On Sunday, over 100 members of Louisville&#8217;s Cuban community gathered at a  a restaurant to support the owner, who emigrated from Cuba, after he had reacted to a letter from Black Lives Matter activists with a series of demands by calling the letter &#8220;mafia tactics.”
Fernando Martinez, the owner of <a href="https://www.labodeguitademima.com/">La Bodeguita de Mima</a>, who risked his life by emigrating to the United States on a raft when he was 18 years old, stated, &#8220;La Bodeguita is open to everybody. If you&#8217;re gay, this is your home. If you&#8217;re Black, this is your home. If you&#8217;re white, this is your home. If you&#8217;re human, this is your home … How can I be called a bigot and a racist when my family is Black? When my son is gay? I&#8217;m the proud father of a gay son, and I&#8217;m gonna fight for him against anybody.&#8221;
“During a speech that was interrupted several times by roaring applause and honking car horns, Martinez told his story,” <a href="https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/local/2020/08/02/louisville-cuban-community-rallies-nulu-la-bodeguita-de-mima/5567470002/">The Courier-Journal</a> reported. Matinez asserted, “It’s sad that we have to justify who we are as people. We need to come together as a community. We’re not an enemy of the Black community. We’re all people and we come in all colors.&#8221;
“Some people sat on the steps of La Bodeguita de Mima and held signs that said, &#8216;We left Cuba because of socialism. Be careful what you wish for&#8217; and &#8216;Justice 4 all,&#8217;” The Courier-Journal added.
The Courier-Journal had <a href="https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/local/2020/08/01/louisville-cuban-community-rally-support-la-bodeguita-de-mima/5562669002/">already reported</a> that a press release asserted that on July 24, when La Bodeguita de Mima was forced to close during a demonstration, several protesters gave Martinez the list of demands and told him he &#8220;better put the letter on the door so your business is not f***ed with.&#8221;
Sadiqa Reynolds, president and CEO of the Louisville Urban League, stated over the weekend that she would no longer patronize Martinez’s two restaurants, El Taco Luchador and La Bodeguita De Mima. She wrote:
<blockquote>Rather than respond to demands tendered, even in the negative, and affirm that he is aware of the pain our people are in, instead he chooses to highlight what he believes is his superiority. I&#8217;m not sure why any human, other than a racist, would choose this time to tell us how little our lives matter.</blockquote>
Luis David Fuentes with El Kentubano, a publication for the Latin community of Kentucky, stated, “We had to escape the socialist government that took away our grandparents&#8217; private businesses in 1959 and continue to restrict our civil and political rights today,” adding that  freedom, respect and prosperity,&#8221; are under attack &#8220;because of the diffusion and expansion of Marxist ideas.&#8221;
“Local ABC News affiliate WHAS11 News <a href="http://archive.is/f8vCr">reported</a> that &#8216;Black Lives Matter protesters&#8217; were the ones who gave the letters out to businesses,” The Daily Wire <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/demand-letter-from-blm-activists-to-louisville-businesses-lists-5-repercussions-of-non-compliance?%3Futm_source=twitter">noted.</a>
A <a href="https://twitter.com/bloosemore">local reporter</a> <a href="https://www.scribd.com/document/471102642/Occupy-Nulu-Demands#from_embed">posted</a> the following five “repercussions of non-compliance” that were reportedly included in the letter:
<blockquote>
<ul>
<li>Reduction in Racial Index Score/bias report to the Better Business Bureau.</li>
<li>Social Media Blast: Notification, via all social media platforms, of non-compliance.</li>
<li>Boycott: Public boycott, coordinated through social media and mail announcements, of your NuLu establishment AND any other business ventures owned by you.</li>
<li>Protest: Visible, media-covered demonstration/sit-in outside your establishment.</li>
<li>Invasive Reclamation: Placement of booths/tables outside your establishment where competing Black proprietors will offer items comparable to those offered by you.</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
As <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/louisville-businesses-threatened-cave-to-demands-for-racial-reparations-or-get-bad-online-reviews">The Daily Wire</a> reported, the list of demands stated:
<blockquote>The residents of Louisville, Kentucky are standing strong, educated, and together to express the destruction your business has caused to low-income communities, specifically those with majority black residents. We therefore demand representation and reparations in the NuLu business district of Louisville for the gentrification that has taken place. The policies and processes of the revitalization on NuLu has displaced marginalized people from homes their families have often resided for generations, single-handedly progressing the gentrification of black neighborhoods.</blockquote>
The letter then listed eight &#8220;demands,&#8221; which included:
<ol>
<li>Businesses will adequately represent the black population of Louisville by having a minimum of 23% black staff (including management) in front of house positions, and maintain commitment and accountability to increasing that number (accountability roundtable information below).</li>
<li>Retail locations will include a minimum of 23% inventory of black retailers OR make a recurring monthly donation of 1.5% of net sales to black local organizations.</li>
<li>Business owners will require diversity, equity, &amp; inclusion training for their staffs, to be conducted by any one of the black women leaders on the attached list. Training will be conducted thereafter on a bi-annual basis.</li>
<li>Customize your own OR display one of the attached written statements in a viable location within your business to increase awareness and show support for the reparations movement.</li>
<li>Non-profits in NuLu district will submit to a voluntary, external audit of their board of trustees and take necessary steps towards 23% representation on those boards.</li>
<li>Business owners &amp; non-profit leaders will participate in quarterly roundtable discussions to be held accountable for their communities to these demands, and work together towards increased equity.</li>
<li>Maintain adequate black representation in any entertainment and performances booked at your business.</li>
<li>Dress code policies inherently discriminate against black folks, women, and the transgender community. You must eliminate dress code policies that promote profiling towards patrons and employees, including their hair requirements or stipulations, which can disproportionately target black folks.</li>
<li>23% black representation on the board of the NuLu Business Association.</li>
</ol>
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.
&nbsp;

Kentucky Covid-19 Cases Continue To Surge

Cubans Rally In Kentucky To Support Restaurant Owner Who Called BLM Activists’ Demands ‘Mafia Tactics’

According to <a href="https://www.tmz.com/2020/08/01/california-couple-throws-coffee-at-man-for-not-wearing-a-mask/">video at TMZ</a>, two men were sitting outside a coffee café in Manhattan Beach, California, when a man and woman walked by and the woman allegedly criticized them for not wearing masks. One of the men called out, “What are you looking at me for? I didn’t say s*** to you. Get the f*** out of my face!”
The woman then apparently hurled her coffee at the man, prompting him to jump up and run after the couple, punching the man.
A man offscreen said to the woman, “You shouldn’t have thrown the drink in his face.” She replied, “I don’t give a f***.” The man who had the drink thrown in his face retorted, “You do now.” The offscreen man repeated, “You should not have thrown the drink in his face. That was stupid.&#8221;
Later, someone addressed the couple, saying, “What you needed to do, you needed to walk away.” The coffee victim said to the man he hit, who was now on the phone, “What are you going to do, tell the cops you threw coffee at me?”
Meanwhile, the man accompanying the woman can be heard saying, “Hello, 911? I’ve just been assaulted on Manhattan Beach Avenue. Two gentlemen —”
The man offscreen commented, “Two gentlemen?”
The man phoning 911 continued, “One gentleman and his accomplice —”
The man offscreen laughed, “You need to get your story straight. Your significant other here, your wife or your girlfriend, she threw a drink in his face and assaulted him.” Referring to the coffee, he continues, “That’s hot. You know that, right?”
Later, “There’s coffee all over your boyfriend!”
The woman replied, “Cause you were punching him!”
The coffee victim addressed the man on the phone, saying, “You’re gonna show coffee all over you cause your stupid girlfriend threw it on me!” Later he addressed the couple, as the man on the phone can be seen with a bloody nose, and says,&#8221;We were sitting here eating our burritos and you stopped and accosted us and threw coffee at me. You’re gonna have a hard time explaining this …”
In late July, a woman enraged by a young couple enjoying a picnic in a dog park in San Diego while not wearing masks <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-enraged-woman-maces-couple-picnicking-who-werent-wearing-masks">reportedly maced the couple</a>.
Ash O&#8217;Brien, her husband Jarrett Kelley and their three-month-old puppy were enjoying the sun in Rhodes Dog Park when a woman in a black face mask targeted the couple with pepper spray, prompting Kelley, who was temporarily blinded, to attempt to grab the canister from the irate woman, who was accompanied by her dog.
One female witness <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8560393/Woman-MACES-couple-California-dog-park-werent-wearing-face-masks.html">admonished the woman</a>, “&#8217;What are you doing? You just maced him! You just maced them and their food because you disagree.”
O’Brien stated on Facebook that the woman had started her rage-filled actions by calling her and her husband “idiots’ and flipping O&#8217;Brien off. O’Brien added, “We were not wearing masks because we were eating. You can’t wear a mask and eat at the same time. … Then she started saying more stuff and I told her to leave the park and stop harassing us. She then came right up to our table wear (sic) we were eating, pointed the mace at me first and got a little on me, and then my husband stepped in and took the entire can.&#8221;
O’Brien told <a href="https://www.10news.com/news/local-news/man-allegedly-pepper-sprayed-for-not-wearing-facial-covering-eating-in-restricted-area">ABC 10</a>, “She just came up without saying anything and just stuck the mace can right in front of my face. My husband, being a good guy, walked in front of her and was like ‘Hey, calm down, please don’t do this’ and then she grabbed him and just starting macing him; she used the entire can on him.” She continued, “We drove to the hospital; he got treated and everything,” adding, “I want her to go to jail; she assaulted my husband, and I’m angry about it.”
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

close-up of a businesswoman holding recycable takeaway coffee cup

Woman Enraged At Man Not Wearing Mask At Outdoor Cafe Allegedly Throws Coffee In His Face

Coffee

Face Mask

Adult film star Stormy Daniels, real name Stephanie Clifford, took another hit last week in her string of lawsuits against President Donald Trump, when her libel suit against the president was rejected by a federal appeals court.
Daniels filed a libel suit against Trump over a tweet he posted back in 2018 concerning a sketch Daniels helped to create of her alleged intimidator alongside a photo of her ex-husband.
Trump captioned the side-by-side photos posted by another Twitter user: &#8220;A sketch years later about a nonexistent man. A total con job, playing the Fake News Media for Fools (but they know it)!&#8221;
Daniels argued that Trump smeared her as a liar, hurting her reputation, and denied their alleged 2006 affair via the tweet.
However, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in California ruled in favor of Trump, whose legal representation said the tweet &#8220;amounted to an opinion about another user’s post and not a factual claim,&#8221; <a href="https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/510150-federal-appeals-court-upholds-ruling-favoring-trump-in-stormy">The Hill</a> reported.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
A sketch years later about a nonexistent man. A total con job, playing the Fake News Media for Fools (but they know it)! <a href="https://t.co/9Is7mHBFda">https://t.co/9Is7mHBFda</a>
&mdash; Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/986547093610299392?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 18, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
“Viewed through the eyes of an objectively reasonable reader, the tweet here reflects Mr. Trump’s opinion about the implications of the allegedly similar appearances of Ms. Clifford’s ex-husband and the man in the sketch,” the court said in its ruling, The Hill noted.
Trump’s tweet “plainly concerns the similarities between the sketch and the photograph” of Daniels’s ex-husband, the court added.
The judges said that “[b]ecause the tweet juxtaposing the two images was displayed immediately below Mr. Trump’s tweet, the reader was provided with the information underlying the allegedly defamatory statement and was free to draw his or her own conclusions.&#8221;
The judges also rejected Daniels&#8217; claim that the tweet denied the two had a tryst back in 2006, while Trump was married to now-First Lady Melania Trump.
Back in December of 2019, Daniels was ordered to pay nearly <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/39294/judge-orders-stormy-daniels-pay-nearly-300000-emily-zanotti" rel="noopener">$300,000</a> in legal fees after her frivolous defamation suit against the president was thrown out, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/stormy-daniels-hush-money-lawsuit-dismissed-james-barrett">The Daily Wired</a> reported. And, later in March, &#8220;another judge dismissed another lawsuit Daniels filed against Trump, this one asking to be released from the infamous nondisclosure agreement she signed in 2016 promising not to discuss her alleged one-night affair with Trump years ago.&#8221;
&#8220;In exchange for $130,000, Daniels (real name Stephanie Clifford) agreed just weeks ahead of the 2016 election that she would not publicly discuss her alleged adulterous tryst with Trump back in 2006,&#8221; The Daily Wire outlined. &#8220;It is for this nondisclosure agreement, as well as another with former Playmate Karen McDougal, that Trump’s former ‘fixer’ Michael Cohen pleaded guilty to violating campaign finance laws.&#8221;
&#8220;Despite having received the money, Daniels quickly sought to violate the agreement, repeatedly appearing on television in 2017 to tease her big reveal of what supposedly happened that night,&#8221; the report added. &#8220;She eventually aired it all and included some rather specific details in her tell-all book, which enjoyed a bunch of free press due to the massive media coverage Daniels and her celebrity lawyer Michael Avenatti received.&#8221;
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

2019 Adult Video News Awards &#8211; Arrivals

Stormy Daniels Takes Another Hit: Judge Tosses Libel Suit Against Trump

Donald Trump

Stormy Daniels

A former MSNBC producer wrote an open letter on Monday explaining why she left the far-left network a little over a week ago, saying that they are a “cancer” that is “stoking national division” by amplifying “fringe voices” and forcing “journalists to make bad decisions on a daily basis.”
The letter was written by Ariana Pekary, who Fox News <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/media/msnbc-producer-ariana-pekary-letter">noted</a> described herself as an &#8220;integral member&#8221; of MSNBC&#8217;s &#8220;The Last Word with Lawrence O&#8217;Donnell.&#8221;
Pekary begins her letter by sharing quotes of what people said to her over the last couple of years as she pondered leaving the network due to the detrimental effect that it is having on society.
&#8220;July 24th was my last day at MSNBC. I don’t know what I’m going to do next exactly but I simply couldn’t stay there anymore,&#8221; Pekary wrote. &#8220;My colleagues are very smart people with good intentions. The problem is the job itself. It forces skilled journalists to make bad decisions on a daily basis.&#8221;
Pekary said that at MSNBC it was &#8220;practically baked in to the editorial process&#8221; that decisions on what and who give coverage to were based on what would generate the most ratings for the network. She said that behind closed doors &#8220;industry leaders will admit the damage that’s being done.&#8221;
A high profile TV veteran reportedly told her, “We are a cancer and there is no cure. But if you could find a cure, it would change the world.”
&#8220;As it is, this cancer stokes national division, even in the middle of a civil rights crisis,&#8221; Pekary said. &#8220;The model blocks diversity of thought and content because the networks have incentive to amplify fringe voices and events, at the expense of others… all because it pumps up the ratings.&#8221;
&#8220;Context and factual data are often considered too cumbersome for the audience,&#8221; Pekary later added. &#8220;There may be some truth to that (our education system really should improve the critical thinking skills of Americans) – but another hard truth is that it is the job of journalists to teach and inform, which means they might need to figure out a better way to do that. They could contemplate more creative methods for captivating an audience. Just about anything would improve the current process, which can be pretty rudimentary (think basing today’s content on whatever rated well yesterday, or look to see what’s trending online today).&#8221;
Pekary said that she has heard colleagues &#8220;deny their role as journalists,&#8221; and claims that a &#8220;senior producer&#8221; told her, “Our viewers don’t really consider us the news. They come to us for comfort.”
&#8220;Through this pandemic and the surreal, alienating lockdown, I’ve witnessed many people question their lives and what they’re doing with their time on this planet,&#8221; Pekary continued. &#8220;I reckon I’m one of those people, looking for greater meaning and truth. As much as I love my life in New York City and really don’t want to leave, I feel fortunate to be able to return to Virginia in the near term to reconnect with family, friends, and a community of independent journalists. I’m both nervous and excited about this change. Thanks to COVID-19, I’m learning to live with uncertainty.&#8221;
Pekary concluded by writing, &#8220;More than ever, I’m craving a full and civil discourse.&#8221;
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Philadelphia Prepares To Host Democratic National Convention

MSNBC Producer Quits: ‘This Cancer Stokes National Division,’ Facts ‘Too Cumbersome’ For Audience

MSNBC

It remains nearly impossible to find any meaningful reasons for the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/khan-8-insane-things-that-happened-in-seattles-radical-autonomous-zone">rioting and destruction</a> all across the nation outside of entitlement, puerility, and boredom.
Since the initial outcry over the murder of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/williams-now-what">George Floyd</a> months ago, the motivations for most of these supposed protests have mutated into cynical tantrums masquerading as some <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/khan-5-radical-goals-of-the-black-lives-matter-organization-the-media-ignores">grand nebulous cause</a>. This has become all too apparent when the rioting here in America is thrown in stark relief with the protests in Hong Kong.
Writing for the <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/07/hong-kong-protestors-still-fighting-good-fight/">National Review</a>, Dmitri Solzhenitsyn recently detailed the grim, ongoing struggles in Hong Kong: 
<blockquote>Standing up for their beliefs against a superpower with no respect for individual rights and little regard for the essential preciousness of human lives, Hong Kong’s protesters are an example of bravery, creativity, and resourcefulness in the face of adversity. For Americans — long accustomed to having our freedoms safeguarded by our centuries-old Constitution — this is a bracing reminder of what’s at stake in the fight for liberty. Whatever actions the allies of freedom are willing or able to muster against Communist China, advocates for Hong Kong’s autonomy should hope that the activists continue to resist…</blockquote>
Unlike here in America, the protests in Hong Kong are an actual demand for civil rights against the marauding influence of China’s woefully oppressive Marxist regime – the very same rights taken for granted to nauseating extremes amid all the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-cnn-reporter-makes-excuses-for-rioting-looting">rioting and looting</a> in Portland and elsewhere.
The hopeless cynicism that informs the current protests in our nation is now legion. Anything to do with America and the monumental principles our nation was founded upon is met with open and adolescent hostility. A nascent desire to simply destroy all vestiges of America informs many of these protesters.
“America was never great” is a common refrain among these protests. Even <a href="https://www.newsweek.com/dc-protesters-chant-america-was-never-great-they-burn-us-flag-following-trumps-july-4th-1515488">Newsweek</a> seemed to express some dismay as protesters burned American flags in front of the White House on July 4th:
<blockquote>Far-left protesters burned U.S. flags while chanting “America was never great” outside the White House in Washington, D.C. on Saturday, just after President Donald Trump gave a July 4th speech.</blockquote>
The <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/07/portland-protests-on-the-scene/">National Review</a> reported on a recent speaker in Portland’s Pioneer Square “energizing” a crowd of protesters by saying “America was never great, but we can make it great.”
Just as federal law enforcement experienced a <a href="https://www.dhs.gov/news/2020/07/31/portland-riots-read-out-july-31">brief reprieve</a> from all the chaos, protesters in Portland began burning Bibles as well as flags in a garish, nihilistic attempt at dissent according to <a href="https://nypost.com/2020/08/01/protestors-burn-bible-american-flag-as-tensions-rise-in-portland/">The New York Post</a>: “Protesters burned an American flag and a Bible in Portland, Oregon, sparking outrage just as weeks of violent demonstrations seemed to be coming to a close.”
Such open acts of defiance and hostility would immediately be quelled by force in <a href="https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/human-rights-violations">countless countries</a> around the world. <a href="https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2020-07-10/this-is-a-cultural-purge-with-new-security-law-even-blank-paper-is-subversive-in-hong-kong">The Los Angeles Times</a> reports that protesters in Hong Kong are being arrested for simply holding up blank pieces of paper:
<blockquote>There were no slogans and no words, only blank white sheets of paper, quivering in the hands of a few dozen Hong Kong residents standing in a shopping mall, saying nothing at all.
The police arrived in full riot gear, waving a flag that read: “You are in breach of the law.” They arrested eight people, searched others and dispersed the rest.</blockquote>
Stranger still, many of the protesters here in America are getting paid unemployment for their grandstanding in the middle of the pandemic by the very same government they accuse of being so “oppressive” and “unjust.” The irony verges toward some kind of dire comedy.
Protests in America exist and are even encouraged because of the very principles of freedom and democracy our country was founded upon. Yet these protesters thumb their noses at the very ideals that permit all of us a dissenting voice in the first place by engaging in senseless acts of destruction.
It’s worth noting again that much of the media refuses to chronicle the mindless violence and mayhem occurring in our cities, often reporting with subterfuge and smokescreens. Reality offers a far different story.
<a href="https://www.city-journal.org/portland-black-lives-matter-protests-riots">City Journal</a> published a concise summation of the media’s downplaying of the violence in Portland:
<blockquote>The media have downplayed the primary reason for federal agents being in Portland: a neutered police department has ceded a portion of the city to violent anarchists, who have staged an ongoing riot—<a href="https://youtu.be/bDeohHg7okA">firebombing</a> the police station, physically assaulting officers, and causing tens of thousands of dollars of property damage. “Any form of resistance is a good way to push our goals forward,” a spokeswoman for the Portland Black Youth Movement told me.</blockquote>
These nationwide protests do not, at all, harken back to “the summer of love” that the likes of Seattle’s woefully inept mayor, Jenny Durkan, hoped for when her own city was <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/khan-8-insane-things-that-happened-in-seattles-radical-autonomous-zone">hijacked by extremists</a>. Instead, they point to a fatiguing brand of cynicism devoid of meaning and purpose outside the stamping of petulant feet.
When compared to the protests in Hong Kong against actual oppression at the hands of China, one can’t help but harbor a profound embarrassment for our nation by all the supposed outrage and meaningless chaos surrounding it.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Riots

KHAN: When Compared To Hong Kong, These So-Called Protests Are Nothing More Than Cynical Tantrums

Hong Kong

protests

Fearing that Donald Trump may lose in November and the presidency may go to whoever Joe Biden chooses as a running mate, I’ve been brushing up on my left-wing reasoning so I can get through the next four years without being thrown off Twitter. Let me see if I have this right. Speech is violence. Silence is violence. Violence is mostly peaceful.
Ninety percent of black Americans who are murdered are murdered by murderers who are also black, so we need to defund the police because white people.
It is absolutely fatal to attend a Trump rally, but perfectly safe to go to a riot.
It is perfectly safe to have a massive funeral for a dead Democrat congressman, but absolutely fatal to gather ten relatives to bury your grandfather.
Trump is a monster to want to reopen the economy, but the fallout from the economic shutdown is his fault.
Trump calling for law and order in Democrat cities violates Twitter policies on glorifying violence, but when Iran’s Ayatollah Ali Khamenei calls for the extermination of the Jewish people that’s a political discussion.
Socialism, which always and everywhere exacerbates inequality, is the cure for inequality, while capitalism, which has made the entire world far wealthier than it’s ever been, is unjust.
The term “gaslighting” comes from a 1938 suspense play by Patrick Hamilton called “Angel Street.” The play, which became the movie “Gaslight,” is about abusive husband Jack Manningham, who seeks to hide the fact that he’s a murderer and a thief by convincing his wife that she’s insane. He does this by trying to make her think she does not see what she sees — the gaslights dimming — or hear what she hears — his footsteps in the apartment above.
Jack Manningham is now, of course, chairman of the Democrat party. All right, that’s a joke. I think. But it is true that America’s leftists are gaslighting us like never before. Every day, every hour, they are using their dominance of America’s information industries to make us believe we don’t see what we see and hear what we hear.
We see their cities burning, but they tell us they’re mostly peaceful. We hear them call America racist and disrespect the National Anthem and the flag, but they tell us they’re patriots. They try to cancel free speech, free worship, and the right to bear arms, threaten to abolish the Electoral College and pack the Supreme Court — and then they tell us it’s Trump who’s a danger to the Constitution. 
We are, all of us, living on Angel Street.
Of course, as an award-winning and dashingly attractive suspense writer myself, it is easy for me to see the problem with the gaslighting plot. In order to make it work, the villain has to completely isolate his victim. The moment anyone says to her: “No, you’re right, the gaslights are dimming,” the whole conspiracy falls apart.
That’s why Democrats wouldn’t let Attorney General William Barr respond to their dishonest and scurrilous charges during his House hearing this week. If he had spoken, America would know that the Democrats are more of a crime family than a political party. That’s why Heather Mac Donald — the best reporter in the country in matters of policing — has to be silenced on YouTube. If she’s allowed to speak, we’ll know the troubles of black Americans have nothing to do with the cops. Even any suggestion that Trump might be right about Hydroxychloroquine is grounds for censorship on Twitter. He’s been right about immigration, China, globalism, and the wars on terror — we wouldn’t want to find out that our experts are empty suits and Orange Man Bad is actually the smart one.
The thing is: You don’t need to censor people when you’re telling the truth. You need to censor them when they’re telling the truth.
It seems at times the gaslighters are winning. Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York is quite literally responsible for the deaths of thousands of old people through his high-handed incompetence in dealing with the Chinese Flu, and yet, after months of media love, he’s one of the most popular governors in the country. Only 29-percent of Americans disapproved of the Washington Redskins’ name, and yet the skins caved in to pressure and changed it. Joe Biden recently told reporters, “I don’t know where I am,” possibly one of the truest statements he’s made in his career, and yet he seems to be leading in the polls against an abrasive but highly competent president.
I don’t know if there’s a Silent Majority out there that still believes in America. I just hope there’s a Silent Majority that still believes in reality.
I guess we’re going to find out.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Gaslight.

KLAVAN: Gaslight Nation

2020 Election

Democratic Party

Joe Biden

Leftism

C.S. Lewis is primarily known for his fictional works (most popularly the Chronicles of Narnia) and his faith-focused writing, including Mere Christianity. But Lewis believed that claims upon the soul are claims upon the whole of life. In other words, everything Lewis said and wrote about his faith had real-world implications — including political implications. Reading Lewis’s work with this in mind reveals profound political insights. The following, the first of a series, looks at the politics of C.S. Lewis as revealed in multiple works.
In December 1918, a young man of 20 returned to Oxford University after a year of service among the British forces on the Western Front of the First World War. Heartsick and demoralized, C.S. Lewis completed the degree he had put on hold to fight in the army. His academic performance — in Philosophy, Ancient History and Literature, and English — was dazzling. But he was an embittered, broken man. The carnage of the war had snuffed out whatever diffident faith remained from his Anglican upbringing: he would later describe himself in Surprised by Joy (1955) as having been both “very angry with God for not existing” and “equally angry with him for creating a world.”
No one who met this inveterate atheist then would have guessed that he would someday become one of Britain’s best-known Christians. Today, though, anyone who hears the name C.S. Lewis will immediately think of the celebrated Narnia novels, a fantastically successful series of allegories that have made the Christian outlook freshly compelling to millions of readers. Some also know that Lewis was England’s unofficial theologian throughout the 1940s: in broadcasts, in sermons, in scores of essays and books, he served as the councilor and guide to a nation harrowed by the ravages of yet another World War.
But even though he played a central role in British public life during a crucial moment in the country’s history, Lewis doesn’t register for most people as a political writer. He’s first and foremost a novelist and a Christian apologist, the winsome preacher of an ancient Gospel to a modern world. But everything Lewis said and wrote about Christian teaching had implications for his audience as citizens of a great nation in one of the 20th century’s most fraught moments. To revisit Lewis’s works from this perspective finds them threaded through not just with theological grace, but also with political wisdom. What follows is a consideration of six interwoven political themes expressed in multiple works by Lewis.
Tyranny For Our Own Good
Near the end of his career, after the war was done, Lewis wrote: “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies.”
Like so many of his turns of phrase, this line is eminently quotable and ceaselessly quoted. It has had a bit of a moment recently in America, as governors selectively enforced increasingly nonsensical lockdown requirements, citing COVID-19 precautions as their rationale. It never seems to occur to such people that if their orders are in violation of the Bill of Rights, then the argument that they are “for the public good” is actually a shameless irrelevancy.
Lewis understood this, which is why he wrote that “those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
He was arguing that well-meaning tyranny is not simply a misapplication of principles which might, if differently and more sensibly applied, govern a just state. To the contrary: self-righteous, benevolent tyranny is based on premises that are wholly antithetical to those which undergird representative democracies and republics.
Free nations governed by popular sovereignty — the kind of nation that both Britain and the U.S. are supposed to be — are based on the stipulation that what the people deem good is what the state shall do. Benevolent tyrannies, on the other hand, proceed according to the stipulation that what the state deems good is what the people must do. The final outcome of such an outlook is embodied in Narnia’s famous White Witch, who would rather rule over a kingdom of lifeless statues than lose her own grip on control: “I was the Queen,” she insists in The Magician’s Nephew (1955). “They were all my people. What else were they there for but to do my will?”
COVID tyranny is galling not because it won’t produce good outcomes, but because the whole presumption of the thing is that “leaders” (many of them unelected) may determine which outcomes are righteous without accountability to the people whose good they claim to be seeking.
Justice vs. Social Engineering
Lewis made this argument in his 1954 essay “The Humanitarian Theory of Punishment.” But he wrote that essay to address a debate which is also alive today: the debate over the death penalty. Then, as now, a growing number of Westerners were becoming disgusted with the idea of a merely retributive justice — one that metes out punishment because it is deserved by the criminal, rather than in order to deter or rehabilitate him.
Dispensing at the outset with questions about whether capital punishment can in fact effectively deter or rehabilitate, Lewis argued that all such questions are governed by a wholly different logic than the logic of justice. Justice, argued Lewis, is nothing other than desert: the only way we evaluate the justice of a punishment at all is by asking whether the person punished deserves it. Even the objection that “the death penalty is unjust” boils down to the argument that “no one deserves the death penalty.”
Deterrence and rehabilitation, on the other hand, are forms of social engineering: they view punishment as a tool for making people do what the punishers want. “Thus,” wrote Lewis, “when we cease to consider what the criminal deserves and consider only what will cure him or deter others, we have tacitly removed him from the sphere of justice altogether; instead of a person, a subject of rights, we now have a mere object, a patient, a ‘case’.”
These two different governing ideas of punishment proceed along entirely separate tracks to very different destinations. Justice — though sometimes fearsome and always imperfect — treats the human being as a moral agent whose actions have weight and therefore consequences. By contrast, Lewis argues that “moral busybodies” (today we would call them “Karens”) are interested not in justice but in social engineering, “a dangerous illusion” which “disguises the possibility of cruelty and injustice without end.”
Confronting Evil
Lewis applied much the same reasoning to one of the central political questions of his life: can a Christian nation go to war? Christ’s injunctions to love the enemy and turn the other cheek weighed heavily on the two generations of British men who were forced in the World Wars to slaughter or be slaughtered.
But Lewis argued that to refrain from fighting against Hitler would be to pervert the relevant commandments. In a 1944 interview, he said:
You are told to love your neighbour as yourself. How do you love yourself?&#8230; I do not think that I love myself because I am particularly good, but just because I am myself&#8230;. You [may] dislike what you have done, but you don&#8217;t cease to love yourself&#8230;. You may even think that you ought to go to the Police and own up and be hanged. Love is not affectionate feeling, but a steady wish for the loved person&#8217;s ultimate good as far as it can be obtained.
To disregard a person’s moral character — to treat him as if his actions make no difference — is not love. It is indifference. Or worse, it is condescension.
Real Christian love — that devoted, terrifying, purifying care whose model is a jealous God and a crucified Christ — cannot shrug off the moral character of the beloved. For God to merely excuse us would be for him to dehumanize us, to lie about the nature of who we are.
We do not really want excuses: we want forgiveness. And forgiveness means acknowledging that our evil is evil.
<div id="attachment_134305" style="width: 810px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img aria-describedby="caption-attachment-134305" class="wp-image-134305" src="https://editorial.dailywire.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/C.S.-Lewis-1-1800x1200.jpg" alt="25th November 1950: English novelist and scholar Clive Staples Lewis (1898 - 1963), a fellow and tutor of Magdalen College, Oxford in his college rooms. Original Publication: Picture Post - 5159 - Eternal Oxford - pub. 1950 (Photo by John Chillingworth/Picture Post/Hulton Archive/Getty Images)" width="800" height="527" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/08/C.S.-Lewis-1-300x198.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/08/C.S.-Lewis-1-874x576.jpg 874w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/08/C.S.-Lewis-1-768x506.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/08/C.S.-Lewis-1-1536x1012.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/08/C.S.-Lewis-1.jpg 2000w" sizes="(max-width: 800px) 100vw, 800px" />John Chillingworth/Picture Post/Hulton Archive/Getty Images</div>
“Not A Pacifist”
This was not a stance Lewis took lightly or without accountability. In 1940, he had aired his arguments in front of a society of pacifists in a speech called “Why I Am Not a Pacifist.” He pointed out that pure nonviolence, if carried to its logical conclusion by all men of fighting age, would leave the pacifist nations defenseless and the world at the mercy of totalitarians and Nazis.
Lewis hoped that the prospect of world domination by the Third Reich would make clear his point that to refrain from violence is hardly the most loving approach in every instance.
He knew his opponents would counter that pacifism, idealist though it was, represented humanity’s only shot at a world without war. But that notion, he responded, “belongs to a mode of thought which I find quite alien to me. It consists in assuming that the great permanent miseries in human life might be curable if only we can find the right cure.”
Another Christian teaching — that sin and misery are permanent fixtures of a fallen world, capable of being alleviated but never escaped — warned Lewis against the alluring but disastrous temptation to cleanse the world of its imperfections.
Lewis did not imagine that the war he was urging upon the young men of Britain was anything other than an unspeakable horror. He had seen the war himself, and described it with ruthless detail in The Screwtape Letters, his fanciful rendering of Hell’s attempts to capture a human soul. The devils in Screwtape relish “the scream of bombs, the fall of houses, the stink and taste of high explosives on the lips and in the lungs, the feet burning with weariness, the heart cold with horrors, the brain reeling, the legs aching.”
It was this unflinching, firsthand grasp of what war meant in the 20th century — hard-won by his own sacrifices and those of his friends in the trenches — that made Lewis’s support for the war so clear-eyed and persuasive, his defense of the British military so powerful and realist.
“What Lies Before Us”
Lewis could urge such self-sacrifice because he believed the rewards of courage would be far more joyous than the agony of service would be painful. That, too, was a hard-won belief. Lewis had to fight his way back to God with greater difficulty, and for longer, than he had to fight England’s enemies on the battlefield. His faith was one which did not rely on easy certainties: he had wrestled ferociously with every clause of it.
Once he had grasped it, Lewis’s Christianity — the richness of heaven in his telling — gave moral and emotional logic to the entirety of his political outlook. He could write unflinchingly in Screwtape about the brutalities of war because he believed in, and could describe with unmatched elegance, the delights beyond this world. In “The Weight of Glory,” preached as a sermon in 1942, he said:
The faint, far-off results of those energies which God’s creative rapture implanted in matter when He made the worlds are what we now call physical pleasures; and even thus filtered, they are too much for our present management. What would it be to taste at the fountain-head that stream of which even these lower reaches prove so intoxicating? Yet that, I believe, is what lies before us. 
The sheer pleasure of heaven, which always glowed just outside the frame as Lewis wrote, was what he imagined the soldiers of the war would receive as the final reward for all their courage and consolation for all their misery. It was what gave coherence to his understanding of human justice on earth, and of the free civilizations which governments existed, in his view, to protect.
“On The Edge of a Precipice”
For these reasons Lewis understood the World Wars, horrific as they were, to be nothing other than an intensified version of the perennial human condition. “The war,” he told a group of Oxford students in 1939, “creates no absolutely new situation: it simply aggravates the permanent human situation so that we can no longer ignore it. Human life has always been lived on the edge of a precipice.”
That speech, published as “Learning in Wartime,” expresses Lewis’s conviction that the great aims of human life — family, art, scholarship, invention — have their meaning because they take place in a fragile world of imminent mortality, yet reach outward toward a heavenly horizon for which we were born but which we cannot yet see.
This outlook was pointedly not limited to wartime: indeed, in Lewis’s work the most eternally consequential things are those which happen out of sight of the world. Jesus said: “Be careful not to perform your righteous acts before men” (Matthew 6:1). For Lewis, part of what this meant was that the eye of heaven itself was upon the mundane, the seemingly unremarkable, aspects of daily life.
In The Great Divorce (1945), Lewis imagines his narrator given a vision of the heavenly realms, where he sees a woman of incomparable loveliness and majesty. He feels certain she must have been a queen on earth, until his guide corrects him: “‘it’s someone ye’ll never have heard of. Her name on earth was Sarah Smith and she lived at Golders Green.’” But because of Smith’s immense warmth of heart and daily devotion to those around her, in the truer reality which is Heaven she is “‘one of the great ones.’”
In the conclusion to “The Weight of Glory,” Lewis said: “You have never met a mere mortal. Nations, cultures, arts, civilizations—these are mortal, and their life is to ours as the life of a gnat. But it is immortals whom we joke with, work with, marry, snub, and exploit—immortal horrors or everlasting splendours.”
He viewed every moment of social and political life as minutely important, not because this or that government or program was important per se, but because the human souls participating in those governments and programs were, every one of them, beings of almost indescribable importance.
Lewis stood here in perhaps the oldest tradition of Judeo-Christian wisdom — the wisdom of Augustine’s City of God and the Gospel of John and the Prophecy of Isaiah — that though “all flesh is grass,” still it is our God whose word stands forever and our eyes that will see the redeemer at the end of days.
As Europe fell under the shadow of death, Lewis saw what Christian politics really means: he saw that the choices of England’s citizens and the decisions of her leaders, no matter how minute, would be of eternal consequence.
Spencer A. Klavan is host of the <a href="http://youngheretics.com/">Young Heretics</a> podcast and assistant editor of both the <a href="http://claremontreviewofbooks.com/">Claremont Review of Books</a> and <a href="http://americanmind.org/">The American Mind</a>.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

C S Lewis

The Politics of C.S. Lewis

C.S. Lewis

Christianity

Conservatism

In our politically obsessed society, references to George Orwell&#8217;s “1984” are so common that they are at risk of becoming cliché. Terms like “thoughtcrime” and “doublespeak” are effective retorts to the reliable buffet of political lies told every day. The American Left have made <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/11/teaching-1984-in-2016/508226/">repeated</a> attempts to claim that the United States under the Trump administration is <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/teens-1984-george-orwell-trump_n_5892445ce4b070cf8b8060a7">synonymous</a> with the “dystopian world in which war is peace, freedom is slavery, and ignorance is strength” described in 1984. However, when we analyze the themes explored in George Orwell’s famous dystopian novel, we increasingly feel that we are reading what appears to be the American Left’s playbook.
1. History
“Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.”
On multiple occasions, the Left have demonstrated a desire to rewrite history with two primary objectives. The first is to escape their own history, and the second is to reshape history to enable their future. After all, the Democratic Party is forever tarnished by the legacy of slavery, the KKK, and Jim Crow. Even after the controversial and refuted “switch,” Democratic President Lyndon B. Johnson’s repeated use of the phrase “n***er bill” during the Civil Rights era exemplifies the fact that the American Left never truly banished racism from its platform. Instead, they embraced a paternalistic bigotry of low expectations which exists to this day.
While this strategy is applied to American history through absurdities like the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/historians-shred-nyt-1619-project-claiming-slavery-defines-america">intellectually fraudulent</a> “1619 Project,” the same effort has been exerted against inconvenient elements of world history. The fact that fascism is <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/haworth-the-deadly-double-standard-of-communism-vs-fascism">rejected</a>while communism, socialism, and Marxism are accepted is testament to the success of the American Left in purposefully failing to educate younger generations on the inevitable failure of Leftist regimes.
Because of this erasure of history, <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/22/politics/biden-charlamagne-tha-god-you-aint-black/index.html">comments</a> from Joe Biden like “if you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black” or that Mitt Romney would put African Americans “<a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/biden-tells-african-american-audience-gop-ticket-would-put-them-back-in-chains/">back in chains</a>” are ignored. It is why those who openly describe themselves as communists, socialists, or Marxists are embraced and celebrated. It is why we seem to be repeating the mistakes of the past.
“Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.”
2. Language
“Don’t you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it.”
After history is reformatted to be politically convenient, the next component of the Left’s Orwellian strategy is to gain control of our language in order to achieve ideological ends. There are countless <a href="https://americanmind.org/essays/the-terms-of-our-defeat/">examples</a> of this tactic, including the redefinition of racism to align with the flawed notion of intersectionality, the demand that you prove fealty by chanting “Black Lives Matter” with no regard for its underlying premises or the radical organization it supports, or the assertion that we must “Believe Women” despite the obvious fact that men and women are equally capable of duplicity.
The Left understands that achieving full control of language will open the gateway to their subsequent goal of controlling our culture. The generational removal of methods of dissent or disagreement, alongside the subjective redefinition of words for political gain, will be difficult, if not impossible, to undo. For this reason, and this reason alone, the Left focuses on speech more than anything else. “Speech is violence” justifies a violent reaction to speech, until the only speech that remains is deemed politically acceptable.
“It&#8217;s a beautiful thing, the destruction of words.”
3. Truth
“Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one&#8217;s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.”
As the Left’s grip on our language grows tighter, and historical excerpts which debunk their radical principles and positions are intentionally wiped away, they are finally equipped to target and redefine the ultimate and central metric of ideological debate: truth and logic.
While the notion that politicians have a habit of being deceptive shouldn’t be a shocking revelation, the Left’s modern approach to the definition of truth goes far beyond the intentional use of simple falsehoods. To put things bluntly, we have left the realm of “I did not have sexual relations with that woman” and have instead entered an illogical universe where sex and gender simultaneously have no meaning while also being characteristics of upmost importance.
Just like Orwell in 1984, we use the mathematical certainty that “2 + 2 = 4” as an example of concrete truth. However, even such binary notions have been slowly eradicated, with the culturally dominant Left demanding that we accept a fluid version of truth which disregards fundamental logic. For example, if men are women and women are men, how can the Left concurrently posit that our society is dominated by a systemic scourge of malicious misogynistic males who forcefully hold females in positions of subjugation and servitude?
“In philosophy, or religion, or ethics, or politics, two and two might make five, but when one was designing a gun or an aeroplane they had to make four.”
4. Freedom
“Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”
As truth becomes subjective, the unfortunate outcome is that freedom is diminished. The very notion of freedom has been subtly redefined to remove its original connection to individual liberty with the necessary partner of personal responsibility. Instead, freedom has become tainted by notions of selfishness and entitlement, with no regard for the individual freedom of others. In short, the negative rights of all have been replaced by the positive rights of some.
While this problem also exists on the American Right, the American Left approaches freedom in the same manner as George Orwell, with a distinct focus on the restriction of thought and speech.
Those who speak objective truths —  such as referencing <a href="https://www.manhattan-institute.org/the-myth-of-systemic-police-racism">statistical evidence</a> which counters the claim that police brutality is both racist and systemic, or that life cannot be measured as valid or invalid along a scale of convenience, or even that men and women are different — are castigated as bigots, societally “cancelled,” or even punished.
The fact that the Left attempts to justify such attacks on free speech — whether truthful or not — under the guise of achieving some notion of equality or tolerance is irrelevant when we consider that, without freedom of speech, we can never be free.
“The choice for mankind lies between freedom and happiness and for the great bulk of mankind, happiness is better.”
5. Propaganda
“The Ministry of Peace concerns itself with war, the Ministry of Truth with lies, the Ministry of Love with torture and the Ministry of Plenty with starvation. These contradictions are not accidental, nor do they result from ordinary hypocrisy: they are deliberate exercises in doublethink.”
No oppressive regime can exist in a vacuum, and all require a method of enforcing their demands. While the (remaining) pages of history are riddled with stories of power achieved through violence alone, the mainstream Left is potentially more dangerous because they exercise control and power not through the violence of groups like Antifa — whom they are happy to passively support — but through the control of truth through curated propaganda in the form of “objective journalism.”
The term “fake news” is so overused (and often misused) that it has lost all meaning. Unfortunately, this has allowed the dishonesty of the mainstream media to hide in plain sight. Instead of performing their assumed “duty” as objective journalists, they have morphed into an elitist gaggle of activists. Instead of screaming their demands in the streets, they shape their reality in our collective psyche through their words and voices.
Ultimately, the blame for this prevalence of shameless lies falls not just on the declining fraternity of journalists, but on society as their audience and consumers. However, it is arguably impossible for a society to question the given narrative when its freedom has been diluted, its ability to question stunted, and its understanding of contextual history rewritten. The nail in this particular coffin is the despicable compulsion of the political and journalistic classes to present adherence to subjective policy as proof of one’s virtue. By doing so, they bypass the need for debate or justification, instead providing people with a lazy method of proving virtue and ideological purity.
The mainstream media have abandoned any hint of objectivity, but continue to benefit from the generational levels of trust and respect earned by their predecessors. Until that changes, their deceitful words will remain powerful, and as a result they will continue to be convenient mouthpieces for the Left.
“Orthodoxy means not thinking&#8211;not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness.”
****
George Orwell’s marvelous yet terrifying novel is a hauntingly appropriate novel to reference when criticizing the actions of any political movement. However, in recent years it appears as if the American Left have started to treat it not as a work of fiction, but as a guidebook for power.
Their objective is made simple if our children don’t read — and more crucially understand — profound political works like 1984. Why do you think the Left wants to control our education, our history, and our words?
More from Ian Haworth: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/haworth-the-difference-between-cancel-culture-and-free-speech">The Difference Between Cancel Culture And Free Speech</a>
Ian G. Haworth is a conservative commentator who provides an honest, principled, and hard-hitting insight into our politics and culture from his unique perspective as a British immigrant to the United States. Ian hosts “The Ian Haworth Show” and “The Truth in 60 Seconds.” He is a regular columnist for Townhall.com, and his work has appeared in other outlets including The American Mind, The Washington Examiner, and The Federalist. Ian graduated from Oxford University, and now lives in California. Follow him on Twitter <a href="https://twitter.com/ighaworth">@ighaworth</a>
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Lorne Greene In &#8216;1984&#8217;

HAWORTH: 5 Ways Orwell’s ‘1984’ Perfectly Describes The American Left’s Quest For Power

Free Speech

Hate Speech

Media Bias

In the latest exclusive Daily Wire interview, Fox News star Greg Gutfeld discusses his unorthodox rise to media prominence and how to counter the &#8220;bully machinery&#8221; of Cancel Culture.
Greg Gutfeld remembers the time in high school where he feared he was a fraud.
The future Fox News superstar entered a debate on nuclear energy confident he could defend his anti-nuke bona fides.
“Bombs are made for killing,” the young Gutfeld said en route to what he predicted would be a sure victory on the nuclear freeze topic.
Not exactly.
“In the middle of it I realized I was a fraud. I didn’t know what I was talking about. I was a superficial clown on this topic,” Gutfeld says.
“I think I won, but It was so obvious that I didn’t,” Gutfeld recalls of the applause-driven metrics, adding his opponent “beat me to death” during the debate.
Years later, when he became a print journalist, he learned the rigorous research required to share data with the public. And, along the way, he discovered too many reporters weren’t much better than his teen self at getting the facts straight.
“I’ve been on every side of an interview. People look for stories to shape and match their assumptions,” he says. “It taught me to be super skeptical.”
And careful, of course, particularly when writing medicine-based stories for publications like Prevention Magazine.
“You make a mistake in these magazines, and you could kill somebody,” he says.
Today, the TV star draws a sizable crowd on both his Saturday night Fox News program, “The Greg Gutfeld Show” and “The Five” weekday roundtable. The latter crushed all of CNN’s daytime and prime time programming as well as most MSNBC shows for July, averaging 3.3 million viewers (including 489,000 in the 25-53 age demographic), according to Fox News.
“The Greg Gutfeld Show” lapped the combined audiences of MSNBC and CNN during the same period in total viewers. It also was the second most-watched late night program in all of television behind CBS’s “The Late Show” with Stephen Colbert.
Former President George W. Bush White House Press Secretary Dana Perino credits Gutfeld for coaxing her out of her Beltway-built shell. “The Five” co-host wasn’t the only one Gutfeld helped along the way.
“He’s very good about spotting talent early and helping grow that talent,” Perino says, citing rising Fox News stars like Kat Timpf and Tyrus. “He really does give people opportunities. He doesn’t push them too far or too fast. He brings them along. It’s a skill that not that many people have.”
Her co-host also connects with audiences in a way that’s both plainspoken and pure.
“He doesn’t use big, fancy words to make his points,” she says. “He’s really honed skills over the last several years in terms of persuasion.”
Gutfeld’s irreverent presence, snarky but substantive, took root during his childhood.
“I was kind of a weirdo. My interests were pretty eclectic,” says Gutfeld, recalling how punk music “consumed” him. He cherished “Monty Python,” Mad Magazine and the group known as <a href="http://www.srl.org/">Survival Research Laboratories</a>, which created moving sculptures from mechanical doodads.
He longed to hang with people from the proverbial fringes but simultaneously learned how to understand people along the way.
“It’s a weird combination of traits,” says Gutfeld, who once played “Candyland” on air with the <a href="https://lbj.utexas.edu/he-was-human-tape-measure-ex-navy-seal-who-killed-bin-laden-says-they-confirmed-his-identity-asking">man credited with killing Osama bin Laden</a>, Navy SEAL Robert O’Neill.
Gutfeld credits his late mother, Jackie Gutfeld, for forging core elements of his personality. She got him hooked on the “usual gang of idiots” at Mad Magazine, encouraged him to write what he calls “crazy little short stories.” In turn, he made her a part of his professional journey.
She contributed a tips column to Stuff Magazine (where her son increased circulation from 750,000 to 1.2 million) and even served as a “senior” correspondent on “Red Eye.”
Those days in the print magazine trenches, including stints at Men’s Health, Prevention and Maxim magazines, prepared him for his Fox News duties. He thought he was ready for the gig long before he actually landed it, though.
“Dude, I can really work here,” he recalls telling a Fox News contact after the network had him on as a guest. He laughs at his chutzpah now, but it took another gig for the Fox News connection to take root.
He started writing columns for The Huffington Post, mocking the people who wrote for the liberal site. That caught the attention of Breitbart News founder Andrew Breitbart, who had connections with a Fox News affiliate in Los Angeles.
That led to his first Fox News gig, hosting the late, late night show known as “Red Eye.”
He trusted his curious instincts, and it paid off in unexpected ways. Consider the recurring bit around “<a href="https://redeyebonusroom.fandom.com/wiki/Pinch">Pinch</a>,” a puppet made of old New York Times newspapers meant to mock the liberal news outlet.
“I learned there are people as weird as I am,” he says. So he trotted out unusual bits without trying to over-explain them. Audiences, at least those on a similar wavelength, bonded with him and the show.
He also received “tons of hate mail,” he notes, letters pleading with his bosses to fire him.
The gig came with heaping helpings of anxiety, even if the on-camera Gutfeld took it all in stride.
“You’re getting up there and doing it without a net, making a fool out of yourself on TV,” he says. “I hadn’t performed [before]. I’ve never gone on stage and done bits. People assume that I did, but I was always a print dude.”
The “print dude” racked up impressive ratings for a 3 a.m. EST production, routinely topping competitors’ shows airing at much more friendly time slots.
The usual suspects didn’t immediately savage the show. In fact, the progressive Slate.com wrote a <a href="https://slate.com/culture/2007/04/the-bouncy-pleasures-of-red-eye-w-greg-gutfeld.html">tempered love letter</a> to “Red Eye” months into its improbable run. The site called it “a tabloid gabfest and a dumbfounding frat party—a production so light and crude that it seems to have been adapted from the margins of a spiral-bound notebook, right down to its hair-metal-indebted logo and that indifferent w-slash.”
That’s a compliment. So is this:
“[Gutfeld] tries to play the boor here, with Sarah Silverman shock tactics and one eye on the gutter, but there’s a nerdish twist to his sense of humor and a good-natured twinkle in his eye.”
Fox News eventually retired “Red Eye,” leaving Gutfeld with both “The Five,” and later his self-titled show. The host’s predilection for the printed page never faded. Best sellers like “Not Cool,” “The Joy of Hate” and “How to Be Right” showcased his wit in a retro, albeit familiar, format.
The older, wiser Gutfeld’s new book, “The Plus,” offers a different side of the media personality. His publishing contact targeted a 2021 release date for a new Gutfeld tome, but he saw too many culture fissures that demanded his attention now.
Cancel Culture. The pandemic. Mobs gone wild. Social media rage-a-thons.
“If I wait any longer on this it’ll be old,” he feared. Only he didn’t want to merely recite the modern ills damaging society. He had ways to deal with them, ways to put our best selves forward.
Meet “<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Plus-Self-Help-People-Who-Hate/dp/1982149914">The Plus: Self Help for People Who Hate Self Help</a>.”
<div id="attachment_134241" style="width: 510px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img aria-describedby="caption-attachment-134241" class="wp-image-134241" src="https://editorial.dailywire.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Greg-Gutfeld-The-Plus-378x576.jpg" alt="Greg Gutfeld The Plus" width="500" height="762" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/08/Greg-Gutfeld-The-Plus-378x576.jpg 378w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/08/Greg-Gutfeld-The-Plus-197x300.jpg 197w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/08/Greg-Gutfeld-The-Plus-768x1170.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/08/Greg-Gutfeld-The-Plus.jpg 1000w" sizes="(max-width: 500px) 100vw, 500px" />Courtesy Greg Gutfeld</div>
The comedic book offers tips for navigating social media, supporting those pulled over by the P.C. police and more. Risk sharing, where we rally behind those unfairly “canceled,” is just one strategy highlighted in the book.
“If the person is innocent you have to help them,” he says, adding the more people who rush to someone’s aid, the less likely anyone will be officially “cancelled.”
The “Cancel Culture” passages in the book read as if they were written last week given the tenor of the times. It’s “bully machinery,” he says of the cultural movement.
Other chapters get more personal, with Gutfeld sharing how he evolved on a number of fronts. One painful episode shows the personality bombing with an opening joke, a reminder to be both humble and aware of the crowd before you.
A sidebar/rant on “How to Read a Never Trumper,” from a personality who took time to warm to the atypical leader, is similarly on target. So is his comic assault on “binary thinking,” offering clever ways to avoid that intellectual mouse trap.
Gutfeld shares “The Five” with liberals like Juan Williams, and he’s equally willing to knock back a few cold ones with progressive pals.
”I have friends who are liberals in rock bands, and they totally disagree with me on everything,” he says. “We go out and we have fun.”
That camaraderie isn’t always mutual these days, but Gutfeld has an ace in the hole.
His fans.
Those friends may loathe his politics, but chances are “their parents don’t,” he says. “It happens a lot,” he notes, including one liberal comic whose mother likes Gutfeld more than him, the Fox News star jokes.
Or is he?
He once nearly landed an artist on his Fox News show who initially turned down his invitation in no uncertain terms.
“Faux News!” the artist all but shouted via an email exchange. Then the artist had a change of heart.
“Two days later, ‘you know, um, I was telling my Dad I got an email from you and he totally flipped out,’” Gutfeld recalls.
“Whatever they feel toward me, there’s somebody in their family that likes me,” he says. “They have to deal with that.”
More exclusive content from The Daily Wire: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/exclusive-progressive-comic-judy-gold-on-cancel-culture-the-left-is-eating-its-own">Progressive Comic Judy Gold On Cancel Culture: The Left Is Eating Its Own</a>
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Greg Gutfeld

EXCLUSIVE: Greg Gutfeld Gets Candid About His Rise To FOX Fame, Countering Cancel Culture

Fox News

Earlier this month, the hashtag “#JewishPrivilege” <a href="https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium-white-supremacists-trigger-twitterstorm-by-using-jewishprivilege-hashtag-1.8990556">trended</a> on Twitter, spreading a “mixture of classic conspiratorial theories involving Jewish domination and control of the media, Holocaust denial and accusations of underwriting social unrest movements so that Jews could displace whites with minority groups.”
Leveraging our deep experience of combining suffering with sarcasm, Jews on Twitter <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/how-jewish-twitter-users-celebrities-took-down-virtual-anti-semitic-ncna1233915">quickly rallied</a> to flip the use of #JewishPrivilege to share stories of both modern and generational anti-Semitism.
Using the concept of “Jewish privilege” to justify the circular argument that so-called “Jewish success” is ensured by “Jewish influence” is nothing new. For centuries, Jews have been labeled as malevolent puppet masters, with their disproportionate success in various societies seen as further proof of the breadth and depth of their “control.” This remains true to this very day, with the same conspiratorial anti-Semitic rhetoric spread by <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/15/entertainment/nick-cannon-viacom-trnd/index.html">actors</a>, <a href="https://jewishjournal.com/news/317054/rapper-ice-cube-accused-of-anti-semitism/">musicians</a>, and even <a href="https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/antisemitism/ilhan-omar-voted-2019s-antisemite-of-the-year-613308">members of Congress</a>.
While the anti-Semitism demonstrated by “Jewish privilege” is the same sort of shallow bigotry which we have witnessed for centuries, anti-Semitism is a “<a href="https://rabbisacks.org/mutating-virus-understanding-antisemitism/">mutating virus</a>.” There is a new tentacle of anti-Jewish bigotry which continues to go widely unrecognized, anti-Zionism. Criticism of Israel has become a veil used by anti-Semites to dismiss any and all rebuttals, with “Israel” becoming a convenient synonym for “Jews.”
The difficulty here is that, while many Jews are quick to speak out against traditional anti-Semitism, the same is not true when it comes the intersection between anti-Semitic and anti-Israel rhetoric. Indeed, fueled by an experience of relative tolerance in liberal, insular, and secular bubbles, influential Jewish voices often give credence to the flawed arguments used by those who use their criticism of Israel as a mask for their hatred of Jews.
Speaking on Marc Macron’s <a href="http://www.wtfpod.com/podcast/episode-1143-seth-rogen">podcast</a> this week, Seth Rogen demonstrated a stunning ignorance of Judaism’s past and present when it comes to its identity and its immutable links with Israel, and thereby provided ammunition to those who seek its destruction.
“To me it just seems an antiquated thought process. If it is for religious reasons, I don’t agree with it, because I think religion is silly,” said Rogen. “If it is for truly the preservation of Jewish people, it makes no sense, because again, you don’t keep something you’re trying to preserve all in one place — especially when that place is proven to be pretty volatile, you know? ‘I’m trying to keep all these things safe, I’m gonna put them in my blender and hope that that’s the best place . . . that’ll do it.’ It doesn’t make sense to me. And I also think that as a Jewish person I was fed a huge amount of lies about Israel my entire life! They never tell you that — oh by the way, there were people there. They make it seem like it was just like sitting there, like the f***ing door’s open. They forget to include the fact to every young Jewish person.”
There are three fundamental failures underpinning Rogen’s arguments. The first is the dismissal of the undeniable Jewish connection to Israel (which has existed for thousands of years) under the banner of an atheistic secularism which disregards the religious foundation of Judaism.
Whether individual Jews embrace the religious or the cultural aspects of their heritage is entirely up to them, but to deny the importance of Israel as the one and only everlasting home of Judaism based on one’s personal lack of religiosity is profoundly selfish and theologically inane.
The second is the use of historical revisionism which ignores that there has been a continuous Jewish presence in Israel for thousands of years. To claim that the sole purpose of Israel is “the preservation of Jewish people,” and that prior to Israel’s founding there were (other) people there, assumes the false premise that Israel was apologetically handed to Jews for the first time in the aftermath of the Holocaust.
<div id="attachment_134030" style="width: 710px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img aria-describedby="caption-attachment-134030" class="wp-image-134030" src="https://editorial.dailywire.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Western-Wall.jpg" alt="Jewish men wearing traditional Tallit prayer shawls and clad in face masks following tightened restriction aimed at fighting the spread of the novel coronavirus, gather for the morning prayer at the Western Wall in the Old City of Jerusalem, on July 27, 2020. (Photo by MENAHEM KAHANA / AFP) " width="700" height="456" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/07/Western-Wall.jpg 741w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2020/07/Western-Wall-300x196.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 700px) 100vw, 700px" />Menahem Kahana/AFP via Getty Images</div>
Such a simplistic description of Israel’s ancient and modern history only fuels the intentional attempt by those who target Jews under the “anti-Israel” guise to mislabel Israel as the result of 20th century Jewish colonialism. Contrary to this historically illiterate belief, the founding of the State of Israel in 1948 was simply a recognition of reality.
Finally, the notion that dispersing Jews across the world is the answer to the everlasting threat of anti-Semitism forgets that our history of non-consensual dispersion has not exactly gone well. In addition, Rogen’s absurd blender analogy regarding the volatility of the Middle East, and that we should disperse that which we wish to protect, makes the argument that Jews should not claim what is theirs because there are those who wish to prevent them from doing so. The presence of continual mortal danger is insignificant when it comes to exercising the Jewish right to self-determination in our ancestral homeland, regardless of what the neighbors think.
Seth Rogen is utterly and completely wrong, and his arguments will be music to the ears of those who seek to destroy the Jewish State. Israel does not exist for the preservation of Jewish people. Instead, Israel exists for the preservation of Judaism, and Judaism exists for the preservation of Israel. Israel is Judaism, and Judaism is Israel, and no amount of ignorance or lazy historical revisionism will change the enduring fact that Israel is, and always will be, the enduring home of the Jewish people and of Judaism itself.  For Jews and Judaism to persist, Israel must survive.
<div>
Ian G. Haworth is a conservative commentator who provides an honest, principled, and hard-hitting insight into our politics and culture from his unique perspective as a British immigrant to the United States. Ian hosts “The Ian Haworth Show” and “The Truth in 60 Seconds.” He is a regular columnist for Townhall.com, and his work has appeared in other outlets including The American Mind, The Washington Examiner, and The Federalist. Ian graduated from Oxford University, and now lives in California. Follow him on Twitter <a href="https://twitter.com/ighaworth">@ighaworth</a>
</div>
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Seth Rogen

HAWORTH: Three Failures In Seth Rogen’s Criticism Of Israel

Anti-Semitism

Israel

Representative John Lewis was laid to rest at a funeral in Georgia on Thursday. The funeral — attended by dignitaries, former presidents, and politicians from all over the country including 50 members of Congress — was the culmination of several days worth of memorials and public remembrances for the late congressman and civil rights icon. 
The journey began with a service in an Alabama chapel and another at Troy University. The congressman’s body was ceremonially escorted by a military honor guard, via horse-drawn carriage, over a bridge in Selma with an audience watching. Lewis was then laid in state in DC for public viewing before being brought back down south, to Atlanta, for a series of memorials followed by the funeral. In all, there were more than ten ceremonies across five different cities. The final ceremony, the funeral, was invite-only, but many of the pews were still filled with people sitting shoulder-to-shoulder. 
Under normal circumstances, I wouldn’t begrudge a prominent figure his memorials and posthumous celebrations. Lewis obviously is not the first such figure to get this kind of send off. John McCain, who died two years ago, had a similarly packed schedule of memorial services. But the difference between two years ago and today is, obviously, the coronavirus and the accompanying lockdowns and restrictions. 
For months now, many Americans have either been prohibited from holding any funeral service at all for their deceased loved ones, or have been forced to hold very small gatherings attended only by immediate family members. The CDC labels large or medium-sized in-person funeral services as “highest risk” events, and in many places, such events are still banned. As a funeral director wrote in The Washington Post, saying goodbye to a loved one has become a lonely affair. But not for everyone. 
A whole series of exceptions were made for the congressman, just as they were made for George Floyd’s various memorials and funerals. And the exceptions don’t just apply to the events themselves. As Buck Sexton <a href="https://twitter.com/BuckSexton/status/1288951529668575232?s=20">points out</a>, DC regulations require that travelers coming from Georgia must self-quarantine for 14 days. Will the 50 congressmen who attended Lewis’s funeral in Atlanta proceed directly to self-quarantine on their return to the capital? Somehow I doubt it.  
And this has always been the problem with the coronavirus policies and restrictions. It’s not just that they represent infringements on our constitutional liberties — though they do — but that they are blatantly arbitrary. From the beginning, exceptions have been granted in service to politics, ideology, and elitism, rather than sound medical and scientific reasoning. Why can John Lewis have a dozen memorials in 5 cities while you weren’t allowed to have even one for your beloved grandmother? The answer is, quite simply, that your grandmother’s life wasn’t as important as the life of a Democratic congressman — at least according to the Powers That Be. Why can’t you go to church even while thousands of left-wing demonstrators and rioters cram together on the street? Because the same authorities don’t care about your church or believe in its message. They do care about left-wing movements and their messages, however. So one is allowed but not the other. 
This arbitrary imposition of liberty-infringing policies is a true outrage and a disgrace. This is perhaps the most explicit case of “rules for thee but not for me” that we have seen in modern times. It is the very definition of tyranny. 
More from Matt Walsh: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/activist-teachers-say-its-not-safe-to-go-back-to-work">Activist Teachers Say It’s Not Safe To Go Back To Work, While Many Attend Mass Protests</a>
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Funeral Held For Rep. John Lewis At Atlanta&#8217;s Ebenezer Baptist Church

WALSH: John Lewis Memorial Services Highlights Arbitrary Double Standards Of Coronavirus Policies

Coronavirus

COVID-19

John Lewis

Comedian Judy Gold thought she was immune from Cancel Culture. She doesn’t feel that way anymore. “I always knew about it,” Gold, an Emmy-winning writer, actress and author told The Daily Wire in reference to the toxic trend. “You came to this point and you think you’re safe.”
Now, a comedian’s context or intent can be downplayed, or even ignored. Suddenly, they’re the next victim.
Gold’s new book, “<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Yes-Can-Say-That-Cant/dp/0062953753">Yes, I Can Say That: When They Come for the Comedians, We Are All in Trouble</a>,” explains the folly of that thinking. Part memoir, part history lesson, “Yes, I Can Say That” chronicles the early free speech battles fought by comedians Lenny Bruce and George Carlin.
Both comics found themselves on the wrong side of the law for spinning R-rated punchlines.
The book also explores how the best comics coax us to explore race, class, religion and, of course, politics. Comedy can heal and educate. It also convinces us to let our guards down.
Cancel Culture stands in the way of that progress, she warns.
Gold, an avowed progressive, ties Cancel Culture to a less openly destructive force. Call it “Everybody Gets a Trophy.”
“This person won the tournament, but you were smiling when they won,” she cracks, citing the 2018 book, “<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Coddling-American-Mind-Intentions-Generation/dp/0735224897">The Coddling of the American Mind: How Good Intentions and Bad Ideas Are Setting Up a Generation for Failure</a>” as a source on the subject.
“Your feelings are the only feelings that matter… When did we get so powerless?” she asks. “You don’t wanna hurt people’s feelings, but comedy isn’t pretty.”
Gold’s book cites a 2018 incident in which an Indian-American comic, Nimesh Patel, told a progressive joke at Columbia University about how hard it is to be both black and gay in America.
The group overseeing the event quickly unplugged his microphone, despite the joke’s overtly progressive spirit.
Intent didn’t matter. A select group of attendees were “triggered” by the subject matter, including the folks who hired Patel in the first place.
“The bit is brilliant,” Gold says, furious that the audience missed the punchline’s point. “Are we really thinking in 280 characters, too?”
It can’t be easy for a progressive to blame her own side for Cancel Culture’s rise, but Gold isn’t backing down from that position. She stated it during a recent interview with podcaster Adam Carolla, and she told The Daily Wire a similar message.
“It’s really upsetting that the progressive left has stifled free speech … we’re eating our own,” says Gold. “It’s not progressive … to not acknowledge someone who has evolved or shutting someone down.”
She compares speech police efforts to telling a painter he or she can’t use a certain color and expecting the finished portrait to look like it should.
Cancel Culture also means the Academy Awards can’t find a comic host who could survive a woke vetting.
“That says a lot to me,” she says. Comic actor Kevin Hart’s brief fling with Oscar <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/kevin-hart-confirms-he-will-not-reconsider-hosting-paul-bois">ended after old jokes insensitive to gay people</a> resurfaced.
“The progressive left wants people to evolve … to change their viewpoints. When they do, we should acknowledge that and not bring up sh** they said 15 years ago,” she says.
Gold also defended comic Michelle Wolf who caught flak from both sides of the ideological aisle after <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-smacks-comedian-who-mocked-sarah-sanders-james-barrett">her withering 2017 set at the White House Correspondents Dinner</a> as well as Kathy Griffin’s ISIS-like image with the president’s decapitated head.
Some of Gold’s fellow comics fear Cancel Culture’s wrath, self-censoring their material to protect themselves — and their careers. A well-structured joke is no longer a viable defense.
“You trust your craft and your point of view,” she says. “Now? Nope, sorry, that’s not valid anymore… We can’t trust ourselves. Someone is gonna take it the wrong way, so I can’t say it.”
Few entertainers loathe President Donald Trump like Gold, which she demonstrates repeatedly throughout her new book. She still sees free speech as an area where liberals and conservatives can, and should, come together.
“I don’t believe that conservative people should be stopped from giving speeches at liberal colleges,” she says, referencing how Daily Wire Editor Emeritus Ben Shapiro, and other high-profile conservatives, require security just to speak on select campuses – if they’re allowed at all. “Who are you to tell me that? You have to hear every side of something.”
“Yes, I Can Say That” challenges conservatives with its anti-Trump passages. It also shares warm stories of comedians who directly addressed their fears with humor, like former “Facts of Life” actress Geri Jewell, who has cerebral palsy.
The book lets Gold join a short but impressive list of comedians who vocally oppose Cancel Culture.
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/gervais-says-the-woke-mob-wants-to-shut-you-up">Ricky Gervais</a> and <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/exclusive-adam-carolla-gets-raw-about-our-all-woke-no-joke-culture-friendship-with-jimmy-kimmel-truth-about-trump">Carolla</a> speak out the loudest on the issue, but so do Bill Maher, Nick Di Paolo, Dennis Miller (he called them <a href="https://www.hollywoodintoto.com/dennis-miller-bill-burr-cancel-culture-mccarthy/">“McCarthy hearings with a search engine</a>”), <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-video-released-of-dave-chappelles-fierce-hilarious-defense-of-first-amendment">Dave Chappelle</a> and to some extent, Bill Burr.
“Comedians love to push the envelope because it feels so rewarding to lead people into a state of discomfort and then release them from it with a smart and unexpected punch line,” she writes in the book.
Gold, like her peers, is itching to share her comic perspectives about the pandemic and so much more, but of course there’s a catch.
“It’s the perfect storm for stand-up but there’s no place for us to perform,” she says regarding the pandemic. “We’ve been through such hell. We need to f***ing laugh. That’s where the hope is — living without the arts, people are appreciating them a little more.”
More exclusive content from The Daily Wire: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/exclusive-adam-carolla-gets-raw-about-our-all-woke-no-joke-culture-friendship-with-jimmy-kimmel-truth-about-trump">Adam Carolla Gets Raw About ‘All Woke, No Joke Culture,’ Friendship With Jimmy Kimmel, Truth About Trump</a>
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Judy Gold

EXCLUSIVE: Progressive Comic Judy Gold On Cancel Culture: The Left Is Eating Its Own

Cancel culture

Comedy

Political Correctness

&#8220;Mostly peaceful.&#8221; So goes the characterization of demonstrations that have routinely turned into looting and rioting for months on end, from Portland to Seattle to New York to Los Angeles.
&#8220;Protesters in California set fire to a courthouse, damaged a police station and assaulted officers after a peaceful demonstration intensified,&#8221; read one recent ABC News tweet.
CNN called protests in Portland &#8220;mostly peaceful,&#8221; adding that &#8220;they have at times devolved into violence, vandalism, and arson.&#8221;
During riots in Los Angeles in June, as the entire county locked down, the Los Angeles Times noted, &#8220;The third night of countywide curfews followed days of massive, mostly peaceful protests &#8230; Nearly 1,200 people were arrested Sunday after police officers clashed with demonstrators and looters shattered windows and emptied stores in Santa Monica and Long Beach.&#8221;
The phrase &#8220;mostly peaceful,&#8221; then, is rather fungible. 
Consider that during the tea party protests of 2011, then-Vice President Joe Biden reportedly likened tea partiers to &#8220;terrorists&#8221; — and those protests were notable mostly for people cleaning up their own litter. When anti-lockdown protesters descended on the Michigan state capitol, a columnist for The New York Times labeled them &#8220;armed rebels,&#8221; despite a complete lack of violence. When three white supremacists were arrested for plotting violence at a pro-gun rally, GQ&#8217;s Talia Lavin headlined, &#8220;That Pro-Gun Rally in Virginia Wasn&#8217;t Exactly &#8216;Peaceful'&#8221; — even though the rally saw no violence.
In truth, the category of &#8220;mostly peaceful&#8221; is a brand-new invention meant to obscure the simple fact that many of our cultural elites are fine with violence so long as those who engage in such violence have the proper goals. Nikole Hannah-Jones, creator of the pseudo-historical 1619 Project, celebrated when critics labeled rioting and looting &#8220;the 1619 riots&#8221;; she added that destruction of property was &#8220;not violence.&#8221;
This week, Democrats grilling Attorney General Bill Barr could not be bothered to condemn violence, prompting Barr to rant, &#8220;What makes me concerned for the country is this is the first time in my memory the leaders of one of our great two political parties, the Democratic Party, are not coming out and condemning mob violence and the attack on federal courts.&#8221;
This should come as little surprise, given that those same cultural elites have cheered on massive protests in a time of a deadly pandemic, explaining that sometimes politics is just too important to stop a raging disease.
Our journey back to the 1960s is nearly complete.
Too many Americans have rejected some of the key lessons of that time — that a breakdown in law and order costs lives, that political change does not require violence — in favor of a newfound sense of purpose. These Americans will pat the violent vanguard of revolution on the head, content that they will not pay the price, all the while maintaining that those who crave law and order stand for regressive autocracy.
Thus, Mayor Jenny Durkan of Seattle recently informed MSNBC that federal law enforcement attempting to stop destruction of federal property in Portland actually represented a &#8220;dry run for martial law.&#8221;
With Democrats and those in the media willing to run cover for violent leftists, the thin veneer of civilization disintegrates. When violence is excused as speech and speech by the opposition labeled violence, democracies die.
With each passing day of silence by those who should know better — or worse, those propagandizing on behalf of those who engage in criminal activity — America draws closer to the brink.
More from Ben Shapiro: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/shapiro-america-is-hitting-the-self-destruct-button">America Is Hitting The Self-Destruct Button</a>
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Portland Protests Continue Unabated Despite Federal Law Enforcement Presence

SHAPIRO: The Left’s Willingness To Tolerate Violence Should Frighten All Americans

Antifa

Defund The Police

Jenny Durkan

Law Enforcement

Nikole Hannah-Jones

Portland

Seattle

At present, no organization has more sway in the United States, not just in shaping opinion, but changing behaviors and lives, than Black Lives Matter. A recent Rasmussen poll found that 62% of likely voters now have a “favorable” opinion of BLM. This is almost a reverse of opinion only six months ago.
It is both fascinating and troubling to see this transformation. Fascinating in that, like so many political movements, its emergence usually is the reaction to some larger underlying shift in the national order that the existing parties have failed to address. The Republican Party, for example, was spawned from the growing abolitionist sentiment in the country — one the Southern Democrats vehemently resisted to the point of taking up arms.
But unlike the nascent GOP, Black Lives Matter, the organization that has co-opted the self-evident slogan, is based not just on deception, but outright, demonstrable lies. And even more troubling still is the willingness with which the American people, gutted of any proper historical understanding for generations by failed education, the activist media, and cowardly politicians of both mainstream parties are willing to carry water for this mendacious group.
Consider the genesis of the Black Lives Matter organization itself. On February 26, 2012, 17-year-old African-American Trayvon Martin was intercepted by George Zimmerman, a man of mixed race, who was the neighborhood watch coordinator for his community. An altercation occurred, Zimmerman claimed Martin attacked him and in the scuffle Zimmerman fatally shot the boy.  A tragedy all around, no doubt. Zimmerman was acquitted; he was found to have indeed acted in self-defense. Bowing to national public outcry a federal investigation was launched as well — and it reached the same conclusion. But that did not matter. By then Trayvon Martin had become a household name — a martyr, a symbol of a false narrative laced in fallacious inductive reasoning that it was “open season” on young blacks by non-blacks. The 2013 acquittal inspired a Facebook posting that included the phrase “black lives matter” and the “Movement for Black Lives,” which eventually fell under the catch-all banner “Black Lives Matter,” was born.
The movement was spurred on by the shooting of Michael Brown by police Officer Darren Wilson in Ferguson, Missouri on August 9, 2014. It was widely reported that Wilson shot Brown while the man was helpless, with his hands raised in the air, and pleading “Don’t shoot!” That narrative took hold and spread like wildfire, and soon a terrible untruth began to spread among both the black community as well as white guilt-ridden leftists who are always happy to cheer them on from behind the walls of their all-white enclaves. The storyline went that Brown’s death was emblematic of a widespread problem that black people have confronted for years: brutality and injustice at the hands of systemically racist police. Soon even NFL players got into the act, many striding onto the field with their hands up in a gesture of solidarity.
Once again, the shooter was acquitted. But unlike the Martin case, where some doubts will always linger, the matter of Brown’s demise was a clear case of police self-defense. The Brown as sainted victim narrative was a lie. Brown was six-foot-five, 285 pounds. Al Sharpton, C.E.O. of Race Hustlers, Inc., eulogized him as a “gentle giant.”  His family said he didn’t have a violent bone in his body. This would come as a surprise to the store owner trying to prevent Brown from stealing a box of cigars the night he died. When confronted, the stoned (as the autopsy showed) Brown can be seen on surveillance video grabbing the diminutive store owner and slamming him into a shelf.
While walking down the middle of the street soon after, Brown was intercepted by Officer Wilson who pulled up next to him in his squad car. The “gentle giant” then proceeded to reach into the cruiser for Wilson’s gun. Wilson shot him in the hand and then pursued on foot. Brown then turned around and charged the policeman who shot the NFL linebacker-sized man coming straight at him, killing him. More than a half-dozen black onlookers witnessed the episode. Despite enormous pressure to affirm the lie, they agreed Brown never put his hands up, and never said “Don’t Shoot.” An <a href="https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/opa/press-releases/attachments/2015/03/04/doj_report_on_shooting_of_michael_brown_1.pdf">FBI investigation</a> and a Grand Jury each affirmed Officer Wilson’s story. No matter. Benjamin Crump, the Brown (and Martin) family lawyer declared “family and supporters will not be persuaded by the autopsy report or eye-witness statements.” A lawyer really said that. Is it any wonder then that Ferguson erupted in riots based on a lie? President Barack Obama could have dampened the rioters’ anger by making an address supporting the Ferguson police who did no wrong here. Instead he framed the incident as part of wider fears of being guilty of “<a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/black-lives-matter-releases-policy-agenda-n620966">walking while black</a>.” Healer indeed.
BLM now had its cause…any black man shot by police under any circumstance. It also had its villain: the nation’s 800,000 law enforcement officers. Other incidents followed. In Baltimore in 2015 Freddie Gray was arrested for carrying a knife. He suffered injuries while being transported in the van to central booking, fell into a coma, and died days later.  He was heard by witnesses banging the sides of the van and the officers had to restrain him with cuffs and leg shackles. Once again, the arresting officers were <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/federal-officials-decline-prosecution-death-freddie-gray">cleared by an Obama Justice Department investigation</a>. Again, it did not matter and five days of violence and looting in Baltimore followed in protest of systemic police racism. So what if the arresting officers were black, the Baltimore City Council was almost all black, and the mayor was black?
In 2016 the BLM organization released a 24-page mission statement entitled “<a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/black-lives-matter-releases-policy-agenda-n620966">A Vision for Black Lives: Policy Demands For Black Power, Freedom and Justice</a>.” Lurking within its many pages, graphics and diagrams one can find its policy goals. Some are generalities like “End the war on black people.” (Given that the vast majority of <a href="https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2018/crime-in-the-u.s.-2018/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-6.xls">homicides among black people</a> are carried out by other black people, I’m not exactly sure for whom this message is intended.) But some demands are more substantive, and worrisome:
<ul>
<li>Reparations for past and continuing harms. (This includes property as well as cash).</li>
<li>A reconstruction of the economy to ensure our communities have collective ownership, not merely access.</li>
<li>Independent black political power and black self-determination in all areas of society. (As in re-segregation?)</li>
</ul>
And today, of course, this list also includes the very dangerous #DefundThePolice demand.
Martin, Brown, Gray. Although useful, none could be the face of such a movement given the murky circumstances of their deaths. Then came George Floyd’s murder at the hands of Minneapolis policeman Derek Chauvin. Anyone who has seen that video should agree that Floyd is a victim of police brutality. It is one thing to draw a gun and open fire in the heat of the moment, where a split-second hesitation could either prevent a tragedy if the target is benign, or send you into the next life if he means you harm.  But for over eight minutes, in full view of bystanders and fellow officers who criminally did not intervene, and for all the amateur videographers to get the evidence, Chauvin kneeled on the man’s neck well after he was no longer a threat, despite Floyd’s begging him to stop uttering the now ubiquitous rallying cry “I can’t breathe.” This was murder. Suddenly all the wokeness, the simmering neo-Marxism, the nihilism, and the racism that feeds the BLM movement exploded onto the streets. Enter like clockwork Al Sharpton, to give the man’s eulogy as our city streets burned. In George Floyd, BLM finally had a beatified face to go with the charges of police “open season” on blacks.
This is an inflammatory accusation. And worse, easily debunked with hard data. In fact, the numbers show that widespread, systemic police brutality against blacks, especially unarmed blacks, is a myth. Nevertheless, it is one that BLM, both political parties, the media, even the public seem more than willing to accept — or if they do not accept it, are unwilling to confront the lie.
But here are the facts. And, as John Adams said, “Facts are stubborn things.”
In a recent <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-myth-of-systemic-police-racism-11591119883">Wall Street Journal op-ed</a>, Heather Mac Donald, author of The War on Cops: How the New Attack on Law and Order Makes Everyone Less Safe, sums up the data that is readily available to the curious:
<blockquote>In 2019 police officers fatally shot 1,004 people, most of whom were armed or otherwise dangerous. African-Americans were about a quarter of those killed by cops last year (235), a ratio that has remained stable since 2015. That share of black victims is less than what the black crime rate would predict, since police shootings are a function of how often officers encounter armed and violent suspects. In 2018, the latest year for which such data have been published, African-Americans make up 53% of known homicide offenders in the U.S. and commit about 60% of robberies, though they are 13% of the population.
The police fatally shot nine unarmed blacks and 19 unarmed whites in 2019, according to a Washington Post database, down from 38 and 32, respectively, in 2015&#8230;In 2018 there were 7,407 black homicide victims. Assuming a comparable number of victims last year, those nine unarmed black victims of police shootings represent 0.1% of all African-Americans killed in 2019. By contrast, a police officer is 18½ times more likely to be killed by a black male than an unarmed black male is to be killed by a police officer.</blockquote>
So, there it is. The cause of the utter chaos in our streets. One-tenth of one percent of blacks murdered in the USA last year. Black lives matter, yes, but apparently some matter a lot more than others. Otherwise we’d know the names of all 7,407 black homicide victims, not just those with political expediency. But we don’t. To paraphrase an old cynical saying attributed to many figures from Erich LeMarque to Josef Stalin: “One death is a tragedy, 7,407 a statistic.”
Still, do these numbers mean the Minneapolis police department, or many others no doubt, is not in need of reform? Of course not. Chauvin had a history of violence both as a cop and his second job as a bouncer, and never should have been on the force. And he should do hard time. However, demanding police reform is a far cry from removing the police altogether. But this, through defunding, is precisely what the Black Lives Matter organization wants.
So how is it, with such a prima facie dangerous agenda, that this organization has become so strong? How has such a radical message become, on the surface at least, mainstream? Because a mob, when uncontested, becomes just more brazen. There is no concerted push-back. Politicians are cowering. The mainstream media, already slightly to the left of Che Guevara, gleefully push the narrative, as sowing racial disharmony has been for decades a technique the Democrat Party uses to retain power. And since the media is now but an arm of that Democrat Party, this serves both interests well. Taking a step further, BLM, too, is now an extension of that political party. So a cynical and nationally destructive symbiosis has emerged.
Why do I equate BLM with the Democrat Party?  Because they are, literally, cyber-linked. Go to the Black Lives Matter website homepage and click “Donate.” That takes one to an organization called <a href="https://secure.actblue.com/donate/ms_blm_homepage_2019">ActBlue</a>, a registered 501 c3 non-profit Political Action Committee. So donations to BLM will go into ActBlue. Now, under terms and conditions, there is a fine print section which states that ActBlue adheres to Campaign Finance laws.
Question: If a donation goes to a cause to ostensibly support a social movement why are  the recipients of said funds required to comply with Campaign Finance restrictions?
Answer: Because the top 10 “causes” of Act Blue were either Democratic candidates (Bernie and Biden being first at over $300 million) or Democratic political committees.
It is said that movements for social justice, religion, and political reform — and this is all three rolled into one — start off as a cause, then become a business, and finally a racket. BLM has reached the racket stage.
So where, then, are the “law &amp; order” Republicans in all this? Remember them? The voices of the great “silent majority”? They are doing what they do best. Offering conservative lip service to their constituents while protecting the established order, and their corporate donors, as much as any Democrat. Democrans and Republicrats. All have bent the knee to the BLM organization that is now a multi-billion dollar political fund-raising machine. Although Democrats still do it best. When my governor, Phil Murphy, who banned  graduation ceremonies, public funeral services, and even haircuts for fear of COVID outbreaks, came to our town’s recent BLM protest and spoke before a packed crowd of 1,500 people for whom “social distancing” was a quaint notion, I saw first-hand just what shameless pandering for political points looks like. The image of Murphy, a Goldman Sachs alumnus, taking a knee for “equality” and “social justice” was one until recently only the Onion or Babylon Bee could concoct. But we are down the rabbit hole now. And as such both parties acquiesce to the lie that is tearing our country apart.
Sadly, no group will suffer more for our leaders’ complete abdication of responsibility than the very black lives all involved profess to hold sacred.  In New York City, once lauded under GOP mayors Giuliani and Bloomberg as “America’s safest big city,” homicides are <a href="https://www1.nyc.gov/site/nypd/news/pr0706/nypd-citywide-crime-statistics-june-2020">up 23%</a> from the first six months of 2019. In the last week of June and first week in July, <a href="https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/breaking/ct-chicago-homicides-data-tracker-htmlstory.html">Chicago’s murders</a> were up 39% compared to the same 2019 weeks. One week in May in <a href="http://www.lapdonline.org/statistical_data">Los Angeles</a> saw murders up an astounding 250%. Atlanta, Washington D.C., New Orleans and others have seen similar surges in violent crime.
Adding to the agony, more and more victims are children. In Brooklyn over the July 4th weekend a <a href="https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/family-of-1-year-old-killed-in-brooklyn-drive-by-shooting-to-say-final-goodbye/2535445/">one-year-old boy</a> was killed by gunfire while resting in his stroller as his family picnicked. He was one of six children, all black, to die in a hail of bullets that weekend. In fact, most of the neighborhoods where the deadly violence has escalated, and those destroyed through arson, vandalism and looting, are minority neighborhoods. Clearly the lives of the 7,000+ black people murdered each year do not matter to these activists. What matters now is that the police have been compelled to all but abandon those who need their protections far more than the left-wing elitist interests feeding the BLM machine.
Brad Schaeffer’s is a commodities trader and author.  His articles have appeared in The Wall Street Journal, New York Daily News, National Review, and others. His acclaimed World War Two novel <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Another-Time-Place-Brad-Schaeffer/dp/1682616630">Of Another Time And Place </a>[Post Hill/Simon &amp; Schuster, 2018] is available for purchase or kindle/audible download.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Black Lives Matter Protesters

SCHAEFFER: The Truth About The Black Lives Matter Organization

Black Lives Matter

Race

The term “cancel culture” is one that has started to dominate our political discourse in recent years, growing from an irritating but innocuous freckle into an ideological tumor on the back of society. Despite the clear prevalence of its use, there is an ongoing debate regarding its fundamental meaning.
For some, cancel culture is the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/14/opinion/cancel-culture-.html">weaponization of the masses</a> — often in the form of virtual mobs on social media — to punish thoughtcrimes or the expression of “problematic” opinions in a bid to eradicate certain viewpoints. For others, cancel culture is an imaginary term <a href="https://time.com/5735403/cancel-culture-is-not-real/">used</a> as “a catch-all for when people in power face consequences for their actions or receive any type of criticism, something that they’re not used to.”
To some extent, both positions are correct. It’s obvious to any objective onlooker that cancel culture is real. Just last year, celebrities including R. Kelly, Kanye West, Scarlett Johansson, Gina Rodriguez, Kevin Hart, and Shane Gillis all faced “cancellation” for reasons spanning from criminal acts to the utterance of subjectively offensive jokes. However, cancel culture is an equal opportunity assassin, and comes for the famous and unknown alike. For example, a teacher in Michigan was recently <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/michigan-teacher-fired-after-tweeting-trump-is-our-president">fired</a> after tweeting that Donald Trump is president of the United States — a simple statement of fact.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
I’m done being silent. <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@realDonaldTrump</a> is our president ❌🧢 
Don’t @ me
&mdash; Coach Kucera (@CoachKWLW) <a href="https://twitter.com/CoachKWLW/status/1280312826796675074?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 7, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
In addition, the crosshairs of cancellation often fall on non-human elements of our culture. In the aftermath of George Floyd’s death and the riots that ensued, criticism of &#8220;glorifying police&#8221; <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/celebrities-who-have-been-canceled-over-scandals-stances-on-protests">resulted</a> in the literal cancellation of “Cops” and “Live P.D.”
In similar fashion, HBO Max reacted to increased racial tensions by temporarily removing the classic movie “Gone With The Wind” from its streaming library and only reinstating it after providing a pedantic &#8220;trigger warning.&#8221; The fact that Hattie McDaniel was the first African American to be awarded an Academy Award for her role as “Mammy” is, unfortunately, irrelevant in the eyes of those who wield the sword of cancel culture in the battle for “progress.”
It’s also important to recognize that there is some truth to the argument that cancel culture has always existed, and is sometimes the necessary reaction to certain deplorable actions. While figures like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez are wrong in their claim that “cancel culture comes from entitlement,” it’s difficult to argue that legitimate criminals such as Bill Cosby should be viewed with the same level of societal respect after their appalling actions are uncovered.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
The term “cancel culture” comes from entitlement &#8211; as though the person complaining has the right to a large, captive audience,&amp; one is a victim if people choose to tune them out.
Odds are you’re not actually cancelled, you’re just being challenged, held accountable, or unliked.
&mdash; Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) <a href="https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1281392795748569089?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 10, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The issue is not whether or not cancel culture exists, but what “cancellation” should be and when it is appropriate. Earlier this month, an <a href="https://harpers.org/a-letter-on-justice-and-open-debate/">open letter</a> titled “A Letter on Justice and Open Debate” was published by Harper’s Magazine. The letter was signed by dozens of “<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/jk-rowling-over-100-others-sign-letter-condemning-cancel-culture-one-caves-apologizes-rowling-responds">academics, writers, and artists</a>,” and aimed to defend free speech and condemn cancel culture.
&#8220;We need to preserve the possibility of good-faith disagreement without dire professional consequences,&#8221; the letter reads &#8220;If we won’t defend the very thing on which our work depends, we shouldn’t expect the public or the state to defend it for us.&#8221;
This letter touched on the central issue underpinning the uncontrolled application of cancel culture: “where does the line between cancel culture and free speech exist?” We have already shown that some instances of cancel culture are absurd — such as firing teachers for stating literal facts — while some instances are understandable and, arguably, completely valid. The “<a href="https://www.mackinac.org/OvertonWindow">Overton Window</a>” is supposed to be the lens through which we can make the distinction between the protection of free speech and the rejection of fundamentally bad ideas:
“The Overton Window is a model for understanding how ideas in society change over time and influence politics. The core concept is that politicians are limited in what policy ideas they can support — they generally only pursue policies that are widely accepted throughout society as legitimate policy options. These policies lie inside the Overton Window. Other policy ideas exist, but politicians risk losing popular support if they champion these ideas. These policies lie outside the Overton Window.”
Unfortunately, the Overton Window has been largely hijacked. Instead of expanding or contracting, it is being shifted to the Left by the collective efforts of the establishment media, academia and progressive politicians. There still remains a significant element of the political spectrum, particularly on the Right, unrepresented by the “Harper letter.” If the ideological diversity permitted by the Overton Window is only defended by those who seek to shift it by just enough to recover their own personal respectability, then they are promoting merely a temporary stop-gap until the pressure of radical Leftism becomes too great to resist.
For now, it is clear that the Overton Window is not the answer to the question of defining the line between free speech and cancel culture. Instead, we must first agree that the misuse of cancel culture exists, and reject and debunk the flawed arguments of those who scoff at this assertion. When Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is applauded for stating that “People who are actually &#8216;cancelled&#8217; don’t get their thoughts published and amplified in major outlets,” they must be immediately presented with a <a href="https://www.nas.org/blogs/article/tracking-cancel-culture-in-higher-education">list</a> of those who have been cancelled and, as a result, have no ability to protest.
Currently, cancel culture is either condemned, condoned, or dismissed, but usually from within ideological silos. These bubbles of thought are usually maintained through the desire to promulgate certain political positions. If cancel culture is an effective tool, then it is either celebrated or ignored. If cancel culture is a dangerous opponent, then it is adamantly denounced.
Rather than this binary approach, we need to acknowledge that the notion of “cancellation” is simply a societal tool and, like all tools, has the potential to be used in a wide array of positive and negative ways. We should also acknowledge that the act of criticism is not necessarily motivated by the desire to cancel its target. If we hope to hamper the malicious use of cancel culture while also protecting the ability to disagree, the intent behind the criticism must be our primary focus.
With this in mind, let&#8217;s reframe the discussion with intent in the equation. Here&#8217;s an analogy: Imagine that “respectable” ideological society is a single room, with a single door to an inescapable void that exists outside. Built into this door is a single mail slot. Occupants of the room carry a set of papers which contain their thoughts and ideas which they present to others in the room. Arguments are not only expected, but inevitable. Ideas which are directly opposed commonly clash, with tribes forming around common principles. As a result, it&#8217;s decided that some views are better than others, and so it&#8217;s time for this society to determine what is acceptable and may therefore remain. Ideas deemed unacceptable will be cast out into the abyss through the mail slot. Everyone is within their right to share their papers with others, and criticism of its contents is permitted, even encouraged.
The problem with our society is that we fail to notice that our “door” has a mail slot. Instead of rejecting ideas, we reject people. Those whose ideas are deemed unacceptable by an inconsistent metric of morality are cast out of the door, never to return.
This represents the fundamental difference between cancel culture and the valid use of free speech. People are separated from their ideas as those in our “room” are separated from their “papers.” If someone seeks to cast out an individual because of their ideas, then they are engaging in cancel culture. Similarly, the threat of eviction being used to silence those who wish to remain is also an example of cancel culture. The act of criticism itself is not, as long as the criticism is motivated by the desire to demonstrate the invalidity of an idea. In our analogy, this is the difference between attempting to dispose of their papers and disposing of the person themselves. If the goal is to hurl the person — along with their ideas — into the abyss, then a line has been crossed.
Of course, this analogy assumes good intent. In reality, there will be some who hope to use their ideas to enable and justify the destruction of the rights of others. There are also, of course, actual criminals, whose actions are the reason they should be rightly &#8220;cancelled.&#8221; However, permanently consigning someone to the societal void must be viewed as an absolute last resort rather than the default position, as it has increasingly become.
Until we separate the bodies, lives, and careers of those with whom we disagree from their ideas, we don’t have free speech. Until we accept that criticism is a necessary requirement for debate, we don’t have free speech.
More from Ian Haworth: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/haworth-how-we-can-push-back-on-the-lefts-virtue-of-american-self-hatred">How We Can Push Back On The Left’s ‘Virtue’ Of American Self-Hatred</a>
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

A front door with mail slot, doorknob and deadbolt lock

HAWORTH: The Difference Between Cancel Culture And Free Speech

Perhaps the stupidest development to come out of the protests and riots is the Left&#8217;s bizarre announcement that lawful arrests are now &#8220;kidnapping.&#8221; Recent videos of law enforcement officials arresting wanted criminals and putting them in unmarked vehicles have provoked this sudden redefinition of terms. The latest such incident went viral when a &#8220;counterculture journalist&#8221; (who seems oddly to be completely in line with the culture, not counter to it at all) posted a <a href="https://twitter.com/MichelleLhooq/status/1288253381883113475">video</a> with the caption:
&#8220;NYC is taking after Portland — a trans femme protestor was pulled into an unmarked van at the Abolition Park protest — this was at 2nd Ave and 25th Street.&#8221;
This video has been shared all over social media, with people like MSNBC anchor Chris Hayes and Rep. Jerry Nadler describing it as &#8220;kidnapping&#8221; and &#8220;terrifying,&#8221; respectively. Nadler declared that police officers using unmarked vehicles during an arrest somehow amounts to a violation of the Constitution. Many on the Left have echoed this claim.
Meanwhile, back in the solid world of reality, the &#8220;kidnapping&#8221; victim was actually a wanted criminal who had allegedly vandalized and destroyed government property on five separate occasions. The people carrying out the arrest were members of the city&#8217;s warrant squad, and I know that because they were wearing shirts that said &#8220;Warrant Squad.&#8221; They were assisted by uniformed police wearing bright neon outfits that said &#8220;Police.&#8221; Yes, the van was unmarked, but that is nothing strange or innovative.
This will come as a shock to Rep. Nadler, who is shocked and scandalized by the concept of unmarked cars, but police have been using them for decades. The reason is rather logical. Most people, it turns out, don&#8217;t want to be arrested. People who don&#8217;t want to be arrested will tend to run away if they see a police car approach the scene. This is why police don&#8217;t always like to announce their presence with blaring sirens. None of this is new, weird, disturbing, or, for God&#8217;s sake, unconstitutional.
Of course, these days police have a whole host of additional reasons to use a lower profile. One obvious reason is that marked police cars are routinely targeted for arson attacks by &#8220;peaceful protesters.&#8221; <a href="https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/lapd-cars-damaged-during-protests-cost-80000-each/2385560/">In the city of Los Angeles</a>, for example, 156 LAPD patrol cars had been damaged by the end of June, each costing about $80,000 to repair. The protesters are destroying cop cars and then getting angry and screaming about fascism when cops must resort to using different kinds of vehicles.
All of this ridiculous &#8220;kidnapping&#8221; stuff is part of a larger, and just as ridiculous, narrative about our nation&#8217;s slide into &#8220;fascism.&#8221; It is hard to believe that anyone could look at the government&#8217;s paltry response to months of rioting, looting, and chaos, and come away convinced that we live under a fascist dictatorship. I have never lived under a fascist dictatorship — and I don&#8217;t now, and neither do you — but I feel pretty confident that a little bit of tear gas and a few rubber bullets would be the least of your worries if you behaved this way in such a country. But, as we have seen, the Left is never slowed down by facts or reality when constructing their narratives.
More from Matt Walsh: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/activist-teachers-say-its-not-safe-to-go-back-to-work">Activist Teachers Say It’s Not Safe To Go Back To Work, While Many Attend Mass Protests</a>
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

WALSH: No, Police Are Not ‘Kidnapping’ People Off The Street. Stop Being Hysterical. 

Chris Hayes

Jerrold Nadler

Jeffrey Epstein

10 Bizarre Facts Surrounding Jeffrey Epstein

This week, public school teachers in DC — who, you understand, care for nothing as much as educating the children and equipping a new generation with the tools they will need to succeed in life — protested the plan to possibly reopen schools in the fall by placing <a href="https://twitter.com/debbietruong/status/1287812716950884352?s=21">fake body bags</a> outside of the school district’s offices. Striking a careful balance between absurd melodrama and shameless self-aggrandizement, one of the bags was accompanied by a cardboard gravestone that said “RIP Favorite Teacher.” Others read “killed in the line of duty” and “how many will you let die?” 
Many activist teachers across the country have been engaging in similar theatrics for weeks now. A recent CNN article warns that educators are <a href="https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/07/16/us/coronavirus-teachers-preparing-wills/index.html">preparing their wills in anticipation</a> of going back to work, an act apparently tantamount to being sent to death row. Indeed, a <a href="https://www.boredteachers.com/news/can-we-talk-about-the-serious-dangers-of-sending-teachers-back-to-school">recent article</a> on a website for educators called Bored Teacher claims outright that reopening schools is a “death sentence” for teachers, which seems to be the general sentiment expressed by many of the hundreds of teachers who have <a href="https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ryancbrooks/teachers-strike-school-reopenings-coronavirus">taken to the streets</a> to protest the re-opening of schools. 
One can’t help but wonder how these activist teachers, who see the classroom as some kind of death chamber, are frequently willing to protest in large groups. While some of the anti-school reopening demonstrations have featured social distancing practices, many of the protests attended by activist teachers have not. Teachers have had a <a href="https://www.google.com/amp/s/katu.com/amp/news/local/healthcare-workers-union-workers-teachers-join-protesters-at-justice-center">notable presence</a> at the BLM protests for the past several weeks. In Portland, they have even formed a group called “Teachers Against Tyrants,” and have been wading into the non-socially distanced mass of people to convey their political message. In Philadelphia, teachers <a href="https://www.inquirer.com/news/philadelphia-teachers-protest-racism-black-lives-matter-20200712.html">gathered with their students</a> to march against police brutality. Similar scenes have unfolded <a href="https://www.fox7austin.com/news/educators-gather-to-protest-police-brutality-advocate-for-black-lives-matter-movement">in Texas</a> and elsewhere.
If teaching in front of a classroom of children is a &#8220;death sentence,&#8221; what about standing in an enormous crowd of other adults? 
In reality, of course, neither a protest nor a classroom is a death sentence. The average age of a public school teacher in America is 41, putting most of them well outside the high-risk age bracket. They are also working closely with children; a group that appears to have a <a href="https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/what-scientists-know-about-how-children-spread-covid-19-180975396/">lower risk</a> of contracting, spreading, or developing serious complications from the virus than adults. It is not that teaching carries no COVID risk at all, but that the risk is likely far less significant than activist teachers are claiming. And whatever the risk, it is hard to see how it would be substantially greater than the risk of attending a raucous protest with thousands of other people. 
Meanwhile, grocery stores, Walmarts, and many other retailers have been open throughout the pandemic, even at its height. It&#8217;s possible that I missed it, but I don&#8217;t recall teachers&#8217; groups crying out for Target to be closed for the sake of its workers. In fact, I&#8217;d guess that a fair number of these people who are allegedly so petrified of returning to the classroom have themselves been patronizing retail establishments and grocery stores this entire time. And it&#8217;s not just teachers — I don&#8217;t remember hearing almost anyone demand that these places be closed. If we are supposed to weep for the fate of our doomed teachers, why not for Kroger cashiers?
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/hz7FhfvS7pE?start=155" width="720" height="385" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen">﻿</iframe>
I will be told that all of this is very different from the situation teachers will be in when they return to school. School is indoors. It lasts for several hours. Many students are confined to one classroom. It&#8217;s true that these factors present unique challenges, but there are also unique advantages. Namely, as I already outlined, the fact that kids statistically appear to be less likely to contract or spread the virus than adults. Teachers will be spending most of their time, therefore, with what statistics suggest is the safest group of people to be around as far as COVID is concerned. This is <a href="https://services.aap.org/en/pages/2019-novel-coronavirus-covid-19-infections/clinical-guidance/covid-19-planning-considerations-return-to-in-person-education-in-schools/">one of the reasons</a> why the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that schools be re-opened in the fall.
But the main thing that ought to balance out the challenges, and prompt any dedicated teacher to call for a return to class, is the overwhelming importance of education. This after all is the actual reason why few people complained about grocery stores and retail outlets remaining open — we all believe those establishments to be essential to the proper functioning of society. Don&#8217;t we say the same, only more so, for education?
I&#8217;ve already <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/walsh-public-school-teachers-are-now-insisting-that-public-schools-are-inessential-as-a-homeschool-parent-i-agree">argued</a> that, as far as I&#8217;m concerned, public school teachers can and probably in most cases should be replaced by parents. As a homeschool advocate, I don&#8217;t think that public school is essential. But most of the people protesting the re-opening of schools would disagree. It is they who would say, in any other circumstance, that kids need school and will be gravely harmed without it. Isn&#8217;t that enough reason right there to re-open? Putting everything else aside, shouldn&#8217;t the fact that our children allegedly need the public school system be sufficient justification for getting them open again?
It&#8217;s clear that move to keep schools closed  has less to do with precaution than with priority. Education is not as important to some of these activist teachers as they have claimed. They will &#8220;risk their lives&#8221; to send a political message at a protest, or to shop at Target, but not to teach our kids. Children must take a backseat.
More from Matt Walsh: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/walsh-the-confused-and-pointless-rage-of-an-entitled-generation">The Confused And Pointless Rage Of An Entitled Generation</a>
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Educators Protest

WALSH: Activist Teachers Say It’s Not Safe To Go Back To Work, While Many Attend Mass Protests

Education

The following is satirical.
If the polls are correct, Joe Biden stands a good chance of soon becoming the former president of the United States.
To solidify his hopes of announcing his resignation from the highest office in the land, Biden has unveiled “The Biden Agenda for Women.”
In a statement written in drool and released to a particularly large cockroach in the corner of his basement, Biden said, “It’s a disgrace that this country treats women unfairly when they make the place look so attractive and just smell incredibly great.&#8221;
&#8220;When you come up behind them and stick your nose deep in their velvety hair and then take a great big sniff, it’s like a rocket ship to heaven and yet they still make less per hour for answering the phone than a man makes for parachuting onto a burning oil rig and fighting the fire until he dies,&#8221; he continued.
&#8220;So today, I’m announcing The Biden Agenda for Women which of course is not my personal agenda for women, which is a fantasy that would blow your socks off — but that nice lady named Jill who follows me around all the time says I’m not supposed to talk about that and it’s possible she’s my wife assuming I’m the same person I was yesterday.”
Speaking to the family dog who may or may not be a plush toy, Biden listed the Agenda’s provisions, saying, “One, we will tackle health care inequities. It’s completely unfair that women come down with diseases men don’t even get like their periods and that thing where they cry all the time and won’t listen to reason.&#8221;
&#8220;B. We will end violence against women by issuing an executive order telling people: if you’re going to punch someone, punch a man. Four, we will end unequal pay so women basketball players will earn as much as men even though no one watches what they’re doing. And first and foremost, I would like to announce that I’m resigning the presidency. Or isn’t it time yet?”
More satire from Andrew Klavan: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/democrats-vow-violence-and-chaos-will-continue-until-america-agrees-to-vote-for-them-satire">Democrats Vow Violence And Chaos Will Continue Until America Agrees To Vote For Them</a>
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Biden Says Women Are Treated Unfairly Despite Smelling So Great [Satire]

Satire

The legacy of both Nazi Germany and World War II has left a scar across our political and social psyche still visible to this day. Seventy-five years after Allied forces saved Europe from the bloody grasp of tyranny, we still use the crimes of the Nazis as a baseline for measuring unimaginable evil. One of the most appalling labels which can be applied to anyone in the political space is still “Nazi” or “fascist,” and such labels have become an effective arrow in the Left’s sheath of ad hominem attacks against conservatives.
In addition to the understandable horror associated with the label of Nazism or fascism, references to the Holocaust often provide the “shock factor” cherry on the Left’s cake of hyperbole. One such obscene example was provided by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), who <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/ocasio-cortez-trump-running-concentration-camps-ryan-saavedra">compared</a> illegal immigrant detention centers to concentration camps.
“I want to talk to the people that are concerned enough with humanity to say that we should not that ‘Never Again’ means something and that the fact that concentration camps are now an institutionalized practice in the home of the free is extraordinarily disturbing and we need to do something about it,” said the Democratic congresswoman.
Unfortunately, those who are willing to cheapen the memory of murdered Jews for political gain — even <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/aoc-faces-backlash-for-using-first-they-came-holocaust-poem-in-defense-of-omar">evoking</a> the memory of the Holocaust in an attempt to defend anti-Semites — do so from a position of both historical ignorance and moral fecklessness. While supposed “opponents” of tyranny, authoritarianism, and intolerance wring their hands while screaming “Never Again” in the faces of their enemies, they are ignoring the brutal fact that China is the Nazi Germany of not only our generation, but of the last half-century.
For months, the Chinese government have reportedly been enacting oppressive policies against its Uyghur Muslim population which have all the hallmarks of The Final Solution. When the BBC’s Andrew Marr <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-53463403">confronted</a> China’s UK ambassador with authenticated footage of Uyghur Muslims being blindfolded and led to trains, Liu Xiaoming unconvincingly feigned ignorance and stated that “there is no such concentration camps in Xinjiang.”
It is alleged that up to one million Uyghur Muslims have been forcibly detained by the brutal Chinese communist government in so-called “re-education camps,” where they are subjected to forced labor, indoctrination, and sterilization.
For anyone with the slightest understanding of modern China’s political history, their shameless actions of dehumanization are nothing new. Between 1958 and 1962, Chairman Mao — one of history’s most prolific mass murderers — launched the “Great Leap Forward,” which resulted in tens of millions of deaths through starvation, beatings, torture, or suicide. Introduced in 1979 and remaining in place until 2015, the now infamous “One Child Policy” ushered in decades of appalling human rights violations, including forced abortions, sterilizations, and child abandonment.
Despite this clear and demonstrated history of a complete disregard for the value of human life, China is not viewed as the despicable geopolitical enemy they repeatedly prove themselves to be. They remain one of the five members of the United Nations Security Council, whose <a href="https://www.un.org/en/sections/un-charter/index.html">charter</a> ironically includes the desire “to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small.”
Unbelievably, China was even a member of the United Nations Human Rights Council in 2019, <a href="https://www.un.org/press/en/2019/ga12204.doc.htm">alongside</a> other supposedly human rights-promoting regimes such as Cuba, Saudi Arabia, and Iraq. The ethical worthlessness of the United Nations Human Rights Council can be explained by <a href="https://unwatch.org/un-israel-key-statistics/">noting</a> that between June 2006 and June 2016, 68 of its 135 resolutions singled out the Jewish State of Israel for condemnation. Not one of the 135 resolutions criticized China.
If “Never Again” means something, then we cannot remain silent as China openly enacts a <a href="https://www.amnesty.org/en/countries/asia-and-the-pacific/china/report-china/">regime of tyranny</a> upon its citizens. This begins by acknowledging that the United Nations and its various councils on “security” and “human rights” are meaningless vessels of willful ignorance, and therefore understanding that we, as citizens of free nations, are responsible for standing up for the value of human life.
Those who refuse to condemn China while claiming to abhor the crimes of Nazi Germany are nothing but opportunistic cowards who are simply unwilling to stand up for what is right and fight against what is wrong. “Never Again” is utterly meaningless among those who stand silent now as Uyghur Muslims are left helpless to face a similar fate as Jews under that monstrous regime.
More from Ian Haworth: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/haworth-5-of-bidens-most-significant-flip-flops">Biden’s 5 Most Significant Flip-Flops</a>
Ian G. Haworth is a conservative commentator who provides an honest, principled, and hard-hitting insight into our politics and culture from his unique perspective as a British immigrant to the United States. Ian hosts “The Ian Haworth Show” and “The Truth in 60 Seconds.” He is a regular columnist for Townhall.com, and his work has appeared in other outlets including The American Mind, The Washington Examiner, and The Federalist. Ian graduated from Oxford University, and now lives in California. Follow him on Twitter <a href="https://twitter.com/ighaworth">@ighaworth</a>
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Menu

MSNBC Producer Quits: ‘This Cancer Stokes National Division,’ Facts ‘Too Cumbersome’ For Audience

Cubans Rally In Kentucky To Support Restaurant Owner Who Called BLM Activists’ Demands ‘Mafia Tactics’

Woman Enraged At Man Not Wearing Mask At Outdoor Cafe Allegedly Throws Coffee In His Face

Stormy Daniels Takes Another Hit: Judge Tosses Libel Suit Against Trump

Ep. 534 - The Tyranny Of Non-Contributing Ignoramuses

Ep. 1065 - Are We Now In A Covid Panic?

Ep. 590 - The Left Can’t Lose

#105 SpaceX Dragon Endeavour Returns to Earth w/ Jeremy

KHAN: When Compared To Hong Kong, These So-Called Protests Are Nothing More Than Cynical Tantrums

KLAVAN: Gaslight Nation

The Politics of C.S. Lewis

HAWORTH: 5 Ways Orwell’s ‘1984’ Perfectly Describes The American Left’s Quest For Power

EXCLUSIVE: Greg Gutfeld Gets Candid About His Rise To FOX Fame, Countering Cancel Culture

HAWORTH: Three Failures In Seth Rogen’s Criticism Of Israel

WALSH: John Lewis Memorial Services Highlights Arbitrary Double Standards Of Coronavirus Policies

EXCLUSIVE: Progressive Comic Judy Gold On Cancel Culture: The Left Is Eating Its Own

SHAPIRO: The Left’s Willingness To Tolerate Violence Should Frighten All Americans

SCHAEFFER: The Truth About The Black Lives Matter Organization

HAWORTH: The Difference Between Cancel Culture And Free Speech

WALSH: No, Police Are Not ‘Kidnapping’ People Off The Street. Stop Being Hysterical.

10 Bizarre Facts Surrounding Jeffrey Epstein

WALSH: Activist Teachers Say It’s Not Safe To Go Back To Work, While Many Attend Mass Protests

Biden Says Women Are Treated Unfairly Despite Smelling So Great [Satire]

HAWORTH: China Is Our Generation’s Nazi Germany

Read members only content for just 99¢

Menu

MSNBC Producer Quits: ‘This Cancer Stokes National Division,’ Facts ‘Too Cumbersome’ For Audience

Cubans Rally In Kentucky To Support Restaurant Owner Who Called BLM Activists’ Demands ‘Mafia Tactics’

Woman Enraged At Man Not Wearing Mask At Outdoor Cafe Allegedly Throws Coffee In His Face

Stormy Daniels Takes Another Hit: Judge Tosses Libel Suit Against Trump

Ep. 534 - The Tyranny Of Non-Contributing Ignoramuses

Ep. 1065 - Are We Now In A Covid Panic?

Ep. 590 - The Left Can’t Lose

#105 SpaceX Dragon Endeavour Returns to Earth w/ Jeremy

KHAN: When Compared To Hong Kong, These So-Called Protests Are Nothing More Than Cynical Tantrums

KLAVAN: Gaslight Nation

The Politics of C.S. Lewis

HAWORTH: 5 Ways Orwell’s ‘1984’ Perfectly Describes The American Left’s Quest For Power

EXCLUSIVE: Greg Gutfeld Gets Candid About His Rise To FOX Fame, Countering Cancel Culture

HAWORTH: Three Failures In Seth Rogen’s Criticism Of Israel

WALSH: John Lewis Memorial Services Highlights Arbitrary Double Standards Of Coronavirus Policies

EXCLUSIVE: Progressive Comic Judy Gold On Cancel Culture: The Left Is Eating Its Own

SHAPIRO: The Left’s Willingness To Tolerate Violence Should Frighten All Americans

SCHAEFFER: The Truth About The Black Lives Matter Organization

HAWORTH: The Difference Between Cancel Culture And Free Speech

WALSH: No, Police Are Not ‘Kidnapping’ People Off The Street. Stop Being Hysterical.

10 Bizarre Facts Surrounding Jeffrey Epstein

WALSH: Activist Teachers Say It’s Not Safe To Go Back To Work, While Many Attend Mass Protests

Biden Says Women Are Treated Unfairly Despite Smelling So Great [Satire]

HAWORTH: China Is Our Generation’s Nazi Germany

Read members only content for just 99¢

Don't miss a beat of our coverage.