effects.
Crystal Mangum, the stripper at the center of that case, has admitted she lied back in 2006. Until now, she has never publicly admitted she fabricated the rape allegation.
Three men, David Evans, Collin Finnerty, and Reade Seligmann, were arrested and put on trial before the case was dismissed. Mangum’s original allegation was that she had been performing at a team party off campus in March of 2006, had been sexually assaulted, and raped by a series of white Duke lacrosse players.
She was, indeed, at this party, but, apparently, she engaged in none of her &#8220;career activity,&#8221; shall we say, because she was high on drugs or intoxicated with alcohol. She ended up leaving early, and then these accusations were filed.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-2104-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show</a></h3>
There were many holes in her story. First, there is no DNA on her. Second, she could not identify any of the Duke lacrosse players, except for one, who ended up not having even been there.
Yet, the problems with her allegations did not stop everyone — including the elite media and those on university campuses — from jumping to conclusions.
Durham County District Attorney Mike Nifong <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqt9OX-oAtU" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a> in 2006, “I am not going to allow Durham’s view in the mind of the world to be a bunch of lacrosse players from Duke raping a black girl in Durham.”
Nifong obviously had other political motivations, possibly to run for a higher office at some point. In a March 2006 interview with CBS News, he <a href="https://www.ncbar.gov/orders/06dhc35.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">stated</a>, “The circumstances of the rape indicated a deep racial motivation for some of the things that were done. It makes a crime that is by its nature one of the most offensive and invasive even more so.” According to Nifong, this wasn&#8217;t just a rape. It was, in fact, a racist rape.
The former Duke University president, Richard Brodhead, took immediate action against the team following only the allegations. He accepted the resignation of the men&#8217;s lacrosse coach, canceled the remainder of their season, and suspended the accused three players from school after they were indicted for rape, according to <a href="https://nypost.com/2024/12/12/us-news/former-stripper-murder-convict-crystal-mangum-confesses-to-lying-about-being-raped-by-duke-lacrosse-players-in-2006/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The New York Post</a>. This was “despite having asked the public not to prejudge the criminal case.”
David Evans, one of the players, stridently <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=niLROfcOfBc" target="_blank" rel="noopener">denied the allegations</a>, saying, “I am absolutely innocent of all the charges that have been brought against me today, that Reade Seligmann and Collin Finnerty are innocent of all the charges that were brought against them. These allegations are lies.” Eventually, the case was dismissed.
<div id="attachment_844111" style="width: 1034px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-844111" class="wp-image-844111 size-full" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/12/GettyImages-57618732.jpg" alt="DURHAM, NC - MAY 15: Duke lacrosse player David Evans (C), 23-years-old, proclaims his innocence as he addresses the media outside the Durham County Detention Center after being indicted on sexual assault charges on May 15, 2006 in Durham, North Carolina. Evans is the third player to be indicted for sexual assault of a woman hired as a private dancer to a party attended by lacrosse team members March 13. (Photo by Sara D. Davis/Getty Images)" width="1024" height="557" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/12/GettyImages-57618732.jpg 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/12/GettyImages-57618732-300x163.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/12/GettyImages-57618732-768x418.jpg 768w" sizes="(max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" />DURHAM, NC &#8211; MAY 15, 2006: Duke lacrosse player David Evans (C), 23-years-old, proclaims his innocence. (Photo by Sara D. Davis/Getty Images)</div>
Yet that did not stop The New York Times from running around 100 pieces about the Duke lacrosse allegations. A tremendous number of Duke faculty actually paid for an ad that was put in the Duke Chronicle devoted to this particular case. Numerous departments and professors at the university signed onto this paid advertisement. What did <a href="https://today.duke.edu/showcase/mmedia/pdf/socialdisasterad.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">the statement</a> say?
<blockquote>We are listening to our students. We’re also listening to the Durham community, to Duke staff, and to each other. Regardless of the results of the police investigation, what is apparent everyday now is the anger and fear of many students who know themselves to be objects of racism and sexism; who see illuminated in this moment’s extraordinary spotlight what they live with everyday. They know that it isn’t just Duke, it isn’t everybody, and it isn’t just individuals making this disaster. But it is a disaster nonetheless. These students are shouting and whispering about what happened to this young woman and to themselves.</blockquote>
The ad then provided anonymous student statements about the issue. The seedbed for the Black Lives Matter movement here is obvious. And it turns out all of this was based on lies. It was all lies — beginning to end.
Eventually, the North Carolina attorney general, Roy Cooper, announced that the charges had, in fact, been dropped. (Cooper would go on to become the governor of North Carolina.) He <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHtDbZ5i-w8" target="_blank" rel="noopener">announced</a>:
<blockquote>Our attorneys and SBI agents have interviewed numerous people who were at the party, DNA and other experts, the Durham County district attorney, Durham police officers, defense attorneys, and the accusing witness on several occasions. We have reviewed statements given over the year, photographs, records, and other evidence. The result of our review and investigation shows clearly that there is insufficient evidence to proceed on any of the charges. Today, we are filing notices of dismissal for all charges against Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty, and David Evans. The result is that these cases are over, and no more criminal proceedings will occur.</blockquote>
Nifong ended up being disbarred for making false statements and hiding evidence from the defense. The president of Duke University later came out and offered <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1NkgddRymFA" target="_blank" rel="noopener">an apology</a>.
But here&#8217;s the issue: What was the fallout from this case? Was the fallout a lesson learned about people making false allegations? Of course not. Was the fallout about the rush to judgment by the media deeply desperate for a race case that they could magnify? Of course not; there have been dozens since.
The actual fallout in terms of policy was that in 2011, the Obama administration changed Title IX regulations so that you basically could not defend yourself against sexual harassment or sexual assault allegation on campus.
CNN <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2017/09/07/politics/betsy-devos-education-department-title-ix/index.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reports</a> that the administration,
<blockquote>&#8230;outlined guidelines for schools on how to handle sexual assault allegations in a memo referred to as a ‘dear colleague’ letter. The letter reminded schools of their legal obligation to address sexual violence amid concerns that schools were not taking the issue seriously enough, and called on schools to step up investigations of reports. It also provided guidelines for investigations and hearings.</blockquote>
And it gave the accused no due process. It made it so that a person did not actually have a right to face down someone who was accusing them. That was the actual legal implication drawn from the false allegations of the Duke lacrosse case.
This repeated itself later with similar allegations that were made about the University of Virginia frat members in 2014 accused by Rolling Stone of engaging in a gang rape, which turned out to be completely false as well. But that didn&#8217;t stop the momentum of the #MeToo movement.
False allegations are, unfortunately, the lifeblood of movements that require gas when there is no gas in the tank.
Yesterday, Mangum, the accuser in the Duke lacrosse case — who is serving time for murder right now — finally admitted (nearly 20 years later) that her accusations were all made up. She said in <a href="https://www.letstalkwithkat.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">an interview</a>: 
<blockquote>I testified falsely against them by saying that they raped me when they didn&#8217;t. And that was wrong. And I betrayed the trust of a lot of other people who believed in me and made up a story that wasn&#8217;t true because I wanted validation from people and not from God. And that was wrong. And I hope that they can forgive me.</blockquote>
It was false, and everyone knew it was false at the time. Yet it led to another string of these sorts of cases ranging from: the University of Virginia false rape allegations; the false allegations regarding Michael Brown&#8217;s death in Ferguson, Missouri, which led to riots in 2014; the case of George Floyd, which is in fact a false case; and the Daniel Penny case.
It stretches forward because the media need these opportunities. They spin up these opportunities. They rely on these opportunities in order to “have the discussion.” They&#8217;re constantly looking for a news hook to have discussions on the issues that they find most interesting regardless of whether the underlying data is there or not.
The media are perfectly willing to jump into certain conversations. However, there are other conversations that the media are absolutely not willing to broach.
Was there a widespread investigation into false rape allegations, which was the actual story with regard to the Duke lacrosse case? Absolutely not. Was there a full-scale media blitz on the question of rape hoaxes, which is what happened in Duke lacrosse? Absolutely not. The way the mainstream media work, their way of deciding whether something is a national story or not, is not based on the truth or falsity of the statements or the good or bad action of the people in question.
They have a preset narrative, and then they look for a hook for that narrative. That is how spinning up a movement out of nothing becomes possible. And it is how polarizing the American body politic occurs.
For four decades, the national media have pursued a preset narrative agenda. Then, they look for a news hook for that agenda that allows them to spin it up into a national story.
That is why Americans are sick and tired of the national legacy media.
* * *
<h3><a href="https://get.dailywire.com/gift-guide/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE</a></h3>

Lacrosse

The Race Rape Hoax That Started It All Collapses

campus

College

Duke University

false accusations

New York Times

North Carolina

Rape

Sexual Assault

There is something deeply broken about our society. Egregious symptoms show that being the case.
One of those symptoms is Lily Phillips.
Lily Phillips is 23-years-old. She&#8217;s become quite prominent because she has a very lucrative OnlyFans account where she earns millions of dollars to take her clothes off and have sex.
Back in October, Lily Phillips did a stunt in which she had sex with 101 men in a day. She did a documentary about it titled, &#8220;I Slept with 100 Men in One Day.&#8221; 
In the documentary, she says, “It’s not for the weak girls, if I’m honest. It was hard. I don&#8217;t know if I&#8217;d recommend it. I think if you&#8217;re a different type of girl, it&#8217;s very like… it&#8217;s kind of like being a prostitute in a sense of like, it&#8217;s just a different feeling. I don&#8217;t know how to explain it, like.”
“It&#8217;s not like just having sex with someone,” a man says to her.
“Yeah. Yeah. Just one in, one out. Like, it feels intense,” she replies.
“Like, more intense than you thought it might,” he suggests.
“Definitely,” she answers, then breaks down in tears.
She says, “I think by the 30th, when we&#8217;re getting on a bit, I&#8217;ve got a routine of how we&#8217;re going to do this and sometimes you disassociate and it&#8217;s not like normal sex at all.” She admitted not remembering much of this. She said, “In my head right now I can think of five, six, 10 guys I remember. And that&#8217;s it. It&#8217;s just weird, isn&#8217;t it? If I didn&#8217;t have the videos, I wouldn&#8217;t have known I did 100.”
The New York Post <a href="https://nypost.com/2024/12/11/lifestyle/onlyfans-model-lily-phillips-cries-after-sleeping-with-101-men-in-a-day/">reported</a>:
<blockquote>Phillips shared that it’s not just the physical intimacy of having sex with so many men that made her feel “so bad” but also disappointing them by not being able [to] talk with them, or even being interested in doing so.
She said that conversing with them was also “hard” and recounted how one man complained that they only chatted for about two minutes when she had said beforehand that they would talk for about five minutes.</blockquote>
Then, she breaks down in tears.
But none of this is apparently stopping her from taking on a new challenge now because the money is too good. She has claimed she wants to take on a new challenge in January. She <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-14166101/middle-class-graduate-sex-Lily-Phillips-OnlyFans.html">posted</a> on social media: &#8220;1,000 men in 24 hours. Male talent casting call. 18+ only. Location TBC.&#8221;
“I dreamed it up with my assistant. I can’t wait … It’s very exciting. It will be a world record. A real challenge!” she enthused.
“The current world record is held by Lisa Sparks, an adult film star who bedded 919 men in one day at a sex industry event in Poland back in 2004,” the Post noted.
The question here: Why is this wrong in our modern society? What&#8217;s the big problem for a lot of folks, particularly on the secular Left? That&#8217;s a relevant question. After all, she&#8217;s engaging in consensual activity. Why is this wrong? Why is this bad?
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-2103-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show</a></h3>
We live in a society in which consent is considered the highest and perhaps only value.
That&#8217;s because we&#8217;ve largely bought into the liberal framework for how society ought to run.
According to social psychologist Jonathan Haidt, there are six moral matrices for how we measure morality. The first is care versus harm. The second is liberty versus oppression. The third is fairness versus cheating. The fourth is loyalty versus betrayal. The fifth is authority versus subversion, and the sixth is sanctity versus degradation.
For example, care versus harm would include feeling compassion for a suffering human being. That&#8217;s one value system. Liberty versus oppression would include seeing an unjust rule being promulgated that oppresses someone versus that person being free to make their own choices.
Fairness or cheating would be if somebody cheats, it&#8217;s unfair because somebody has cheated. Loyalty versus betrayal would be if someone betrays a group. Authority versus subversion is if somebody disrespects legitimate authority, and sanctity versus degradation is if, for example, somebody does something disgusting.
Leftists and conservatives think of the world in very different ways from one another. 
Leftists are interested in only three of these six matrices: care versus harm (compassion); liberty versus oppression (individual rights and individualism); and finally, fairness versus cheating (the final outcome of a system as fair or rights as fairly distributed).
Conservatives, people on the Right, care about all six of those matrices, including notions like loyalty and betrayal, authority and subversion, and most importantly, sanctity versus degradation.
Thus, what does the Left do about somebody like Lily Phillips? Theoretically, the argument could be made that she&#8217;s harming herself, that this violates the sort of care/harm principle. That&#8217;s why what she&#8217;s doing is wrong.
But that runs directly against the liberty foundations of liberalism, because after all, she&#8217;s the one who has volunteered her consent to it. How can you tell her? Can you be paternalistic enough to suggest she has harmed herself under the rubric of leftism? And also, is it unfair that she did this if she did accept the arrangement? In fact, she sought the arrangement; she&#8217;s being paid by the tonnage for this arrangement.
For conservatives, the answer is actually quite easy. Phillips and women like her are engaging in self-harm. Liberty is not libertinism; it is bound by rules. Fairness is not implicated because she has no right to engage in this sort of conduct on a moral level. She has no moral right. She does have a legal right, but that is not the same thing as having a moral right to engage in this.
She&#8217;s being disloyal not only to any boyfriend she might have, but to the standards of her society and to humanity at large. You&#8217;re being disloyal to humanity when you violate yourself this way. She is undermining the authority of basic morality.
But most of all, and most importantly, what she is doing is disgusting.
Now, I know that word has fallen out of usage. “Disgust.” “Disgusting.” The idea in modern left-wing parlance is that if you talk about something being disgusting, it means that you&#8217;re being judgmental.
In his book “The Righteous Mind,” Haidt wrote about asking college students if it would be immoral to have sex with a frozen chicken. Liberals will initially say maybe, and then they&#8217;ll think about it and say, “No, it doesn&#8217;t violate my principles of consent. It doesn&#8217;t violate the care/harm matrix. It&#8217;s a violation of liberty to say that it is disgusting, problematic, or wrong.”
Conservatives would react, “Yes, that&#8217;s gross. It&#8217;s wrong. You&#8217;re degrading yourself.”
Disgust is useful and has kept human beings alive for eons. Originally, it evolved as a way of naturally driving people away from things that are quite bad for them. The reason human beings have a reaction of disgust when they see a snake is because snakes can kill people.
Now, that does not mean all disgust historically is proper. Sometimes human beings are disgusted by behaviors or traits that are perfectly legitimate or have arisen through no fault of the person by whom they are disgusted. So, for example, many primitive cultures found people with mental disabilities to be disgusting. In ancient Sparta, if you had a disabled baby, you left it out on a cliff somewhere.
But disgust as a general human emotion is a response to the violation of the sacred.
So what exactly is “the sacred”? 
The sacred is the thing that we as a species place beyond question. That&#8217;s what sacred means. Sacred means to declare something holy.
To be holy means to be separate from the secular. It is something that is not to be questioned. It is something that has such high value that to question it would undermine the entire society. To throw away the sacred is to throw out that which is most important in building a society.
There are some things we find so sacred that we will not violate them.
An entire community cannot come together to share the same values unless they agree on a concept of the sacred and the profane; things that are so high in value that they are not worth arguing about — and to argue about them should generate a feeling of disgust.
It is community, says Robert Nisbet, that gives to the sacred its most vital expressions everywhere: birth, marriage, death, and other moments of the human drama.
These are all of such high value that they become sacred.
In the case of Lily Phillips, what is sacred here?
The individual human soul.
You do not own your own soul. It does not belong to you. You have duties attached to the stewardship of your soul.
Your innate humanity is made in the image of God. You as a human being are sacred. You are the sacred property of the Divine.
After all, whatever disgusting substances this woman has anointed herself with can be washed off, but her soul can&#8217;t be washed off without repenting of what she has done to herself.
And she knows that. Why is she breaking down? Why is she upset? It&#8217;s not just because of the physical exertion. It&#8217;s because she made herself into a sex robot. She made herself into something profane. She engaged in profane behavior, and she should be disgusted with herself. She should be ashamed of herself.
A society should be able to look at that behavior and declare it wrong. It is not just a mere matter of moral apathy because a society that greenlights, celebrates, or pays people millions of dollars for this sort of behavior gets more of it.
It reduces the humanity of all of us to the level of the animal. It removes the sacred completely. Then, all that remains is the profane.
No community, no workable society, can be built solely on the profane. Human beings have a natural understanding of the sacred. We have a natural understanding, a desire to worship, a desire to understand there are things that are of eternal value.
<h3><a href="https://www.amiracist.com/?_gl=1*jtghwp*_gcl_au*ODQ1NjYzNTg2LjE3Mjg5MDk3OTE.*_ga*MTc2NzM0NDQ2NS4xNzI4OTA5Nzkx*_ga_CZKR9ZYKJP*MTczMDEyMDgwOS40OS4xLjE3MzAxMjA4MzkuMzAuMC4w" target="_blank" rel="noopener">MATT WALSH&#8217;S &#8216;AM I RACIST?&#8217; NOW STREAMING ON DAILYWIRE+</a></h3>
This is why, by the way, when it comes to sex, the concept of consent is necessary, but it is not sufficient. Of course consent is necessary to sex, but it is not the only marker of whether sex itself is a good thing or a bad thing in regard to how people engage in it.
It&#8217;s because we&#8217;ve lost the concept of the sacred and the profane.
In the #MeToo movement, there is a phenomenon that has arisen many times where women will consent to sex with someone they should not have. They will treat themselves badly; then, they&#8217;ll wake up the next morning and decide they didn&#8217;t like it.
And they don&#8217;t have the language to even express what it is they don&#8217;t like because they already gave consent. Un-giving consent is not possible. So then they go to the language of consent again. In some cases, they&#8217;ll go so far as to say they were raped when they weren&#8217;t actually raped or the evidence shows they weren&#8217;t raped.
But they&#8217;re not wrong to feel bad about themselves.
They&#8217;re not wrong to feel bad about the decision-making. Regret is a realization of having taken something sacred and having made it profane.
The relationship between two people who love one another in a committed bond is sacred. That&#8217;s what makes sex sacred rather than profane.
If sex is treated in a profane way, a lot of the time, it will feel profane. You might wake up in the morning and feel degraded because you degraded yourself.
Then, people look for an excuse for why they feel the way they do, but they don&#8217;t even have the language to explain why they feel the way they do. This is particularly true of young women who are engaging in activities they later regret. They don&#8217;t even understand why they regret.
The answer is that we are all, men and women, capable of sullying ourselves, of disgusting ourselves. And that is a worthwhile tendency in human beings to recognize: that sometimes when we look at the behavior of somebody like a Lily Phillips, we should be upset. We should be upset that as a society we have decided an OnlyFans kind of society is fine, decent, and good.
It is not. It is not fine, decent, or good. Pornography ought to disgust us because it is disgusting. It should disgust us because it turns something that should be about commitment and love into something that is simply about rutting. Sex is meaningful — not because it is a matter of consent, but because it is a matter that has meaning attached to it and has throughout human history.
Pretending that people don&#8217;t have emotions connected to sex is one of the most ridiculous aspects of the modern feminist movement and the modern secular Left. Even Phillips acknowledges that. She says, “I didn’t even get to talk to the guys.”
That’s the most pathetic expression of the problem, but she’s not wrong. It turns out that very often, both women and men actually want to know the person with whom they are having sex because it means something beyond pure consent.
A society that boils its morality down to consent alone is a society that doesn&#8217;t even have the language to express why it&#8217;s corrupting itself. It&#8217;s why we as a society have such trouble declaring pornography is morally bad or OnlyFans is a blight.
Young men are being destroyed by OnlyFans. Young women are certainly being destroyed by OnlyFans.
And this should not be a matter of moral apathy in our society. I&#8217;m not talking about regulation or legislation. Perhaps that&#8217;s appropriate, but that&#8217;s not even the question. The question is: Do we even have the moral language anymore to look at human behavior that ought to disgust us and say it&#8217;s acceptable to be disgusted by that behavior?
It&#8217;s ok to look at what violates the nature of being made in the sacred image of God and say, “That&#8217;s bad, and I have an innate sense of being provoked by it into disgust.”
It&#8217;s ok. We were made that way, and that is a good thing.
A society that loses any concept of the sacred and trades the sacred for the profane is a society that is not long for this world. Because in the end, if we can&#8217;t place certain principles above and beyond debate and in the realm of the sacred, then we&#8217;re not going to have a society for very long.
* * *
<h3><a href="https://get.dailywire.com/gift-guide/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE</a></h3>

Front of lens camera and light shade color from two flash.

The Sickness Of OnlyFans

OnlyFans

Pornography

Prostitution

I used to enjoy Bill Burr’s work.
On occasion, I still do. He&#8217;s a comedian, which means he&#8217;s very hit or miss. Once upon a time, I was such a fan that I actually bought tickets for me, my wife, and two of my friends to go see him.
It turned out to be one of the worst shows I have ever seen in my life because Burr has become woke. Over time, I think he became embarrassed that many people on the Right thought he was very funny, so he decided he was going to go woke.
The show I saw was so bad that he got frustrated with the audience. The audience was not laughing at his jokes because his jokes were basically about how Floridians were a bunch of anti-gay racists. And Floridians reacted badly because that&#8217;s not true. There are a lot of gay people who live in Florida and many Hispanics, blacks, and Jews live there as well.
He ended up cutting his show early and walking off the stage. The reason was, he was totally disconnected from the audience.
That disconnect has continued. Not long ago, he appeared on Bill Maher&#8217;s show where he declared solidarity with the pro-Hamas students on campuses.
Now, he is proclaiming he is very happy that CEOs are walking around in fear for their lives.
We tend to give comedians more leeway to say edgy things because they’re trying to be funny.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-2102-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show</a></h3>
But it&#8217;s not clear to me that Burr is attempting to be funny. This week, he explained that he is perfectly fine with CEOs having to live with full-time security because they fear they might be shot. Because, after all, they are murderers too.
Burr openly cheered the murder of the UnitedHealthcare executive because he says CEOs should live in fear if they don&#8217;t act in the way that he would have them act — in a system that he has no fixes for, by the way.
He <a href="https://www.mediaite.com/podcasts/bill-burr-explains-why-hes-ok-with-ceos-fearing-for-their-lives-after-ny-shooting-a-lot-of-you-are-mass-murderers/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">stated</a>:
<blockquote>You know what’s annoying me about this kid who killed this CEO? None of these news programs are talking about the incredible lack of empathy from the general public about this because of how these insurance companies treat people when they at their most vulnerable, after we’ve all given them our money every f***ing month, and now we finally need you and all you do is deny us…
You know, I gotta be honest with you, OK? I love that f***ing CEOs are fucking afraid right now. You should be! By and large, you’re all a bunch of selfish greedy f***ing pieces of s***; and a lot of you are mass murderers. You just don’t pull the trigger. That’s why it looks clean.</blockquote>
What he said is truly evil. He&#8217;s saying you should live in fear if you&#8217;re the CEO of a company that does things that Burr deems to be bad or wrong.
Now, we have laws on the books, for example, that prevent crimes like fraud and embezzlement. We have laws on the books that punish criminal activity. If you don&#8217;t like the system, and many people don&#8217;t, the proper response to that system would be legislation. In a democratic republic, the way to fix problems is to have open discussions of the details of those problems and then craft regulatory or legal fixes.
You do not say that it is a good thing that CEOs should live in fear of their lives because Burr deems them morally inferior.
Bill Burr’s blue collar class routine act is a bunch of horses***. The man is worth $14 million, and he makes his money creating crap movies for Netflix at this point. If we&#8217;re going to have a functioning country, you can&#8217;t justify the murder of people who run their businesses legally in ways with which you disagree.
It is one thing to disagree with executives. You can call them whatever you want. But to start justifying that they should live in fear or suggesting that they should be murdered? What is the limiting principle here?
The alleged shooter in this case was echoing Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber. The Unabomber suggested that if you were, for example, an oil executive, maybe you should be murdered, because after all, there were externalities to the oil industry.
Why not the banking industry? Maybe Burr doesn&#8217;t like the banks. After all, that bank denied grandma her loan. So, with his logic, maybe the CEO of the bank should be tracked down and murdered.
This is full-stop evil. It is evil. I don&#8217;t care what complaints exist with the health insurance company, the notion that the solution to those complaints is the murder of the executives is sick. If you were living in a tyrannical society with no legal correctives or alternatives in terms of Medicaid — which does exist — and no alternatives in terms of other health insurance programs, then an argument could be made for there to be a full-scale monarchic tyranny.
But that&#8217;s not the system in which we live. And promulgating that lie leads to greater violence. It leads to justification of all violence.
It&#8217;s not just Bill Burr. It is also Jimmy Kimmel, who decided last night to devote an entire segment celebrating the good looks of the alleged shooter. He <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/jimmy-kimmel-laughs-shares-staffers-texts-about-ceo-killer-being-hot" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a>, 
<blockquote>So many women and so many men are going nuts over how good-looking this killer is. There’s a huge wave of horny washing over us right now. It’s like when one of the guys you work with says, ‘I had a dream about you last night.’ When it’s the FedEx guy with the big muscles and the rolled-up sleeves, you’re like, ‘Ohh.’ But if it’s the bald IT guy wearing Crocs with black socks, you’re on the phone with HR.</blockquote>
He continued:
<blockquote>It&#8217;s kinda that same dynamic. … I have never experienced anything like this. These are screengrabs of actual exchanges between our members of our staff and their friends, relatives, whatever.
I&#8217;ve changed the names to protect the guilty. Lorraine C. asks, “Do you guys think the United Health Care Co killer is hot?” Friend replies, Yes, I love Luigi. I think he&#8217;s gay though. … And one more from a young woman in our segment department. “Texting all my friends in New York that I hope they get called to jury duty.” “God, I want to do jury duty so bad.”</blockquote>
Hilarious, hilarious stuff. Glorifying the alleged murderer of the UnitedHealthcare CEO.
What a delight these people are.

Hulu’s “Hularious” Stand-Up Comedy Celebration

Bill Burr Goes Full A**hole

Bill Burr

comedian

Comedy

Corporations

Health Care

Health Insurance

Murder

New York City

One of the outlying symptoms of evil is to use broad-based rationalizations about systemic problems in order to justify individual acts of evil.
The most recent example: the murder of Brian Thompson, a father who was the CEO of UnitedHealthcare.
I know a lot of doctors who don&#8217;t like how UnitedHealthcare runs. They think UnitedHealthcare rips off customers and fights them at every turn.
But whatever you think about U.S. health care is irrelevant to the question of whether Thompson should have been shot to death on the streets of New York.
According to <a href="https://www.wsj.com/us-news/luigi-mangione-unitedhealthcare-ceo-shooting-2c23b33b">The Wall Street Journal</a>, it appears the reading interests of Thompson’s alleged murderer started with ideas about activism but crossed over to an interest in violence at some point. He is an upper-class citizen from an upper-class family. He attended the University of Pennsylvania, where he majored in computer science and earned a master&#8217;s degree. So, he apparently has quite a high IQ.
He also underwent some sort of recent serious health crisis, which, as The Wall Street Journal reports, was probably exacerbated by psychedelic use. He may have had a spinal fusion surgery, which has a very low rate of success; it often leaves people with significant pain for life. His friends said they had not heard from him for months.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-2101-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show</a></h3>
The alleged murderer also seems to have <a href="https://x.com/darreljlewis1/status/1866293045244649848">posted</a> about the Unabomber&#8217;s manifesto on Goodreads. What he wrote offers a window into his mind and illuminates how people who have “social concerns” can start channeling those into acts of individual evil. The review reads: 
<blockquote>Clearly written by a mathematics prodigy. Reads like a series of lemmas on the question of 21st century quality of life. 
It’s easy to quickly and thoughtless write this off as the manifesto of a lunatic, in order to avoid facing some of the uncomfortable problems it identifies. But it’s simply impossible to ignore how prescient many of his predictions about modern society turned out.
He was a violent individual &#8211; rightfully imprisoned &#8211; who maimed innocent people. While these actions tend to be characterized as those of a crazy luddite, however, they are more accurately seen as those of an extreme political revolutionary.</blockquote>
The review also quotes someone who had written about Kaczynski in a Reddit thread, saying he “had the balls to recognize that peaceful protest has gotten us absolutely nowhere.” The commenter also wrote that “‘violence never solved anything’ is a statement uttered by cowards and predators.”
The extreme political radicalism is obvious and suggests violence is justified because the system is unworkable and unfixable and because grievances are justified.
Ironically, many of the same people who were presumably cheering on the alleged shooter in this case are in favor of a health care system that ends with lower life expectancy and actual government rationing of care.
Yet there is something deeper, a sickness that is going on in our political class, best exemplified by the absolute nutjob Taylor Lorenz, who used to work for The Washington Post and for Vox. She was fired yesterday after proclaiming on Piers Morgan’s show that she felt actual joy when Thompson was murdered on the street. “I do believe in the sanctity of life,” she <a href="https://x.com/theblaze/status/1866273170195431560" target="_blank" rel="noopener">stated</a>. “And I think that&#8217;s why I felt, along with so many other Americans, joy, unfortunately.”
How can this make you joyful? Thompson was a father, and he was gunned down in the middle of Manhattan. 
People in the United States who cheer for murderous criminals is nothing new. This has happened for a very long time in the United States. Bonnie and Clyde were made famous in a film. John Dillinger, who robbed some 24 banks with his gang, was widely proclaimed a folk hero in the 1930s by one segment of the population.
You can easily see the logic of this extending to most aspects of free market enterprise in the United States, including health care, oil companies, banks, anything. If you don&#8217;t like the way a business is acting, this logic says you should shoot somebody.
Why is that? Why is that happening?
There is now an entire media and political class dedicated to a simple proposition: that America is so flawed and its systems are so corrupt that criminality is a reasonable response to those flaws.
This is demagoguery. The way to change policy is by electing politicians. And then those politicians work with each other and with regulators at both the state and local levels in order to change the policy. Once you say that the system is so broken that the only resort is revolutionary violence, you have to make the case for overthrowing the entire system.
But that&#8217;s not what these people are doing. It&#8217;s just nihilistic violence, lashing out at a system that these people believe is targeting them in some way.
Why do they believe that? Because instead of saying the truth, which is that these systems are really complex and difficult to fix, there&#8217;s a whole class of demagogues in political office and in the media who spend their days saying that all problems are easily solved, but aren’t because there is an intractable coterie who want to keep people in misery for their own profit and they just don’t care. If they just cared more, then all would be solved.
This is ugly, stupid, and not true. There may be those who are perfectly willing to keep people in misery for profit, but they are not the vast bulk of people in the United States or in positions of high power or in positions in high industry. 
That is not how it works. This is a political strategy discussed by the philosopher Alasdair MacIntyre, involving the idea that instead of making an argument against the policy a person is promoting, you ascribe bad motivations to that person. That person is evil. That person is wrong. And they are not just wrong, but they are motivated by a sociopathic evil.
<h3><a href="https://get.dailywire.com/gift-guide/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE</a></h3>
The only way someone kills a man like Brian Thompson is by suggesting his motivation is not to keep the company working and operative in a very difficult regulatory environment with a bizarre system of subsidies and administrative details and so on. Instead of disagreeing with his decisions, someone says he&#8217;s evil and just trying to maximize profit.
This attitude can be found on both sides of the political aisle. It is predominantly on the Left, but there is a swath of people on the Right who are also espousing this.
And it&#8217;s ugly. I will say that there are elites who have lent credibility to this particular argument through their malfeasance. People like Anthony Fauci have told platonic lies to the American public, lying for their own purposes, and, in many cases, quashing their political opposition.
But the generalized argument is made too much in politics, and it does boil the pot. It leads to an increasing temperature that justifies violence.
It’s an argument that says the reason the health care system is a mess is because Brian Thompson is an evil person who is trying to kill grandma. It’s the same argument that says the reason the oil companies are attempting to pump more oil is not because there is high demand for carbon-based fossil fuels or because it&#8217;s still the most effective form of energy production on the planet, but because they don&#8217;t care about destroying the Earth. It’s an argument that says the reason the bank denied your loan is not because the bank looked at your loan, assessed the risk, and found it wasn&#8217;t worth the price; it&#8217;s because the bank manager is actually Mr. Potter and is trying to deny your bank loan because he himself is evil.
And the argument is dangerous.

Suspect Questioned In Pennsylvania For United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson Killing

The Murder Of Brian Thompson: How Individual Acts Of Evil Get Justified

The Assad regime in Syria is gone. 
A tectonic shift in the Middle East just happened over the weekend. On Sunday morning, Syrian rebels finally took Damascus. They took Bashar al-Assad&#8217;s palace. The Assad regime is no more. Assad has fled to Moscow where he is being granted some sort of asylum because the Russians backed the Assad regime.
It’s important to remember that Syria is an artificial creation, post-World War I by the West, French, and British. Because of that, like many other states in the Middle East, it is unworkable and has been unworkable for a very long time.
There are a large number of groups of various religious belief systems — many of them unbelievably radical, many of them terrorists — all fighting one another.
The Syrian civil war is likely to continue for a long time to come because this is an unworkable patchwork of various groups in various areas of the country.
There are numerous interests involved. The Russians are exceptionally interested in Syria because they wanted to secure ports on the Mediterranean Sea in Syria, which they actually did with the acquiescence of the Assad regime.
Iran used Syria as a thoroughfare and helped prop up the Assad regime.
Turkey, on the other hand, did not like the Assad regime and was also attempting to make its own incursions into Syria. That is because many people in Syria are Kurds and the Turks don&#8217;t like the Kurds in the same way they don&#8217;t like the Armenians.
Israel wants to defend itself and make sure that it is not the victim of yet another land incursion from Syria.
So Syria, as is geopolitically evident, is just a mess. That’s without even getting into the internal politics.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-2100-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show</a></h3>
Syria is split into many different territories. Certain opposition groups in the south of Syria border the Golan Heights and Jordan. Some of those are radical Sunni Islamists. Some of those are Druze. 
The main terrorist-rebel coalition is located in the northwest of Syria. That coalition is run by a person named Abu Mohammed al-Golani, an Al-Qaeda and ISIS-affiliated terrorist. He’s in the north and backed by the Turks.
The Kurds are in control of a large swath of the northeast area that was, at one time, not under the control of the Kurds but under the control of ISIS, where ISIS still has a presence. ISIS prisons held tens of thousands of prisoners in those Kurdish areas.
After the Assad regime fell, the United States started launching airstrikes in these ISIS-type hotbeds in the Kurdish area of Syria in order to prevent ISIS from reconstituting. Turkey also has taken over huge swaths of the north of Syria.
All the pretense from the media asserting that the people who just took over Syria might be moderate is flat wrong.
By 2024, the Assad regime basically had no money. Their currency was effectively worthless; there were massive inflation rates. The Assad regime had to be propped up by outside forces, Iran and Russia. Russia gave them weaponry and other resources; in return, they got access to some coastal bases in Syria.
Then, October 7 happened. Iran activated Hamas. Hamas murdered 1,200 Jews and pulled 250 more into Gaza, many of whom are still being held in the terror tunnels. Hezbollah started firing thousands of missiles over the course of a year into northern Israel, clearing out Israel&#8217;s north.
Over the course of the subsequent year, Israel proceeded to take out Hamas and virtually all of their military resources, then turned to devastating Hezbollah. They also conducted operations in Syria to prevent Syria from being used as a thoroughfare for Hezbollah resources. So Iran’s sphere of influence got absolutely shellacked.
Meanwhile, Russia was bogged down in their war with Ukraine. They simply didn&#8217;t have the money or the capacity to uphold the Assad regime.
As a byproduct of the Ukraine war and Israel’s efforts, Assad had no allies upon whom to call. The legs of the stool on which his regime was standing got kicked out from underneath him and, as a result, the stool fell.
What happened in Syria was not that the Sunni Muslim terrorist groups suddenly became good at war again. They were really low ebb at the beginning of 2024. What happened is that Assad was basically an eggshell skull. They tapped him. He fell. There was no one to come to his support.
Thus, the terrorist-rebels took advantage and toppled the regime. That&#8217;s effectively the story here. Turkey backed many of these Sunni Muslim terrorist groups that hated the Assad regime. Wishing to expand their own sphere of influence into Syria, they took advantage of the chaos caused by Iran and Russia&#8217;s withdrawal.
The two biggest losers in this situation are Russia, because they had backed the Assad regime, and Iran, which has lost their entire crescent of Islamic Shia terror. Hamas is gone. Hezbollah is gone. Assad is gone. These are all massive blows to the Iranian regime, all caused by what Iran started. It is one of the ultimate “f*** around and find out” moments in human history.
The Iranian regime is in serious trouble right now. They have failed on every possible front. And with the Trump administration coming in and presumably increasing sanctions on the Iranian regime, the Iranian regime is going to have one of two choices: Either they&#8217;re going to have to cut some sort of deal with the West in which they abandon their nuclear efforts and presumably move toward some form of non-tyranny or they&#8217;re going to be forced to collapse. The state of Israel is not going to sit around waiting to see what Iran does next with its nuclear weapons — not after Israel already took out Iran’s air defenses.
The big winner in Syria is Turkey. Turkey took an enormous amount of territory. The Kurds had basically cleared an enormous amount of territory. But now they&#8217;re going to be at war directly with the Turks, who are going to be pouring forces and resources into that region.
As for Israel, they can be happy that the Iranian regime has lost power to use Syria as its tool. But the people replacing that regime are Al-Qaeda and ISIS jihadists.
The fate of many people in Syria remains very much in doubt.
Welcome to the Middle East, where there are no good solutions.
* * *
<h3><a href="https://get.dailywire.com/gift-guide/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE</a></h3>

Reactions In Syria To Fall Of Assad Regime In Syria

Syria Falls

Bashar Assad

Iran

Islamic State (ISIS)

Israel

Middle East

Radical Islam

Russia

Syria

Terrorists

Turkey

The Revolutionary Left is creeping into the mainstream.
The shooting of Brian Thompson, CEO of UnitedHealthcare, has unleashed a wave of evil from members of the Left. Thompson wasn’t a criminal. He wasn’t even an advocate of death the way abortionists or euthanasia advocates are. (And murder of an abortionist or euthanasia advocate would be unjustifiable morally in a democratic system.) His great sin is that he was the head of a company that exists within a mixed private-public healthcare framework, and that he did his job.
But for the Left, if you hate the system, you are morally justified in murdering anyone who acts within the system. That means that if, like one Bernie Sanders follower, you believe that private healthcare “kills Americans,” you can murder Congressmen. It means that if you don’t like that health insurers often deny coverage for certain pre-existing conditions or non-covered doctors or medication, you can murder the CEO of a health insurance company.
This is revolutionary leftist evil.
It’s evil for a couple reasons.
First, violence is not justified in a democracy, where your say is part of the process. Revolution to overthrow tyranny is justified — but the tyranny must be real, and the violence must be the last resort. Neither is true in this case. If you do perceive America to be a tyranny and violence to be the proper response, that is a call for unending violence until the system itself is changed. It’s a call for revolution.
Second, violence against members of private industry isn’t even a protest of public policy. It’s a protest against the very system of free markets. Thompson was not responsible for America’s healthcare system any more than the head of CVS is responsible for America’s tariff system. Directing hatred against Thompson is not about shaping public policy. It’s about trying to threaten anyone who engages in free markets at all. This person could have just as easily shot a doctor who decided not to perform a surgery, or a bank worker who denied a loan application.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-2099-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show</a></h3>
This was the philosophy of the Red Army Faction in Germany in the 1970s, also known as the Baader-Meinhof Gang. They weren’t seeking a better world. They were seeking to tear down the world of capitalism on behalf of Marxist evil. They routinely quoted Herbert Marcuse and Antonio Gramsci; they called for revolution. Ulrike Meinhof, a Left-wing radical journalist, led the way, famously stating, “Protest is when I say this does not please me. Resistance is when I ensure what does not please me occurs no more.”
That philosophy led the Baader-Meinhof Gang to engage in routine assassination of everyone from industrialists like Hanns Martin Schleyer to Dresdner Bank head Jurgen Ponto to American servicemen in Germany. These people can also become tools of enemy regimes, as Baader-Meinhof was. Baader-Meinhof worked with the Stasi and other Soviet agents to foment chaos, and coordinated with Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and Palestine Liberation Organization.
The origins of Baader-Meinhof came from the 1968 student protests in Germany. They were Marxist in orientation, influenced by radical race riots in the United States, and allied with radicals all over the globe; Meinhof wrote an essay defending the Munich Massacre of Israeli Olympians by Palestinian terrorists. Stefan Aust, who literally wrote the book on the Baader-Meinhof Gang, pointed out:
<blockquote>The Baader–Meinhof Gang drew a measure of support that violent leftists in the United States, like the Weather Underground, never enjoyed. A poll at the time showed that a quarter of West Germans under forty felt sympathy for the gang and one-tenth said they would hide a gang member from the police. Prominent intellectuals spoke up for the gang&#8217;s righteousness [as] Germany even into the 1970s was still a guilt-ridden society. When the gang started robbing banks, newscasts compared its members to Bonnie and Clyde. (Andreas) Baader, a charismatic action man indulged in the imagery, telling people that his favourite movies were Bonnie and Clyde, which had recently come out, and The Battle of Algiers. The pop poster of Che Guevara hung on his wall, [while] he paid a designer to make a Red Army Faction logo, a drawing of a machine gun against a red star.</blockquote>
What do we make of the journalists and academics who proclaim soft support for the murder of Brian Thompson? That we are on the verge of something terrible. After all, this follows hard on the Black Lives Matters riots, which were indulged and even celebrated by many on the Left; the Hamas takeover of college campuses, again indulged and celebrated by Left-wing elite; and now, the not-so-quiet applause for the assassination of a private healthcare CEO.
The toxic brew of radicalism and violence that characterized the 1970s in Germany and the United States is bubbling again. And why not? Many of those who engaged in precisely that violence are now well-respected American academics: Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn found high positions in academia after spending years planting bombs with the Weather Underground.
<h3><a href="https://get.dailywire.com/gift-guide/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE</a></h3>
Certainly a desperate Left, spurred to action by constant talk of the “fascistic” takeover of Donald Trump, can be counted on to increase their support for violence. Two assassination attempts against Trump in the last six months are merely an indicator of just how deeply this rot is spreading.
This must be stopped. It can only be stopped by a widespread rejection on all sides of the aisle for this type of violence. The shooter in this case should be arrested and given the death penalty. Seedbeds for such Marxist-Leninist violence on college campuses should be defunded. Those like Taylor Lorenz should be rejected from polite society.
The Brian Thompson shooting is a bleeding edge indicator of where the country could be going. All it takes is someone with organizational capacity on the Left to launch America into a new era of domestic terrorism, with the tacit “moral” support of much of the journalistic establishment.

United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson Fatally Shot In Midtown Manhattan

The Evil Revolutionary Left Cheers Murder

Democrats

Political Violence

Revolution

Terrorism

Violence

On Wednesday, a shocking assassination occurred in New York City, and the Left celebrated. 
Brian Thompson, the CEO of UnitedHealthcare&#8217;s insurance arm, was fatally shot outside a hotel in Midtown, the center of Manhattan&#8217;s business and tourist districts.
Police said it was a targeted attack. The video footage makes it seem clear this was a professional hit. Thompson walked past the shooter, who appeared to emerge from the shadows. The shooter shot Thompson, shot him again, then calmly walked by him and appeared to shoot him a third time. 
The suspect fled on foot after the shooting. Police Commissioner Jessica Tisch said this was not a random act of violence, <a href="https://www.mediaite.com/crime/nypd-commissioner-says-shooting-of-unitedhealthcare-ceo-was-premeditated-preplanned-targeted-attack/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">adding</a>:
<blockquote>It appears the suspect was lying in wait for several minutes. And as the victim was walking to the conference hotel, the suspect approached from behind and fired several rounds, striking the victim at least once in the back and at least once in the right calf. … I want to be clear — at this time, every indication is that this was a premeditated, pre-planned, targeted attack. </blockquote>
Paulette Thompson, Thompson’s widow, told <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/live-blog/unitedhealthcare-ceo-shooting-live-updates-new-york-shell-casings-rcna182979" target="_blank" rel="noopener">NBC News</a>, “There had been some threats. Basically, I don’t know, a lack of coverage? I don’t know details. I just know that he said there were some people that had been threatening him.&#8221; 
There are at least two things to be said about this.
First: New York City is governed horribly. When assassinations occur in public places in New York City, that reflects how law enforcement is deployed and what law enforcement is allowed to do. When violence is commonplace on New York streets, that goes to governance. 
Take, for example, the case of Daniel Penny, the Marine veteran who took down a crazed drug abuser named Jordan Neely with a submission hold on the New York subway as Neely was threatening other members of the public in this subway car. Despite the fact that Neely’s death could be attributed to drugs in his system or his reaction to the lack of air to the brain, New York City is bringing a manslaughter or murder charge because the city is governed horribly. 
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-2098-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show</a> </h3>
But second, something else is going on here: the left-wing reaction to the murder of Brian Thompson. 
Anthony Zenkus, a social work professor at Columbia and Adelphi University whose X bio <a href="https://x.com/anthonyzenkus/status/1864415627844178087" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reads</a>, “Trauma expert. Anti-violence. Commie,” a Communist who’s apparently against violence, reacted to Thompson’s death this way: “Today, we mourn the death of United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson, gunned down&#8230;. wait, I&#8217;m sorry &#8211; today we mourn the deaths of the 68,000 Americans who needlessly die each year so that insurance company execs like Brian Thompson can become multimillionaires.” 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Today, we mourn the death of United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson, gunned down&#8230;. wait, I&#39;m sorry &#8211; today we mourn the deaths of the 68,000 Americans who needlessly die each year so that insurance company execs like Brian Thompson can become multimillionaires.
&mdash; Prof Zenkus (@anthonyzenkus) <a href="https://twitter.com/anthonyzenkus/status/1864415627844178087?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 4, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
So he sounds like he’s implying Thompson deserved to die because UnitedHealthcare is a mildly profitable company. 
They are a mildly profitable company — meaning, when it comes to the health insurance industry, the profit margin is generally below 2%. This is not an industry in which the profit margin is 10%, 15%, or 20%. If you take issue with American health insurance and how it is run, that is because of the legal structure that has been set up for health insurance in America.
We could note that health insurance should not be tied to employment, that you should be able to opt into various levels of health insurance rather than basically being shoveled into one of a few categories. We could talk about the fact that an enormous amount of health care should actually be provided just on a pay-for-play basis as opposed to via insurance.
It&#8217;s bizarre that a normal checkup should be covered by insurance. What are you insuring against? That&#8217;s not typically what insurance is for. Insurance is for an unexpected situation you are betting might happen, while the insurance company bets it probably won&#8217;t happen, or at least not in the timeframe you&#8217;re thinking. That is why you have fire insurance; not because you know tomorrow you&#8217;re going to set your house on fire — which would be arson and would violate your insurance policy.
It&#8217;s bizarre that health insurance in the United States works such that it is called insurance, when in reality, it&#8217;s just a kind of subsidized form of group coverage. 
You can have whatever arguments you want with the system. But the idea that because you don&#8217;t like this system, the CEO of a private health care company deserves to die, or at least it is his fault if 68,000 Americans “needlessly die each year so that he can become a multimillionaire,” shows a dramatic lack of understanding of not only markets but of morality. 
Taylor Lorenz, once considered a well-respected reporter at The Washington Post, <a href="https://x.com/MidnightMitch/status/1864461428263973177" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reacted</a>, “People have very justified hatred toward insurance company CEOs because these executives are responsible for an unfathomable amount of death and suffering.”
<div id="attachment_839525" style="width: 825px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-839525" class="size-large wp-image-839525" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/12/MixCollage-05-Dec-2024-05-16-PM-4918-1-815x576.jpg" alt="Screenshot: BlueSky. Taylor Lorenz." width="815" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/12/MixCollage-05-Dec-2024-05-16-PM-4918-1-815x576.jpg 815w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/12/MixCollage-05-Dec-2024-05-16-PM-4918-1-300x212.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/12/MixCollage-05-Dec-2024-05-16-PM-4918-1-768x543.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/12/MixCollage-05-Dec-2024-05-16-PM-4918-1-1536x1086.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/12/MixCollage-05-Dec-2024-05-16-PM-4918-1-2048x1448.jpg 2048w" sizes="(max-width: 815px) 100vw, 815px" />Screenshot: BlueSky. Taylor Lorenz.</div>
“Executives are responsible for an unfathomable amount of death and suffering”? That&#8217;s not true. You might not agree with how the insurance companies run their business. You might think the insurance companies go too far in attempting to restrict coverage or find loopholes in their policies that prevent them from having to issue coverage. 
But that&#8217;s what insurance does. It&#8217;s what they are. 
What you&#8217;re really criticizing is the system, the system of private health insurance in the United States, which is a bizarre amalgam of government subsidies. 
Nearly all health care coverage in the United States is, in some form or fashion, government-involved. Even private health care systems are heavily government-regulated.
But that is not UnitedHealthcare&#8217;s fault. Stating it is their fault is like suggesting that if a grocery’s price on bread is at a particular level because the markets have determined there is only that much bread available, that is somehow the grocery’s fault when people can&#8217;t afford that bread.
The idea that if you work for a private health care insurance company you should be murdered is astonishing.
Lorenz concluded, “As someone against death and suffering, I think it&#8217;s good to call out this broken system and the people in power who enable it.”
I have a question. Why is Thompson the one who enables it? I wasn&#8217;t aware that Brian Thompson was a public policy professional working in an arena in which consent was not actually the keystone. What I mean is that if you don&#8217;t want to buy health care insurance via United, don&#8217;t do it or don&#8217;t work for a company that does.
This says something deeper about the far-Left. There’s a reason why a Venn diagram would show only one circle including people who are fine with Brian Thompson getting murdered on the street and people who are pro-Hamas: That reason is the baseline belief of the far-Left&#8217;s system that if you are working within a system they have deemed morally inferior, you deserve to die.
That belief says if someone kills you, you probably had it coming. You are a Kulak, and you deserve to die.
On the other hand, if you work within a system that the hard-Left deems morally praiseworthy or you&#8217;re a member of a “morally praiseworthy group,” you can literally do anything. If your grievance aligns with the view of the Left as they deem in any way legitimate, you can do anything.
This is the same group of people who will suggest, for example, that if you are in the Gaza Strip and you don’t like your situation, that justifies you raping women and murdering babies.
That is the far-Left&#8217;s full-scale belief system.
And Thompson’s death is a perfect example of the Left’s beliefs and how they play out.
What&#8217;s astonishing about this is that the way the Left adjudicates whether a system is morally praiseworthy or morally blameworthy is not based on a utilitarian calculus.
The professor from Columbia who suggested that the private health care system in the United States is responsible for 68,000 deaths doesn&#8217;t actually believe that if you work for an alternative health care system that is government-run and it kills more people, then you deserve to die. He doesn&#8217;t think that purely because his belief is not about a utilitarian calculus for what&#8217;s best for humanity. 
For the Left, it never is. For the Left, it is all about the central moral principle.
What the Left actually cares about is power and control. If the Left controls the system, the system is good. If the Left does not control the system, the system is bad. And if you are a member of that system, then maybe, just maybe, you deserve to die. 
It&#8217;s all a power game. If you&#8217;re a prosecutor and you see a Good Samaritan on the street trying to stop a violent act on a subway, the person who tried to stop the violent act is bad because that person is not of your political ilk. They&#8217;re not part of your team, and so that person ought to be prosecuted for felony murder. 
But if that person is a member of your team, you do your best to let that person off the hook because it&#8217;s all a team sport.
<h3><a href="https://get.dailywire.com/gift-guide/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE</a></h3>
The subjugation of basic liberal principles by Left-wing principles is perfectly obvious here. It&#8217;s the great untold story of the last several decades in American politics.
It used to be that liberals in this country were people who you or I, as a conservative, might disagree with on tax or health care policy.
But as I&#8217;ve said my entire career, there&#8217;s a difference between a liberal and a leftist. A liberal would never argue that because someone works for UnitedHealthcare, that person ought to die or at least be shot. They might say, “This company needs to be run better.” They might object to that particular CEO. But they would never argue that person ought to be morally dispensed with and just shot on the street in the way some of these members of the radical Left are. 
For leftists, all dynamics are power dynamics. To them, the only thing that matters is that their allies control the government gun. Murder is, in their view, just part and parcel of the system.
Sometimes to cook the Left-wing omelet, you have to break a few eggs.
Even if that means murder.

UnitedHealth Executive Fatally Shot In NYC On Investor Day

A Shocking Assassination — And The Left Celebrates

assassination

There was an attempt at a military dictatorship in South Korea in which the president of South Korea issued a command for martial law. It was reversed hours later, but what exactly was going on there? 
South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol is a member of a party that controls the presidency but is in the minority in the actual parliament of the country. He claimed the majority in the parliament (a party called the Democratic Party in South Korea) is basically a tool of the North Koreans, citing them to be crypto-communists preventing the functioning of the government. 
Essentially, the Democratic Party of South Korea, which represents a large majority in the National Assembly, has been threatening and attempting to impeach the state prosecutors who are looking into the Democratic Party leadership. The prosecutors were supposed to be looking into the family of the president of South Korea, and they had apparently decided to exonerate the president’s wife. Meanwhile, the same prosecutors were additionally looking into the leadership of the Democratic Party regarding corruption charges. In turn, the Democratic Party attempted to impeach these prosecutors. 
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-2097-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show</a></h3>
So, the South Korean president looked at the opposition party (which controls the National Assembly) and contended they were attempting to clean out the prosecutorial part of the government in order to protect themselves or weaponize it against him. Therefore, he would declare martial law. 
The South Korean parliament voted unanimously to defy the country&#8217;s president and lift his martial law declaration.  
But there’s something deeper happening here. 
This sort of constitutional crisis is now taking place in a variety of countries. It’s happening in Israel, where there are fights between the prosecutorial wing of the government and the government of Benjamin Netanyahu. It&#8217;s happening in Hungary, where they&#8217;ve been fighting over state prosecutors. It&#8217;s happening in Brazil, where Lula da Silva, the authoritarian Left-wing leader of the country, is now attempting to militarize the justice system against Jair Bolsonaro, his predecessor. And, of course, there are shades of this in the United States. 
Why, exactly, is all this happening right now? 
To understand that, we must understand the role of the prosecutorial system in democratic republics, because that has changed over time. And this has implications, by the way, for everything, up to and including the Hunter Biden pardon and the Biden DOJ weaponizing itself against Donald Trump.
Democratic republics typically rely on checks and balances to prevent the government from engaging in authoritarianism; that is the basis of the United States Constitution. The House and the Senate check one another. Both are checked by the presidency, and all three of those bodies are checked by the judiciary and vice versa. 
Traditionally, one of the checks and balances to avoid tyranny was impeachment. If you didn&#8217;t like members of the government or you suspected that members of the government were corrupt, a bipartisan majority would work to oust those corrupt officials. 
This is obviously problematic when it comes to getting rid of corrupt officials because if the corrupt official happens to be a member of your party, then you are very unlikely to vote for their impeachment. 
In Democratic republics, the question of how to police corruption is a very real question if there is a corrupt public official. The United States Constitution says that person is impeached in the House, and then there is a full trial in the Senate. 
When the Constitution was designed, Alexander Hamilton and the rest of the Founding Fathers believed the Senate would be the most objective body. United States senators were not appointed by party or by public approval. They were appointed by the state legislatures, and they served six-year terms. The goal was for them to be more independent of the public passions than the House.
The judiciary could not do it because the judiciary could be hijacked. But the Senate was sort of half political: answerable but also indirectly answerable to the public — and thus more insulated from public pressure.
Hamilton pointed out that setting up a separate impeachment court (which we might now call the DOJ) wouldn&#8217;t actually solve the problem because that, too, could be politicized.
The problem is that over time, in a wide variety of countries, as democratic republics and their checks and balances have transitioned into administrative bureaucracies in which enormous power is centralized in the executive branch, checks and balances have atrophied until Donald Trump was impeached twice. The impeachment power was almost never used by the Congress of the United States, for example.
We made a decision at the outset of the 20th century that was echoed in other burgeoning democracies that law enforcement checking corruption was not to be done by the elected bodies of government. Instead, it was outsourced to so-called independent branches of government.
In the United States, that is the Department of Justice; in South Korea, it is the state prosecutor&#8217;s office; in Brazil, the prosecutors, the police, the judiciary; in Israel, the attorney general, and so forth.
There is a problem that happens here, and this is a problem with the administrative state. The problem is that state prosecutors can also be corrupted by politics, as we have seen in the United States. And then the solution isn&#8217;t to change the people in government anymore, because these are independent branches, and they&#8217;re unelected. It&#8217;s not a matter of replacing some people with other people.
If you fire some people, that&#8217;s considered interference with the magical “objective branch.” If you leave people in place and they target your political opponents, it&#8217;s weaponization.
That&#8217;s what leads to constitutional crises. Once the job of policing corruption from the elected branches of government — like the Senate of the United States or the National Assembly in South Korea — is outsourced to state prosecutors, sooner or later, state prosecutors will attempt to go after the wrong people, the legislature after state prosecutors, or the president after state prosecutors, in order to prevent weaponization.
This is the problem with sending up fake “objective legal enforcement” bodies. It creates constitutional crises because the only solution to a politicized law enforcement branch is to either overthrow the government for interfering with the system, which is what the president of South Korea attempted to do, or to call for the overthrow of the government for weaponizing the system.
Constitutional crises are the result of supposedly untouchable, nonpartisan institutions that can either be weaponized or interfered with.
This is happening across the West. It&#8217;s a major, major problem. It&#8217;s the problem with administrative governments. It&#8217;s a major problem in regards to the idea that it is the job of impartial legal bodies to police corruption.
So democracies are throwing themselves into crisis, specifically over this.
Let&#8217;s say that you are in the United States and you are really, really angry that Donald Trump became president in 2016. What do you do? You could try to impeach him, but it will probably fail if you don&#8217;t have the votes because it&#8217;ll break down along strictly partisan lines. 
What do you do instead? You rely on the DOJ; you rely on the FBI. You weaponize those institutions against Trump. And that prompts Trump, if he becomes president, to clean out those institutions, in which case he will be accused of weaponizing those institutions. And so the constitutional crisis just continues to roll on, all because this sort of bipartisan consensus around impeaching presidents who are guilty of crimes has gone away in the United States. 
You could say it died during the Clinton era. And the United States is now feeling the aftereffects. 
The same is true in Israel. In Israel, the attorney general&#8217;s office has put Benjamin Netanyahu under three separate prosecutions; all of them appear to be somewhat specious. The goal is obviously political. Netanyahu has been in power for some 14 of the last 15 years in Israel. He&#8217;s a masterful Machiavellian politician, just in pure, raw talent terms. And so the attorney general&#8217;s office has been weaponized against him, as claims Netanyahu, which I think is largely correct in a wide variety of cases. 
But every time he tries to mess with the prosecution, he&#8217;s accused of tampering with democracy.
<h3><a href="https://get.dailywire.com/gift-guide/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CHECK OUT THE DAILY WIRE HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE</a></h3>
Once these institutions are set up as the final arbiter of guilt and innocence, then anyone who tampers with them on either side is then considered a threat to democracy, even if the person who is actually militarizing law enforcement is the person who is in power.
In Brazil, the law enforcement mechanisms have been weaponized by Lula da Silva against Jair Bolsonaro. That means as Lula is cleaning out the judiciary institutions, he&#8217;s being lauded as someone upholding the norms of democracy while he, at the same time, engages in widespread censorship. Instead of corruption being seen as a political issue to be answered by the political branches and eventually the people, because it&#8217;s been outsourced to law enforcement, the law enforcement branch can be routinely corrupted.
Not all that long ago Lula himself had been banned from running because of his own corruption convictions. Then, in 2021, a Left-wing Supreme Court judge annulled his corruption convictions and allowed him to run again. After he ran and won, the Brazilian police formally accused former President Bolsonaro and his aides of an alleged 2022 coup attempt. That happened just last week.
Bolsonaro has said he would fight the case. Meanwhile, Lula is openly consolidating power in the executive branch in wildly anti-democratic ways. But he has been praised by many members of the media as an anti-authoritarian politician. Yet the reality is that Lula has been a close ally of Venezuela&#8217;s Nicolas Maduro, who&#8217;s been a close ally of the Cuban regime. In fact, it&#8217;s rare to find some sort of authoritarian regime that Lula doesn&#8217;t like. From China to Nicaragua, from Iran to Russia, he has cozied up to authoritarians everywhere. But because he&#8217;s a Left-wing authoritarian, the perception is that he&#8217;s not really an authoritarian, even if he engages in widespread censorship.
This is what happens when democratic republics delegate the power to check political opposition to a supposedly objective, nonpartisan branch of government. It&#8217;s not real. It doesn&#8217;t work. Administrative states do not work for precisely this reason because they&#8217;re never dispassionate, ever.
It&#8217;s true in a wide variety of countries, from South Korea to Israel to Hungary to Brazil.
It&#8217;s always a problem.
Again, all of this breakdown is happening because so many people across so many Westernized countries have decided they no longer trust the mechanisms of checks and balances of the democratic republic and, instead, are going to delegate all power to these impartial institutions.
Then, those institutions break down.
And then, the entire country starts to break down.

South Korean Lawmakers Overturn President’s Declaration Of Martial Law

WTF Just Happened In South Korea?

Brazil

Democratic Party

Founding Fathers

Impeachment

Martial Law

Parliament

prosecutors

South Korea

A couple years ago, I produced a few segments in which I answered viewers’ questions about dating. Rightly so; it’s a hot-button topic. I have <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/how-do-you-know-theyre-the-one-candace-owens-answers-questions-on-dating" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said it before</a> and I will say it again: Dating does not have to be as difficult as people make it out to be if you know what you are looking for in a significant other. So, I am revisiting some questions I have received over time to answer and give my thoughts.
<h4>Q: What are your thoughts on saving kissing for marriage?</h4>
My husband and I did not kiss until after we were engaged; however, that was mainly because of logistics and how quickly we got engaged. I don’t think kissing before marriage is a problem, and I don’t think it’s wrong to kiss someone before you get married. Ultimately, I would never expect someone to save kissing for marriage.
<h4>Q: What are your suggestions for a relationship in a rut with a lot of frustrations?</h4>
Some of the greatest words of wisdom I ever heard about being in a relationship was: When you’re dating someone, that is as good as it’s ever going to get. Many people believe if your relationship gets in a rut, marriage will be the solution to get out of that rut. They think <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/an-important-message-to-women-everywhere" target="_blank" rel="noopener">once you get married</a> and once you have children, the relationship will magically turn into “happily ever after.” (Women in particular hold this perspective, thinking that as soon as they get the ring, things will get better.) But that’s just not true. When you’re dating, you experience an emotional high, the relationship is fairly smooth, and you’re genuinely excited. If you start to see that taper off before you’re married, pay attention to those signs. You may not have found the person you’re meant to do life with.
<h4><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2e9N_e6L7Xk" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: Candace&#8217;s full segment on dating</a></h4>
<h4>Q: As <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/the-vulnerability-that-will-plague-generation-tiktoks-future">a Gen Zer</a>, I wonder where I can find masculine men?</h4>
This problem is in large part due to <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/this-is-a-story-all-about-how-the-fresh-prince-did-not-become-a-king" target="_blank" rel="noopener">culture telling men</a> to be more effeminate — and I’m sure that’s super frustrating. <a href="https://store.dailywire.com/products/make-men-manly-again-t-shirt?_pos=1&amp;_sid=4ee384564&amp;_ss=r" target="_blank" rel="noopener">(Make men manly again.)</a> But what you will find is that the more effeminate men live in city bubbles, but when you move into the rest of America, you will run into farmers, rangers, men who are working with their hands, and masculine men. Masculine men do exist.
<h4>Q: Do you keep in touch with or follow any exes?</h4>
Absolutely not. I am incredibly conservative when it comes to this issue. If you are in a relationship with another man, it’s super disrespectful — especially in a marriage — to maintain a relationship with a previous partner. I have never gone along with the “it used to be more but now we’re just friends” bit either. This is a definite no for me.
<h4>Q: I seem to be more mature than guys my age which makes it hard to date and find someone who will commit. Any tips?</h4>
This is fairly common. Men take a bit longer to mature than women, but, on average, they seem to mature somewhere in their mid-twenties. There are always exceptions, but as a general rule, younger men just tend to be a little more immature than younger women. There are likely some biological aspects to this because, for example, women likely mature quicker because we have to carry children on a biological clock’s dictations. But even little girls like playing with dolls while little boys like to rough house. Men do, however, eventually grow into being ready to commit and in a serious relationship.
<h4>Q: What is the best place to meet <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/three-new-years-resolutions-for-women-on-the-internet" target="_blank" rel="noopener">quality women</a> who aren’t fickle?</h4>
This answer is short and simple: church.
<h4><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/candace" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: Candace Owens</a></h4>
<h4>Q: I have been with the same man for eight years. I called off our engagement because he’s still not ready, but we can’t seem to leave each other. Advice?</h4>
Leave. I knew two girls who went through a similar situation (relationships of about ten years each), and they both ended poorly. These women gave these men their best years. Meanwhile, men tend to age like fine wine — plus, they don’t have to worry so much about their reproductive vitality. That’s not the case for women. So, if you are giving someone years to make a decision and his decision is still “I don’t want to make a decision,” you are, unfortunately, a placeholder. He will likely meet another girl, get engaged quickly, and you will be left wondering what happened to the last decade of your life. I feel so terrible for women who have gone through this. But in both cases with the two women I knew, they knew they should have left earlier, but they didn’t muster the strength to do it. Have the strength to do it. Leave. Don’t be someone else’s placeholder.
<h4>Q: There is a girl I like, but I’m nervous to ask her on a date. How should I ask?</h4>
Just ask her. The worst thing that can happen is that she says no. And while you’ll have a bruised ego for a couple of days, you will have done something manly in the long run. Girls are missing men asking them on dates — men who hold doors and have the confidence to ask women on dates rather than <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/why-everyone-hates-online-dating" target="_blank" rel="noopener">hiding behind apps</a> of Instagram DMs. Ask her to grab lunch or see a movie. If she says no, you’ll move on and find someone else to ask out.
<h4>Q: What is a good at-home date night idea?</h4>
I think cooking together is fun. My husband is also a good cook, so we enjoy doing that together. We also love to watch shows together. Granted, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/kids-entertainment-out-with-the-old-in-with-the-new" target="_blank" rel="noopener">we have children</a> so we stay in more these days, but we love a good at-home dinner-date night.

Wide shot with copy space of couple sharing a dessert in cafe

A Q&A On Dating: Stop Making It So Difficult

Candace Owens

Dating

Gen Z

Readers Pass

Relationships

Social Issues

Women

We never quite know who the Biden administration is going to host at an event, but this year, Kamala Harris invited students from HBCU schools to the White House for a day of HBCU Triumph. At this “black excellence event,” the White House welcomed people they think embody black excellence. Apparently, they are of the belief that <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/this-is-trash-who-is-pushing-this-on-black-culture-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Sexyy Red</a> is one of those people since they played her song “SkeeYee” during the event for all the guests.
But is it black excellence to gather a number of students from HBCU schools and basically cater to them to let them know that you know the kind of music they listen to by playing Sexyy Red? Is that actually black excellence? Or, is that government excellence? I believe it is the latter. This is a prime example of the government playing an almost perfect hand when it comes to black America, as it has destroyed our families over the last half century.
Black Americans were outpacing white Americans in the 1950s under Jim Crow in terms of economic growth, and then, the government got involved. Lyndon B. Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act — even though he was an avowed racist — because he was forced to. With all the unrest and rioting that was going on in the nation following the assassination of John F. Kennedy, he had to sign the Civil Rights Act to calm America. Then, as soon as the Act was signed, he implemented the welfare system with the Great Society Act, saying he knew he would have black Americans voting Democrat for the next 200 years. He has basically been right.
Black Americans continue to think Democrats are their friends and saviors, as witnessed by their visit to the White House when they put on music — trash music — that is the intentional disintegration of the black soul. They are convincing black Americans that this is their culture, when, actually, it is the corrosion of black culture. In today’s society, Sexyy Red is “success” for Democrats — with all the twerking that comes with that music. Just a short time ago, we were listening to bands like The Temptations and singers like Lauryn Hill. Perhaps there is an operation spinning in Hollywood from the people who brought us gangster rap and this sort of trash.
<h4><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-298-i-m-done-being-threatened-the-michael-jackson-diddy-connection-exposed-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: Candace Owens</a></h4>
It’s no secret that some black Americans don’t like me because I talk about these issues. However, I want to <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/are-you-black-pilled" target="_blank" rel="noopener">make black Americans aware</a> of the fact that we have been targeted <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/mass-psychosis-how-villains-become-heroes-in-the-media" target="_blank" rel="noopener">and brainwashed</a> against our better interests. The media inevitably have much to say about anyone who has conversations with me on, basically, any matter, but especially those concerning black America.
I exposed the fraudulence surrounding the George Floyd case in my documentary “<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/videos/the-greatest-lie-ever-sold" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Greatest Lie Ever Sold</a>.” But black Americans said, “How dare you?” Yes, how dare I <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/i-am-sick-and-tired-of-media-deception" target="_blank" rel="noopener">expose</a> that Black Lives Matter not only used George Floyd’s unfortunate death to steal millions of dollars, but also laundered those dollars to organizations that have absolutely nothing to do with black America. How dare I expose that BLM convinced black Americans to riot and loot their own communities so that business leaders would be forced to move out. And they weren’t the only ones who were forced out.
Thanks to BLM efforts, police were forced out of neighborhoods and locations where looting was occurring, so, obviously, no one wanted to live in those neighborhoods. Why would anyone volunteer to live in an unsafe neighborhood or set up a business in a looting zone? This then caused black people in these communities to end up even more impoverished in those circumstances. So, I refuse to kowtow to the Democratic world order that has effectively destroyed black Americans.
I refused to cover up the fact that George Floyd died with enough fentanyl in his system to kill a horse, nor was I willing to act as though the full video of Floyd’s arrest showed that Floyd complied with police — when he did not. Floyd was safely put in the back of a cruiser, proclaimed he could not breathe while he was sitting in the backseat, and then asked to be put on the ground. I went on a fact-searching mission and exposed all the lies and the media propaganda arm that routinely convinces black America — and, quite honestly, all Americans now — that they are a part of a victim group.
The only victim group we are a part of is the group that is, at least to some extent, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/lifes-tough-get-a-helmet-man" target="_blank" rel="noopener">being victimized</a> by the media. Without question, we are constantly being lied to so that we never look at or question who the people are who are actually controlling us.

Vice President Kamala Harris Attends Get Out The Vote HBCU Event In South Carolina

What Is Black Excellence?

Black Lives Matter

Blacks

Greatest Lie Ever Sold

Kamala Harris

Rap Music

A publication (which will remain nameless) that used to cover me quite frequently recently and abruptly stopped. After looking into it, I found out that there had effectively been a ban put on my name — an internal embargo of sorts. Of course, I was curious as to why? What exactly did I do to, all of a sudden, deserve a ban? As I came to find out, they claim that I am a “Christian nationalist.”
Now, I am a proud Christian, but I thought it was a bit strange that a media hit was put on me for the sole reason of being a Christian — because my show is not overtly Christian. There would be nothing wrong with that, but we&#8217;re not exactly praying on the show (though maybe we should be, considering everything that&#8217;s happening in society).
Regardless, I’m not sure I have any problem with either of those terms. I definitely consider myself to be a nationalist, and I am also a Christian. However, they’re saying it in a much more sinister way. If you’re paying attention, “Christian nationalist” is everywhere as of late. Suddenly, Christianity is being smeared, libeled, and attacked. It is being presented in the same vein as white supremacy.
In February alone, major media outlets published numerous headlines about Christian nationalism. <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/what-is-christian-nationalism-and-why-it-raises-concerns-about-threats-to-democracy" target="_blank" rel="noopener">PBS</a> published “What is Christian nationalism and why it raises concerns about threats to democracy,” <a href="https://www.axios.com/2024/02/28/poll-christian-nationalism-americans-reject" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Axios</a> published “Poll: Most Americans cool to Christian nationalism as its influence grows” (apparently we’re now conducting polls and saying Christian nationalism is influential), <a href="https://www.npr.org/2024/02/28/1234304058/christian-nationalism-survey#:~:text=Christian%20nationalism's%20support%20is%20strongest%20in%20rural%20states%20A%20new,as%20Alabama%20and%20West%20Virginia." target="_blank" rel="noopener">NPR</a> published “Christian nationalism’ support is strongest in rural, conservative states,” and the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/01/opinion/christian-nationalism.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">New York Times</a> published “Four Ways of Looking at Christian Nationalism.”
Those all came out within just the last month.
This topic is also getting the Hollywood spin, so, now, it will be pumped through our television screens. After all, once the propaganda goes out, it must get the Hollywood treatment. Apparently, the man for that job is Rob Reiner. Reiner is directing a new documentary titled “God and Country,” which puts Christian nationalism in America under the spotlight. On his press tour, one of his stops was CNN, and in <a href="https://www.cnn.com/videos/world/2024/01/30/exp-amanpour-rob-reiner-god--country-intw-013001pseg2-cnni-world.cnn" target="_blank" rel="noopener">his interview</a>, Christiane Amanpour asked Reiner why he selected Christian nationalism as his next film topic. He responded saying that over time, he has come to see how powerful and well-organized the movement has become: “I then realized that this [movement] has taken root far more and far more deeply than I had ever thought.” Reiner believes Christian nationalism is deeply embedded in society — and believes that’s a problem.
Now, I’m sure when you consider the myriad of issues facing our country today, what you’re really concerned about is that there might be some Christians who are also in love with our country. They are Christian nationalists. When you see drug dealers, illegal immigrants, crime rates, gang violence, I’m sure you’re thinking, it’s the Christians we should be afraid of. It’s an absurd idea.
<h4><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-296-holy-smokes-the-media-just-put-a-hit-on-me" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: Candace Owens</a></h4>
I believe this is a further attempt to divide and brainwash Christians, which is something that has gone on for decades.
Once upon a time, the Bible was taught in classrooms all across the United States, and teachers and students prayed in school. Then lawsuits were filed and all that went away, beginning in the 1960s. Since then, there has been a concerted effort to divide Christians, to make them feel embarrassed about their religion. That push just continues with more force; that is exactly what is happening again with the topic of Christian nationalism.
Hollywood is notorious for supporting initiatives like this. Believe it or not, they’re even going after Justin Bieber. Bieber, as we all know, was young and innocent when he came onto the scene, so he had much potential to be a victim of evil in the industry. Granted, he went through an intense period of partying, but in 2018, he married Hailey Baldwin — and his world completely changed. He dropped the party-boy reputation, changed his ways, and started attending church. This was and still is not the kind of story that usually circulates in Hollywood.
Hollywood has never been a fan of Christianity, so church-going people in the industry simply cannot be allowed. That makes Justin’s pastor’s post on the internet no surprise. Victor Marx took to social media to make a somewhat unusual, though understandable, request, asking for Christians to pray for wisdom and protection for Justin and Hailey, for them to draw close to the Lord, because people in the limelight often face “spiritual warfare.” Hailey’s dad, Stephen, shared the post which caused more questions in the comments. He has since deleted the post, and though we don’t know more details, it is obvious that there is some kind of spiritual battle happening.
It seems that every time we get a glimpse of truth, forces unite and more evil occurs. I cannot imagine the pressure Justin is facing, and I am sure that the evil he has experienced and witnessed in the industry is weighing heavier and heavier on his heart, especially since he has strengthened his relationship with God over the years.
So, to any person going through this type of conflict, know that Christians will stand by you if and when you are ready to share the truth. We will be there with you. We will pray for you — and the entire world. Plus, people who are not Christians will thank you, even if silently, because they know that if Christians are being considered evil, something very sinister is going on.
Pay attention, pray, and encourage each other. If we can unite in our faith, we can conquer more evil together than we can alone.

Small wooden cross and flag of USA. God save America

The Latest Attack On Christians: Christian Nationalism

Christians

Justin Bieber

Nationalism

Rob Reiner

From 2015 to 2016, JoJo Siwa was on the show “Dance Moms” alongside her mother, Jessalynn Siwa. While she may not have been the best dancer, viewers always wanted to see more of her on screen. She has a big, bubbly personality and was always genuinely fun to watch. After two seasons on the show, she started a YouTube channel called “It’s JoJo Siwa,” which was a kids’ show—and kids loved her. It positively exploded. She gained a huge following and even created music for kids thereafter.
In January 2020, Siwa came out as a lesbian. Now, she is back in the news with a new podcast — “JoJo Siwa Now” — and a big announcement: She wants kids.
<div id="attachment_703899" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-703899" class="size-large wp-image-703899" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/MixCollage-29-Feb-2024-01-46-PM-2285-864x576.jpg" alt="WESTWOOD, CA - NOVEMBER 12: Dancer Joelle Joanie 'JoJo' Siwa attends the premiere of Columbia Pictures' 'The Star' at Regency Village Theatre on November 12, 2017 in Westwood, California. (Photo by Barry King/Getty Images)BURBANK, CALIFORNIA: (FOR EDITORIAL USE ONLY) In this image released on June 15, JoJo Siwa poses for a photo backstage during iHeartRadio Can't Cancel Pride at iHeartRadio Theater on April 24, 2023 in Burbank, California. (Photo by Monica Schipper/Getty Images for iHeartRadio)" width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/MixCollage-29-Feb-2024-01-46-PM-2285-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/MixCollage-29-Feb-2024-01-46-PM-2285-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/MixCollage-29-Feb-2024-01-46-PM-2285-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/MixCollage-29-Feb-2024-01-46-PM-2285-1536x1024.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/MixCollage-29-Feb-2024-01-46-PM-2285-2048x1365.jpg 2048w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/MixCollage-29-Feb-2024-01-46-PM-2285-1800x1200.jpg 1800w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/MixCollage-29-Feb-2024-01-46-PM-2285-1200x800.jpg 1200w" sizes="(max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" />[L] Photo by Barry King/Getty Images. [R] Photo by Monica Schipper/Getty Images for iHeartRadio</div>I have said previously that I do not believe Siwa is a lesbian, which she heard about and didn’t like. Nevertheless, I stand by it. There are, obviously, lesbians who grow up to marry women. The women I know who have chosen this route are often women who have been abused by men in some way, be it emotional or physical. They almost experience a repulsion of men for the rest of their lives. Ellen DeGeneres has talked about the sexual abuse she experienced as a child, and she has been married to a woman for many years now.
But Siwa’s story? I have seen this story and so have you: Young girls become famous and want to break away from the child-like persona that made them famous — and they go through “a phase.” Call it a coming-of-age phase, per se. These girls are the Cyndi-Lauper-type girls who “just want to have fun.” They make out with other girls at a high school or college party, but they are not really lesbians. They grow up and out of that phase. They go on to marry a man and have children.
<h4><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-291-shocking-us-airmen-sets-himself-on-fire-member-exclusive">WATCH: Candace Owens</a></h4>
Take, for instance, Demi Lovato, who announced she was a lesbian, then non-binary, then back to being a woman. She is now an engaged woman. Miley Cyrus was also a temporary lesbian. She said she came out to her mom when she was younger, then she came out as a lesbian after her marriage failed with Liam. Now, she is dating a man again, a drummer who came with her to the Grammys.
<div id="attachment_703913" style="width: 752px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-703913" class="size-large wp-image-703913" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/GettyImages-1986406892-742x576.jpg" alt="LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA - FEBRUARY 04: Miley Cyrus accepts the &quot;Best Pop Solo Performance&quot; Award for &quot;Flowers&quot; onstage during the 66th GRAMMY Awards at Crypto.com Arena on February 04, 2024 in Los Angeles, California. (Photo by Kevin Mazur/Getty Images for The Recording Academy)" width="742" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/GettyImages-1986406892-742x576.jpg 742w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/GettyImages-1986406892-300x233.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/GettyImages-1986406892-768x596.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/GettyImages-1986406892.jpg 1024w" sizes="(max-width: 742px) 100vw, 742px" />Kevin Mazur/Getty Images for The Recording Academy</div>
 And, of course, who could forget Lindsey Lohan? She was dating Samantha Ronson for a while, another child actress who became a lesbian. But, Lohan grew up, got married, and just had a child.
<div id="attachment_703915" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-703915" class="size-large wp-image-703915" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/GettyImages-1918716092-864x576.jpg" alt="NEW YORK, NEW YORK - JANUARY 08: Lindsay Lohan attends the &quot;Mean Girls&quot; New York premiere at AMC Lincoln Square Theater on January 08, 2024 in New York City. (Photo by John Lamparski/WireImage)" width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/GettyImages-1918716092-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/GettyImages-1918716092-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/GettyImages-1918716092-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/GettyImages-1918716092.jpg 1024w" sizes="(max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" />John Lamparski/WireImage</div>
So why does any of this matter? It matters because it impacts our children and because it’s relevant to the next generation. This type of behavior becomes dangerous. These women are famous and because their phase is platformed, it is treated as something more than just a phase.
JoJo Siwa has recently discussed on her podcast what coming out to her mother was like. She says she was 12-years-old. That’s right: 12-years-old. Do we assign meaning to anything that a 12-year-old says? Girls’ emotions are all over the place around that age when they are going through puberty; that is why people often say girls are much more difficult than boys when they are teenagers. Factually, a 12-year-old’s brain simply is not developed. In fact, it’s not developed until age 25.
Then, in regards to the conversation between Siwa and her mom, Siwa says, “My mom actually made my coming out to her super easy.” And when “everyone kinda caught a vibe” between her and a girl who ended up becoming her first girlfriend, her mom asked her, “Do you like her as a friend or as more than a friend?” All the while, Siwa has lots of children’s eyes watching her every move, hanging on her every word. They’re the kids who fell in love with her on YouTube, so they’re still listening to her while she makes her lesbian journey sound fun and easy.
Yet many lesbians’ journeys have been far from fun and easy. The highest domestic violence statistics exist amongst the lesbian community, with 43.8% of lesbian women and 61.1% of bisexual women having experienced rape, physical violence, or stalking by an intimate partner. Those are facts, and they are facts that JoJo Siwa is not considering while she goes through what I perceive to plausibly be a phase in her life.
<h4><a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP</a></h4>
Plus, biologically speaking, lesbians cannot naturally have children. But on her podcast, she says she is looking for someone who is ready to have kids because she is “very near ready.” Siwa says, “That is something that I care very, very much about.” Now, I love that she is talking about wanting to have children and making that aspirational because that is actually not common in Hollywood whatsoever. However, she is clearly not considering the implications of being a lesbian and having children. To have children, she would have to go through IVF, a tremendously expensive, emotional, and painful process. The reality of IVF is not flippant; it is severe. Further, it is not guaranteed.
JoJo Siwa may just be wanting to separate herself from the big bow phase, but the lesbian phase may be one she looks back on with regret. Perhaps she will look to some of the women who have lived lives similar to hers to learn from where they are now because her current decisions are in the public consciousness. She is influencing the children who are following her by glamorizing these decisions, even if unintentionally so.

Snap Partner Summit 2023

Child Role Models: How Dangerous Behavior Is Influencing The Next Generation 

Celebrities

Demi Lovato

Ellen Degeneres

JoJo Siwa

LGBTQ

Miley Cyrus

I have become fascinated with the Ruby Franke case. I have not publicly discussed the case because when the story broke months ago, I was not convinced that more commentary would be beneficial to add to the discussion, namely because this story was quite dark. However, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MKNgVX6u34">the statement</a> she gave in her recent court appearance was unexpected.
A Utah-based family, the Frankes became quite popular several years ago via their “8 Passengers” YouTube channel that had over two million subscribers. They fit into the YouTuber families who look like the perfect family — well-dressed, church-going (Mormon), wife, husband, six children. But by June 2020, some of those subscribers started to take note of some strange happenings in the family. Followers began criticizing Ruby Franke’s punishing techniques, they noticed the degree to which she allowed her children to prank one another, and then they realized one of her children was sleeping in a beanbag.
Viewers’ concerns escalated, and some reached out to the local Children Protection Services and went so far as to begin a petition that forcing a child to sleep in a beanbag was too harsh of a punishment. But when Franke was asked about it, she simply said the kid loved it. In 2021, Ruby and Kevin, her husband, began going to counseling with Jodie Hildebrant, a business partner who became her mentor and counselor to her children.
In August of 2022, Franke faced more criticism, this time over a lunch debacle. Her six-year-old daughter had packed a lunch but forgot it. Franke refused to take the lunch to her daughter and let her eat — a punishment obviously way too harsh for a six-year-old.
Police visited the home a few times, but it was not until August of last year when everything exploded. Franke and Hildebrant were arrested after Franke’s 12-year-old son escaped from Hildebrant’s house, ran to a neighbor, and called 911. The boy was entirely malnourished, his limbs had been duct taped, and he had visible injuries.
<h4><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/beyonce-fans-don-t-come-for-me-my-review-of-her-country-music-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: Candace Owens</a></h4>
Hildebrant had allegedly become a counselor to the children; however, the son later told investigators that Hildebrant put cayenne pepper and honey on wounds he had from being tied with a rope. When the Department of Public Safety arrived at the residence, they found another child, her daughter, in comparable condition who had been subjected to the same mistreatment and abuse. As more details unfolded, more abuse came to light. The mother was apparently telling her children they were possessed, and the children believed their mom. Franke told her daughter that to be absolved from possession, she must be subjected to such treatment.
This entire situation is absolutely infuriating. It involves children. Precious, innocent children. It also involves a parent with a warped brain.
This week, Ruby Franke and Jodi Hildebrant were sentenced to 30 years in prison — and Franke’s not fighting it. That’s what has made this case so interesting. Typically, lawyers work to get a sentence reduced, but part of the reason this court case has moved so quickly is because she is not fighting the charges. Franke gave a rather surprising <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MKNgVX6u34">statement in front of the court</a> — surprising in that it is uncommon — saying she believes she deserves to go to prison for what she has done.
In her statement, she explains how she got to her delusional way of living, coming to believe the church was against her, the government was against her, and in order to “save” her children, she must inflict these punishments on them. She was working with an exceptionally dark and disturbed woman, Hildebrant, but Franke says it was her own choice to believe what she heard. She apologizes to her husband, thanks the police officers, addresses her parents with sincerity, and pleads to God, saying her greatest desire is to one day stand in God’s courts, spotless and confident. She ends by confirming she knows this is “a necessary step” to learn until she is “ready to re-enter as a contributing member of our beautiful society.”
What Ruby Franke did is horrible. What her children have experienced is an absolute tragedy. Even with cases such as these, we are conditioned to watch people commit atrocious crimes and then explain why we should understand they committed them.
Everyone looks for an excuse and for understanding. But not Franke. Her response is surprising because people don’t take accountability anymore. They do not admit wrongdoing. They do not ask for healing, own their faults, and admit they deserve every single thing thrown at them.
To be clear, regardless of her statement, the victims are the children and that fact can never be removed. But it is a response worth discussing. What an interesting conclusion — and one we never see.
<h4><a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP</a></h4>

Screen-Shot-2024-02-20-at-6.36.08-PM

What To Make Of Ruby Franke

Child Abuse

Court

Utah

YouTube

Keke Palmer and Darius Jackson’s relationship has been in the news since July 2023. It resurfaced in November of last year with more information, and now, in February 2024, there are still more rumblings coming from these two. My assessment is and always has been that this was an incredibly toxic relationship. But regardless of its toxicity, there are some actions that will never be acceptable in any relationship.
The private life of Palmer and Jackson started to become public in July 2023 when Palmer went to a concert in Las Vegas and was pulled on stage to dance with Usher. Her then-boyfriend, Jackson, took to X to declare his disapproval of her provocative behavior and revealing outfit. By this point, the two already shared a child, and she had given birth just a few months prior.
<div id="attachment_697009" style="width: 371px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-697009" class="size-full wp-image-697009" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/Usher-stage.png" alt="Screenshot. X/Twitter." width="361" height="512" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/Usher-stage.png 361w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/Usher-stage-212x300.png 212w" sizes="(max-width: 361px) 100vw, 361px" />Screenshot. X/Twitter.</div>
Then, in November, a month after separating, Palmer released shocking surveillance camera footage of who appears to be her ex, Jackson, beating her in her own home. At the time of the footage release, she was seeking a restraining order and full custody of their then eight-month-old son. Jackson reportedly trespassed into Palmer’s home without her knowledge nor her consent. This is still working its way through the court process, but the behavior she reported of him is beyond despicable.
<h4><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/meek-mill-tweets-me-is-black-america-finally-waking-up-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: Candace Owens</a></h4>
She shared stills of the footage from her filings in court at the time. In them, Jackson first looks to be forcing her in a certain direction against her will, then has his hand in the air as she loses her balance and falls over the couch, putting her hands up in a defenseless position.
<div id="attachment_697013" style="width: 508px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-697013" class="size-full wp-image-697013" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/House-1.png" alt="Screenshot." width="498" height="512" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/House-1.png 498w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/House-1-292x300.png 292w" sizes="(max-width: 498px) 100vw, 498px" />Screenshot.</div>
<div id="attachment_697017" style="width: 522px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-697017" class="size-full wp-image-697017" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/House-2.png" alt="Screenshot." width="512" height="505" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/House-2.png 512w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/House-2-300x296.png 300w" sizes="(max-width: 512px) 100vw, 512px" />Screenshot.</div>
<div id="attachment_697021" style="width: 522px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-697021" class="size-full wp-image-697021" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/House-3.png" alt="Screenshot." width="512" height="279" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/House-3.png 512w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/House-3-300x163.png 300w" sizes="(max-width: 512px) 100vw, 512px" />Screenshot.</div>
In the court <a href="https://www.today.com/parents/keke-palmer-custody-son-darius-jackson-rcna124585" target="_blank" rel="noopener">filings</a>, she states, “The abuse during our relationship was not just physical, but emotional and manipulative. Darius would ‘love bomb’ me and make me feel like I was the most important woman in the world, only to get extremely distant and cold over a perceived insult to him.” Palmer has repeated that Jackson was very jealous throughout their entire relationship. While this was obviously an incredibly toxic relationship, this abuse was certainly not Keke Palmer’s fault. 
Then, at the beginning of this month, Jackson took to X again, this time, with a message to all the dads who have given up custody: 
<div id="attachment_697023" style="width: 522px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-697023" class="size-full wp-image-697023" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/Darius-4.png" alt="Screenshot. X/Twitter." width="512" height="414" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/Darius-4.png 512w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/Darius-4-300x243.png 300w" sizes="(max-width: 512px) 100vw, 512px" />Screenshot. X/Twitter.</div>
In another post, he continued, giving advice to make sure God is the center of your relationship:
<div id="attachment_697029" style="width: 522px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-697029" class="size-full wp-image-697029" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/House-5.png" alt="Screenshot. X/Twitter." width="512" height="340" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/House-5.png 512w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/House-5-300x199.png 300w" sizes="(max-width: 512px) 100vw, 512px" />Screenshot. X/Twitter.</div>
If you separated these words from the situation he has currently found himself in — having beaten Keke Palmer — I would affirm that this is amazing advice. But you do not get to suddenly become a pastor after we have all seen evidence of horrific footage of you. Even in households of atheists, men know not to put their hands on women. To claim you were beating your significant other because you were not following the Good Book and the Lord? There is no excuse — ever. Let’s not hide behind God. Let’s not turn into a pastor who suddenly has sage words for other men.
I am a firm believer that it is important to weigh in when something goes against your values — so it is important to state this is wrong. This is a situation that should be discussed, not because anyone is prying into the private lives of people (this is information that has been made public), but because it’s important to take a moral position with actual values. This situation includes two people who clearly did not respect each other, nor did they understand who the other was. Toxicity seeped into their relationship, and they never should have been matched in the first place. But no woman should ever go through this, and no woman should suffer abuse. It is never the fault of any person when they are abused.
There is never a circumstance when it is acceptable for a man to put his hands on a woman. Never. Only a coward would ever do that.

2023 Atlanta Film Festival – “Big Boss” Closing Night Screening

An Unjustifiable Act In Any Relationship

Domestic Violence

Hollywood

Young women who were promised the feminist dream are now in the workforce. Growing up, they were told, “You can be just like men. Male parity is what we want! We want to work 40 hours a week. You are going to love it.” But now, at not-so-long last, the women who grew up hearing these platitudes are finding out that the feminist glory, as it was made out to be, is not all that glorious — and they aren’t actually loving it. Gez Z women in particular have found they aren’t making much money, they’re working a lot of hours, and they don’t have any time for themselves.
I’ve been extensively discussing <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/the-vulnerability-that-will-plague-generation-tiktoks-future">the realization Gen Z</a> is coming to, and in yet another TikTok, this topic came to my attention once again. Eliza (<a href="https://www.tiktok.com/@supposedlyasystem">@supposedlyasystem</a>) has recently shared her feelings with the Internet (because that’s what you’re supposed to do on social media these days), and she has <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/three-new-years-resolutions-for-women-on-the-internet">trauma dumped</a> about having to work 40 hours a week while making very little money. She carries on with this monologue for right at two minutes while crying as she does so. In her TikTok, she professes:
<blockquote>Why is it that I have to work 40 hours a week just so I can have a place to live? … I work 40 hours a week so I can have a two-bedroom apartment and an extra $300 a month. … So not only do I not have any extra money, but just working makes me so exhausted that I don’t have time either. Like, I get off work at 5:30, I come home and I am just so tired. I’m so tired… I don’t want to do that anymore, right? I don’t care how poor and miserable I would have to be, but I literally can’t have a place to live without this. You know, like, I don’t know what to do. I’m not made for this. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
She doesn&#39;t have the time, energy, or cash to enjoy her life outside of work <a href="https://t.co/9hFWMnngho">pic.twitter.com/9hFWMnngho</a>
&mdash; wilder😎🇺🇸 (@wilderpatriot) <a href="https://twitter.com/wilderpatriot/status/1752894688388943908?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 1, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
A lot of people have made fun of her for this video, but Eliza isn’t the only Gen Zer who has expressed these exact feelings — so I think we should answer her question. She is asking, why? Why is this her circumstance? Well, the answer, sweetheart, is that the big, bold, bad feminists who came before you insisted that women could be just like men.
Women are obviously not just like men; biologically, men are wired differently. We are symbiotic with men; however, our roles in life are not meant to be the same. But feminists came along and brainwashed people into believing women were no different than men and could, in fact, be just like them: Take birth control and you won’t get pregnant! they said. Go to work and be like the men! they proclaimed. Work alongside your male counterparts.
<h4><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/media-meltdown-tucker-carlson-is-with-vladimir-putin-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: Candace Owens</a></h4>
Fast forward to 2024 and women are finally realizing that perhaps Mother Nature had some things right. Despite this dream of freedom they were sold, women are actually kind of miserable living this “dream.” Maybe, just maybe, the ability to birth children alongside the inclination of knowing how to raise them might be a more natural route for women. I, for example, know what to do with my children in a way that does not come as naturally to my husband. Caring for children, especially as infants, does not come naturally to men in the way it does to women. Men are biologically predisposed to do the same job day in and day out, whereas women innately know how to manage a household. They can multitask while caring for a screaming child because we are designed in that way with that capability.
Unfortunately, women are still not yet willing to let go of the feminist narrative — a narrative that is not making women happy today. This “dream” may help pay the bare minimum bills, but before the explosion of second-wave feminism, the young women who are now finding it difficult to keep up a 40-hour work week likely would have, instead, found a partner, gotten married, and had kids. The husband would have made enough to support the household because women were not yet in the labor force contributing to supporting an entire family. That was a different existence in a different world. But the feminists said that was a prison.
If you ask me, quite frankly, women were happier. My grandmother, who stayed home and raised her kids, wasn’t crying every day about the stresses of raising children. She made dinner every night, managed the household, and cared for her family — all of which made her whole. When I spend the entire day with my three children, I am exhausted but deeply rewarded. Doing that is more rewarding than any feedback received in the climate of an office.
Is it every single woman who feels as overwhelmed as the trauma dumping Gen Zers? No, but in my view, a large majority of women are dissatisfied with their lives yet unwilling to look at the fact that it is our own fault for continuing to embrace this radical feminist movement. This movement started before we were born and while its creation is not our fault, continuing to hold onto it is. Furthermore, we shouldn’t look down on women who are recognizing this “dream” for what it actually is. We should, instead, all be heading in their direction.

Woman working from home

Recognizing The Radical Feminist Movement For What It Is

Feminism

TikTok

Work environment

The NFL has made the entire 2023 &#8211; 2024 football season about <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/taylor-swift-has-the-maturity-of-a-15-year-old-girl" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Taylor Swift</a>. Meanwhile, NFL fans — actual NFL fans — are and have been understandably upset about it. All these people want to do is watch some football, but they’ve been promulgated all season with constant camera pans to Swift.
Obviously, Travis Kelce is having a tremendous season, but early in the season when Swift started making appearances at Kelce’s games, the NFL quickly realized they could make money off her. Since the media are obsessed with Swift, that inevitably meant the NFL showing her at games would get more people watching — not for the actual game but for this love story unfolding between Swift and Kelce.
So at last Sunday night’s Kansas City Chiefs playoff game, Taylor Swift was caught on camera appearing to mouth, “Go away, please.”
To this, I say: Fair.
<div id="attachment_689853" style="width: 874px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-689853" class="size-large wp-image-689853" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/GettyImages-1943420842-864x576.jpg" alt="ORCHARD PARK, NY - JANUARY 21: Brittany Mahomes, Jason Kelce, and Taylor Swift react during the second half of the AFC Divisional Playoff game between the Kansas City Chiefs and the Buffalo Bills at Highmark Stadium on January 21, 2024 in Orchard Park, New York. (Photo by Kathryn Riley/Getty Images)" width="864" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/GettyImages-1943420842-864x576.jpg 864w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/GettyImages-1943420842-300x200.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/GettyImages-1943420842-768x512.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/GettyImages-1943420842.jpg 1024w" sizes="(max-width: 864px) 100vw, 864px" />Kathryn Riley/Getty Images</div>
Now, this is Taylor Swift, and she is arguably the most famous woman in the world next to, maybe, the likes of Beyoncé. Therefore, the cameras are not going to go away, especially because she is dating someone in the public eye. It’s not as though she decided to date someone out of the limelight, which she could have done. But rather than date men who are private and low-profile, she tends to date men who are famous as well. Furthermore, people are obviously invested in her love story because, after all, her music centers around how she falls in and out of love. That’s how she’s been able to connect with her audience. So there is no way the cameras are just going to go away.
<h4><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/oh-snap-woke-female-pilot-explodes-on-me-over-dei-policies-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: Candace Owens</a></h4>
But I do feel somewhat empathetic to her. She is not asking for the cameras to be on her, and I’m sure it is embarrassing for her. She wants the focus to be on Travis Kelce. Even in my own life and in a much smaller circumstance, I have politely declined when someone has asked me for a picture while at one of my husband’s speaking events. A picture with me at one of his events is not the appropriate time.
While people are upset about the focus being taken away from Kelce and put on Swift, she, too, wants the focus to be on him. And I think this is legitimate. 
But the NFL is not going to stop.
This level of attention is the high cost of being someone that famous, but I sense it annoys her. Despite the fact she is incredibly famous, she still wants to take part in things like a normal person. She doesn’t want to have this embarrassing level of attention on her as she’s learning about and getting to know his family. She wants them to like her, just like any girlfriend would. What she does not want is for Kelce’s family to just associate her with lots of cameras and floods of people coming up to her, obsessed with every moment of her life. At the end of the day, she is just a person.
In the long run, I still do not think this relationship is going to work out. These were <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/flag-on-the-play-swift-and-kelces-annoying-relationship" target="_blank" rel="noopener">my early predictions</a>, and I stand by them. She might get a baby out of this, but I do not think they are well-matched or well-suited for each other for a slew of different reasons. But, as it pertains to the NFL, they have been particularly invasive — and they’ve used Swift just to make some money. That’s the worst part.
<h4><a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP</a></h4>

AFC Championship – Kansas City Chiefs v Baltimore Ravens

The NFL Is Using Taylor Swift 

Music

Sports

Menu

The Radical Intolerance Behind Woke Corporate Activism

Exclusive Articles

Is It Finally Time For Our Glorious Conquest Of Canada To Begin?

Public Health ‘Experts’ Set The Stage For A New Prohibition

As Banks Flee ESG, Conservatives Should Remain Vigilant

Morgan Wallen’s New Song Helps Us Reorient How We Think About Life

2025 Just Started And Things Are Already Getting Crazy

What Costco’s Doubling Down On DEI Means — And Doesn’t Mean

Spin Cycle: New Orleans Terror Attack Was Not About The Border, Stop Talking About The Border

My Predictions For 2025

Shaken, Not Stirred: James Bond Franchise Caught In A Tug Of War With Amazon

The American Media’s Failure On The Transgender Debate

Combating The Rising Threat Of Censorship In 2025

Gender Wars: Why 2024 Was The Year We Went Rogue

Biden Admin Blew Over $1 Billion On DEI In Red States

Jimmy Carter’s Unavoidable Legacy

These Brave Teachers Took A Stand For Biological Reality In 2024

Spin Cycle: The 2024 Post-Mortem, And The 2025 Predictions

Trump Gives The Best Press Conference Ever

Massive MAGA Win: Facebook Reverses Its Censorship

The Urgency Of Time: Why Mike Johnson Must Do What He Has To Do

The Greatest Scandal In Modern Presidential History

Trump, Musk Team Up To Kill Pork Bill

No, Divorce Isn’t ‘Fine For The Kids’

Trump’s World: Trudeau On The Brink, Germany Moves Right

What The Hell Are All These Drones?

The Race Rape Hoax That Started It All Collapses

The Sickness Of OnlyFans

Bill Burr Goes Full A**hole

The Murder Of Brian Thompson: How Individual Acts Of Evil Get Justified

Syria Falls

The Evil Revolutionary Left Cheers Murder

A Shocking Assassination — And The Left Celebrates

WTF Just Happened In South Korea?

Ten Classic Books I Recommend For Any Stage Of Life

On Wrestling With God

On Depression And Anxiety: How Micro Goals Facilitate Positive Emotion

On Depression And Anxiety: Specifying The Nature Of The Problem

Interpreting Guilt: How White Guilt Becomes A Replacement For Religion

The Role Of The Holy Spirit: Distinguishing Between Your Will And God’s Will

An Unlikely Activist: Tommy Robinson On The Unrest In The UK

The Foundation Of Elon Musk’s Philosophy

How To Engage In Culture Without Chaos

The Eternal Question Of Human Beings: How Do You Live In The World?

A Different Way Of Thinking About Sanity

Requiem For Rex Murphy: A Tribute To Newfoundland

‘There Is No Room For Savages In Our Civilization’: Mosab Hassan Yousef, Son Of Hamas Leader

Why A Change Of Plans Causes Emotional Destabilization

Wherever You Are Is Not As Good As It Could Be: Plot A Course Forward

Andrew Klavan On Finding ‘The Joy Of My Joy’ After A ‘Horrible Darkness’

Collections

Trending

Latest