Daily Wire Editor Emeritus <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/author/ben-shapiro" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Ben Shapiro</a> absolutely torched former President Joe Biden as his helicopter lifted up and finally flew away from Washington, D.C. 
In a post on <a href="https://x.com/realDailyWire/status/1881408765439996407">X</a> from The Daily Wire’s coverage of Trump’s historic <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/this-isnt-politics-rapper-nelly-defends-decision-to-perform-at-trumps-inaugural-ball" target="_blank" rel="noopener">inauguration</a>, Shapiro was joined by fellow Daily Wire hosts Matt Walsh, Michael Knowles, and Andrew Klavan as the panel watched and waved goodbye to Biden following his departure from Trump’s second inauguration ceremony where he once again was sworn-in as President of the United States.
<a class="c-link" href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?_gl=1*1lail3r*_gcl_aw*R0NMLjE3MzIyMDEyNDkuQ2owS0NRaUEwZnU1QmhEUUFSSXNBTVhVQk9JSkM0VnNsMFVreURxYXUxVWVEVWdOdjZkNzR2Y1pEeEZQeHVBcGl2R3BLaTdBMjVzT1p5TWFBdG1nRUFMd193Y0I.*_gcl_au*NDUxNDQ0NzYwLjE3MzY3ODI2NDY.*_ga*MTc2NzM0NDQ2NS4xNzI4OTA5Nzkx*_ga_CZKR9ZYKJP*MTczNjk1NzYwMy4zNDAuMS4xNzM2OTU3NzE2LjYwLjAuMA.." target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-stringify-link="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?_gl=1*1lail3r*_gcl_aw*R0NMLjE3MzIyMDEyNDkuQ2owS0NRaUEwZnU1QmhEUUFSSXNBTVhVQk9JSkM0VnNsMFVreURxYXUxVWVEVWdOdjZkNzR2Y1pEeEZQeHVBcGl2R3BLaTdBMjVzT1p5TWFBdG1nRUFMd193Y0I.*_gcl_au*NDUxNDQ0NzYwLjE3MzY3ODI2NDY.*_ga*MTc2NzM0NDQ2NS4xNzI4OTA5Nzkx*_ga_CZKR9ZYKJP*MTczNjk1NzYwMy4zNDAuMS4xNzM2OTU3NzE2LjYwLjAuMA.." data-sk="tooltip_parent">CELEBRATE #47 WITH 47% OFF DAILYWIRE+ MEMBERSHIPS + A FREE $20 GIFT</a>
The video started out with a two-shot of Biden’s helicopter taking off from the Capitol in one shot, and the panel of DW hosts in the other.
Michael Knowles waved and said, simply, “See ya.&#8221; But it was Shapiro who had the line of the day with his farewell to Biden. 
&#8220;Wow, the last time a helicopter took off from this kind of a disaster was Vietnam,” the DW host said.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
&#8220;The last time a helicopter took off from this kind of a disaster was Vietnam.&#8221;<a href="https://twitter.com/benshapiro?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@benshapiro</a> waves goodbye to former President Joe Biden as his helicopter leaves the Capitol. <a href="https://t.co/Xx6bjCbWOh">pic.twitter.com/Xx6bjCbWOh</a>
— Daily Wire (@realDailyWire) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDailyWire/status/1881408765439996407?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 20, 2025</a></blockquote>
The video continued to show the helicopter in the distance as it flew on its way to Joint Base Andrews, where Biden made a few comments to supporters before he boarded <a href="https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/biden-farewell-remarks-inauguration/story?id=117903472">Air Force One</a> for the last time.
DW hosts also posted images and posts on their social media accounts saying goodbye to the ex-president.
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?_gl=1*1lail3r*_gcl_aw*R0NMLjE3MzIyMDEyNDkuQ2owS0NRaUEwZnU1QmhEUUFSSXNBTVhVQk9JSkM0VnNsMFVreURxYXUxVWVEVWdOdjZkNzR2Y1pEeEZQeHVBcGl2R3BLaTdBMjVzT1p5TWFBdG1nRUFMd193Y0I.*_gcl_au*NDUxNDQ0NzYwLjE3MzY3ODI2NDY.*_ga*MTc2NzM0NDQ2NS4xNzI4OTA5Nzkx*_ga_CZKR9ZYKJP*MTczNjk1NzYwMy4zNDAuMS4xNzM2OTU3NzE2LjYwLjAuMA.." target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?_gl%3D1*1lail3r*_gcl_aw*R0NMLjE3MzIyMDEyNDkuQ2owS0NRaUEwZnU1QmhEUUFSSXNBTVhVQk9JSkM0VnNsMFVreURxYXUxVWVEVWdOdjZkNzR2Y1pEeEZQeHVBcGl2R3BLaTdBMjVzT1p5TWFBdG1nRUFMd193Y0I.*_gcl_au*NDUxNDQ0NzYwLjE3MzY3ODI2NDY.*_ga*MTc2NzM0NDQ2NS4xNzI4OTA5Nzkx*_ga_CZKR9ZYKJP*MTczNjk1NzYwMy4zNDAuMS4xNzM2OTU3NzE2LjYwLjAuMA..&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1737430804505000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2S7KENhvlT7FAUHjrI0iAs">CELEBRATE #47 WITH 47% OFF DAILYWIRE+ MEMBERSHIPS + A FREE $20 GIFT</a>
Knowles shared a smiling selfie from D.C. and captioned his <a href="https://x.com/michaeljknowles/status/1881410089820778568">post</a>, “Bye, Joe!”
Shapiro <a href="https://x.com/benshapiro/status/1881346901314011391">wrote</a>, “Today ends the darkness of the failed Biden era. The dawn is here. <a href="https://x.com/hashtag/Trump2?src=hashtag_click">#Trump2</a>.”
The Daily Wire&#8217;s co-founder Jeremy Boreing <a href="https://x.com/JeremyDBoreing/status/1881335220093522350">said</a> that the “next four years are ours to seize. Seize them!”
“Today America starts the messy work of retiring at last the Obama Era,” Boreing wrote. “I say messy, because this isn&#8217;t going to be some light switch flip to utopia. Politics is not clean and simple.”
“Battles are won, but the war never ends,” he added. “There will be failures, compromises, and disappointments — and many new challenges we must face when today&#8217;s are overcome.  Donald Trump, like any Republican leader, will be a mixed bag.” 
“But you know who wouldn&#8217;t have been a mixed bag? Kamala Harris,” Boreing continued. She was just a bag. Trump&#8217;s victory alone is a deep blow to Obama&#8217;s legacy. And his victories, while they will not be absolute or perfect, are just beginning. He comes to office clearly energized, having learned from the successes and failures (and unrelenting attacks) of the last eight years. “
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/carrie-underwood-performs-america-the-beautiful-a-cappella-when-music-fails-at-trump-inauguration" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Carrie Underwood Performs ‘America The Beautiful’ A Cappella When Music Fails At Trump Inauguration</a>

Biden Leaves DC

Ben Shapiro Torches Biden As He Finally Leaves DC In Helicopter

Ben Shapiro

Celebrities

Daily Wire

Donald Trump

Entertainment

Inauguration

Joe Biden

Matt Walsh

Michael Knowles

Wheelchair symbol

The Gender Ideology Movement Is Now Exploiting The Disabled For Clout

Gender

Gender Identity

gender ideology

Instagram

Leftists

LGBTQ

Opinion

Social Media

transgender surgery

Twitter

WPATH

If you aren’t on X — or Twitter, if you insist on deadnaming it — you will often be surprised to learn about the kinds of things people are arguing about on that platform. In many cases, the debates do not resemble anything that anyone outside of the site is talking about. These debates are often insular and parochial. Groups of people will get into heated disputes that last sometimes for weeks or months or longer, and yet which have no relevance beyond the confines of the platform itself.
I’ll give just one example of millions. Among Right-wingers on X, there has been a long running and quite tedious quarrel over the term “Woke Right.” Various groups of conservatives are accusing each other of being “Woke Right,” as they debate what the term means, and whether it describes anything real. I don’t know where this “Woke Right” idea comes from, but I do know that I’ve never heard a single soul in the three dimensional, physical world ever use the phrase or express any opinion on it one way or another. There are relatively prominent conservatives on X who have spent months locked in combat over a concept that has no real political or cultural relevance whatsoever. Nobody cares about it but them. Needless to say, there are a great many examples of this sort of thing. And even less do I need to say that I have myself been guilty of arguing about things on X that nobody outside of the app cares about. I might even sometimes be the one starting the argument, admittedly.
However, not every debate on X is so trivial. Sometimes the conversation is relevant beyond social media. Sometimes it reflects what’s actually happening in the world. Sometimes — more often now in the Elon era — a debate on X is actually important. And this week there has been one of those kinds of arguments — another round of it, anyway, as this has been a long running dispute. It’s important enough to write about here. And it will lead me to a very crucial point that I want to make, especially for younger people.
The debate revolves around the economic situation that young people in particular are facing today. One side of the argument says that although it is a challenging landscape for young people who are just starting out in the world, the best thing they can do is get an entry level job somewhere and work their way up in the world from that starting point. The other side says that this “bootstraps” mentality is obsolete. Young people have been totally screwed. They can’t just get a job and work their way up. And, they say, telling a young person to go work some low paying customer service job is insulting and out of touch. The game is rigged. American jobs are being stolen en masse by foreigners. The American dream, says this side of the debate, is effectively dead. Therefore the old school “go out there and work your way up the ladder” approach is simply to antiquated to be useful.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-1516-the-matt-walsh-show">WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show</a></h3>
As you already guessed, out of the two camps, I tend to fall more into the former. Although the latter camp isn’t wrong about many of the fundamental points they’re making about the system as it&#8217;s currently constructed. I’ll get into that in a moment. 
First, let’s take a look at how this exchange is playing out. I think the debate may be best encapsulated by this. <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/christopher-rufo">Chris Rufo</a>, in a series of tweets a couple of days ago, <a href="https://x.com/realchrisrufo/status/1878855931318198421" target="_blank" rel="noopener">wrote the following</a>:
<blockquote>Every generation has challenges. We currently have huge problems with the cost of housing and a splintering culture, but the economy is strong, incomes have never been higher, trades are hiring apprentices straight out of high school, and tech has enabled a wave of entrepreneurship and high-income &#8220;email jobs&#8221; from anywhere on Earth. We should remember that the Boomers, whatever their faults, had to make their way in a much poorer America and had to navigate war, stagflation, recession, and high interest rates. It&#8217;s never a cakewalk. We should work to provide opportunity for our kids, but should also remind them to be grateful for the opportunities they have. I didn&#8217;t make $50,000 a year or own a car until I was 30, then, after years of struggle in a creative field, things paid off. I could live in Seattle or New York or DC, but choose to live in a small town. It&#8217;s all a tradeoff, and one can make a good life in almost any metro area in the US.</blockquote>
In a follow up, he posted a job listing from Panda Express:
<blockquote>This is basically &#8220;full employment.&#8221; The Panda Express near my house is offering $70k/yr plus benefits for the assistant manager. You can make $100k/yr working at Chipotle for a few years and working up to store manager.</blockquote>
A prominent account that goes by the handle &#8220;Bronze Age Pervert&#8221; responded in a way that I think captures the general attitude of the other side of this argument. 
He wrote:
<blockquote>This is an absurd thing to post. This environment is the worst in decades and maybe ever in America to build wealth through any normal career. It’s the worst work environment and worst prospects for wealth accumulation ever. For a young person it’s next to impossible in fact even with the best degrees and “elite” job. It’s absurd and a joke to see conservative pundits, who work as writers and commentators in media and aren’t frankly exemplars of Protestant capitalist enterprise recommend working at Chipotle and UPS for a few smart young right wing men who are deploring decades-long trends. Maybe you’ll care to also give them advice on manning up and marrying a local sweet girl/highschool sweetheart.</blockquote>
The debate spiraled from there. A writer named Aaron McIntyre agrees with Bronze Age Pervert. He posted: 
<blockquote>If you are worried about Andrew Tate&#8217;s influence on young men telling them to climb the fast food ladder probably isn&#8217;t the move.</blockquote>
Another commentator named Scott Greer chimes in with a similar sentiment: 
<blockquote>Conservatives wonder why young men turn to Andrew Tate when they tell the same demographic to be content with fast food work and marrying much-older single moms.</blockquote>
Someone else gave his perspective. He said that it is possible for a young person to get started and succeed even in this tough environment. He offered the example of his own 22-year-old son, who he said has a job at UPS making $70,000 a year. He’s about to marry his girlfriend who is ten years older.
To that, someone else, in a post that has 27,000 likes, said: 
<blockquote>Poor kid is grinding, about to marry a 32 year old, living in his dad’s basement, stuck in a dead end job. He will likely never have kids or own a home. Imagine how out of touch you have to be to post this proudly. This is losing. But boomer dad imagines everything is ok.</blockquote>
Mike Cernovich is on the other side. What we might call the bootstraps camp. He thinks — and so do I — that work is not supposed to be fun. It’s not even necessarily going to be fulfilling. But you have to do it because that’s life and always has been. He wrote: 
<blockquote>You’re supposed to hate your job. That’s why it’s a job. Someone pays you because they don’t want to do it. Most of us had s*** jobs. It’s nothing special. You’re not a snowflake. Fight Club and Office Space covered this decades ago. Work sucks. This isn’t new.</blockquote>
But it’s this reply to that post that I think best captures the essence — and the fatal flaw — in the, I guess, anti-bootstraps position. Someone responded: 
<blockquote>The reason why jobs were worth it is that you could afford a home in a nice high trust society and support a family. Why do it now? I will not be reduced to an f-ing serf.</blockquote>
Jobs are not worth it, he says. Jobs make you a serf. This is why it’s worth talking about this very online controversy. It’s not just online. It seems clear to me that a lot of demoralized young people feel exactly this way. They think jobs aren’t worth it. There’s no point in even trying. They have it harder than anyone has ever had it. It’s hopeless. Everything is unfair. And so on. 
These young people are being encouraged down this hopeless road by people who are considered intellectuals on the right, like Bronze Age Pervert, who we recall said that today’s work environment is the worst ever — the worst ever, in history — and that it is “next to impossible” to become successful and accumulate wealth. They’re told by these supposed thought leaders that they should ignore anyone who even suggests that they start off in a low paying job working customer service or something similar. And a lot of young people — especially young men — have heeded this advice, to their own detriment.
So here’s what I want to say, after this very long preamble where I unfortunately had to give you a blow by blow account of a Twitter war. I acknowledge that young people face serious challenges starting out in the workforce. I can clearly see and do not deny that it is harder than it should be for a young man to get into a stable career, buy a house, and start a family. I agree that we are importing foreigners to take American jobs. That is hideously evil and unfair. I am in favor of any policy that puts an end to that scam. I agree with the anti-bootstrappers on that point. They will hear no argument from me.
Okay. Once we’ve agreed on that, what then? What is a young adult supposed to actually do tomorrow? This is the question that matters. It’s the question that, in these kinds of conversations, most people just skip over. It reminds me of my frequent debates with the Red Pillers and Manosphere where they declare that the dating scene is a disaster and young men have no hope of meeting a quality woman and building a stable family. My question to them is always the same: What do you want these young men to do then? What do you want them to actually do with their lives? Give up and die alone? What do you want them to do?
I ask that here as well: What should they do tomorrow? I’m not asking what the president should do or what congress should do or what government agencies should do. I’m asking what the actual individual human beings we’re talking about here — the newly minted young adults — should do. They will wake up in the morning and brush their teeth and eat breakfast — and then what? That young man who is 22-years-old and has no job. If you believe it is deeply insulting to suggest that he should go apply at Panda Express or UPS, what do you want him to do instead? What do you recommend? What is your plan?
<h3><a href="https://www.amiracist.com/?_gl=1*jtghwp*_gcl_au*ODQ1NjYzNTg2LjE3Mjg5MDk3OTE.*_ga*MTc2NzM0NDQ2NS4xNzI4OTA5Nzkx*_ga_CZKR9ZYKJP*MTczMDEyMDgwOS40OS4xLjE3MzAxMjA4MzkuMzAuMC4w" target="_blank" rel="noopener">MATT WALSH&#8217;S &#8216;AM I RACIST?&#8217; NOW STREAMING ON DAILYWIRE+</a></h3>
Complaining about it incessantly on Twitter is not a plan. Calling for policy solutions is fine and I agree that we should work on those. But what about tomorrow? What is the demoralized young person supposed to actually do in his life tomorrow? Don’t deflect. Don’t tell me about the H1-B program. I think we should abolish it. I don’t want to import any foreign labor at all. But a young man who wakes up in the morning can’t abolish the H1-B program. That’s not something he can accomplish tomorrow. So what should he do? Should he post about abolishing it? Fine. That takes about 60 seconds. Let’s give him 30 minutes for a series of tweets about H1-B visas. Okay. What next? How&#8217;s he spending the rest of his day? If you have no answer to that question, then your contribution to this conversation is worthless. You have nothing of value to offer to this young man.
Here’s what I say. I say that he must get up onto his feet in spite of it all and begin to pursue his goals one small step at a time. He must get the best job he possibly can, which will almost certainly not be a very good job or a very fun job. But he is not in a position where he can afford to worry about what is fun. He has to work as hard as he can to achieve what he can. He must gain experience and establish himself. And if he’s just starting out in the world, the best job is whatever job he can get. You have to start somewhere. And a job is better than no job.
He has a difficult road. Every young man in his position throughout the entire history of the Earth has had a difficult road. Life itself is a difficult road. Is his road more difficult than the road that young men of my generation had to walk? Perhaps. I entered adult life right around the time of a great recession and housing market collapse. It wasn’t exactly an easy path. I worked many awful customer service jobs that I hated with every fiber of my being. My hatred of them fueled me even more. I was more determined to become successful so that I would never again have to work the kind of job where you wear a name tag and get paid by the hour. But I had to work those jobs in order to get to a point where I didn’t have to work those jobs. That’s how it goes. So I am not recommending that anyone do anything that I have not already done. Is it harder now? Maybe. Is it harder than it was for the Boomers when they were just starting out? Probably, although I think the comparison is overstated.
Is it the hardest ever? Is a young person in America today facing “next to impossible odds” and unprecedented hardship? Of course not. That is an absurd suggestion. If you are a 22-year-old man today, you may have it a bit harder than your parents and grandparents, but that is as far as it even theoretically goes. World history did not begin in 1955. No matter what, you and I and our parents all had it and have it easier than the vast majority of human beings who have ever existed on the planet. We are all in the top 1% of the easiest lives ever lived. Which is why, even with all of our problems, you wouldn’t want to live anywhere else on the planet today. And if you had a time machine, the farthest you might want to go back is the middle of the 20th century and no farther. And if you did go back even that far, you would almost certainly discover that it was not the cakewalk you imagine it to be.
<h3><a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?_gl=1*1lail3r*_gcl_aw*R0NMLjE3MzIyMDEyNDkuQ2owS0NRaUEwZnU1QmhEUUFSSXNBTVhVQk9JSkM0VnNsMFVreURxYXUxVWVEVWdOdjZkNzR2Y1pEeEZQeHVBcGl2R3BLaTdBMjVzT1p5TWFBdG1nRUFMd193Y0I.*_gcl_au*NDUxNDQ0NzYwLjE3MzY3ODI2NDY.*_ga*MTc2NzM0NDQ2NS4xNzI4OTA5Nzkx*_ga_CZKR9ZYKJP*MTczNjk1NzYwMy4zNDAuMS4xNzM2OTU3NzE2LjYwLjAuMA.." target="_blank" rel="noopener">CELEBRATE #47 WITH 47% OFF DAILYWIRE+ MEMBERSHIPS + A FREE $20 GIFT</a></h3>
None of this diminishes the difficulties that you, as a young person, are currently experiencing. I only mean to put it in context. The context is important. Because if you think that nobody has ever had it harder than you, you may be justified in wondering whether success is simply impossible in your case. After all, no one has ever succeeded against odds so great as what you are facing. But the point is that many millions of people have succeeded against odds many times greater. This should inspire you, not offend you. Either way, my message to the young man is that he has to get up and walk. Even if he did have the hardest life anyone has ever lived on this or any other planet. Still I would say, well then, get up and move forward. What else are you going to do? Lie down and die?
My attitude is condemned by some Right-wingers whose doomerism has now descended to a point where they will call you a traitor for suggesting that a young man has any agency at all in his life. They want to hear nothing but misery porn and hopelessness. Anything else makes you a Boomer cuck. That’s because they don’t actually give the slightest damn about the young people they pretend to be speaking for.
Instead we end up with the “solution” (which I’ve seen repeated in different forms countless times) offered by the commenter I mentioned earlier. Jobs aren’t “worth it,” he says. He will not be a serf. Instead he will, presumably, live off of the government or his parents. But here’s the problem: that’s not how you escape being a serf. That’s how you become one. You are volunteering for a life of failure and servitude. Working at Panda Express is beneath you, but to eat it for lunch on your dad’s dime because you refuse to support yourself is not beneath you?
That makes no sense.
So again I ask: what is your plan? What are you going to do tomorrow? Some people like to mock the “bootstraps” mentality but they have given young people precisely zero alternatives. They have not given them any idea of what they should do tomorrow. And to me that is the most important and useful question here. What should you do tomorrow? My answer is simple. Tomorrow you should get up, put on your shoes, and get started.

North Carolina Works Job And Resource Fair Ahead Of Initial Jobless Claims

The Real Crisis Young Men Are Facing Today

employment

Gen Z

Inflation

male

Unemployment

Woke Culture

Work environment

The online prostitution website OnlyFans has been in the news quite a lot recently. Last week a prominent OnlyFans prostitute went viral for propositioning a Five Guys employee while he was on the clock at the burger restaurant. Fortunately, the young man kept his dignity and turned her down.
This week, the same predatory degenerate — I think we should treat these people like mass shooters and try not to use their names, when possible— has now claimed that she set a “world record” by having sex with 1,000 men in a 24-hour period. Actually it was 1,057. Far be it from me to deprive her of that extra 57 strands of gonorrhea she likely contracted.
Here she is talking about her big accomplishment:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
OF Bonnie Blue says she broke the World Record by sleeping with 1,057 men in 12 hours.
I don’t think that’s an achievement… <a href="https://t.co/OOvLtZHlAx">pic.twitter.com/OOvLtZHlAx</a>
&mdash; Defiant L’s (@DefiantLs) <a href="https://twitter.com/DefiantLs/status/1878895706947355081?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 13, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
You often hear people, especially conservatives, say that they feel sorry for women like this. I have to admit I don’t. I reserve all of my sympathy for whoever owns the AirBnB they used for this stunt. You’ll have to go in there with hazmat suits to fumigate that room.
Now, you may remember a few weeks ago the story of the OnlyFans prostitute who had sex with one hundred men. These are not the same people. That woman also planned to jump in bed with a thousand men, but she was apparently beaten to the punch. There is now an arms race among cyber hookers to see who can have sex with the most men in a day. Eventually someone is going to figure out a way to crack a million, which will be a pace of about 11 men a second. I don’t see how that’s physically possible right now, but someone will figure it out. This insatiable quest for sexual self-debasement will be the primary driver of scientific and technological advancement in the future, I have no doubt.
Needless to say, business over at OnlyFans is thriving. Back in the fall, it was reported that the website’s revenue for the previous year had cracked $1.3 billion. They are generating all of that money from the approximately 300 million “fan” accounts on the site. But the “fans” are all there for the hookers, or as OnlyFans refers to them: creators. This euphemism makes no sense, of course, because these women aren’t creating anything. They are selling their bodies — that which has already been created, by God Almighty — to the lowest bidder. They are profiting from their own degradation and humiliation. This is not an act of creation, but of destruction — self-destruction.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/mws-ep-1514-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show</a></h3>
But whatever you call these women, how many are there? According to recent reports, there are currently about 1.4 million American women producing pornography for OnlyFans. 1.4 million. That number is undoubtedly a severe undercount. It doesn’t count all the women who “created” on OnlyFans in the past. And it doesn’t count the women who use other platforms to sell their bodies. All in all, it’s impossible to know exactly how many women in this country have elected to become prostitutes. We only know that the number, whatever it is, is well into the millions.
This is a truly unprecedented circumstance. Prostitution itself is not new or unprecedented. It is the world’s oldest profession, as the saying goes. And there’s nothing necessarily new about having such a high percentage of women in a given population turning to prostitution to make a living. You could almost certainly find more per capita prostitutes in most third world countries today. Historically, it’s thought that something like 1 in 5 women in 18th century London were prostitutes — 20% of the female population. There are a lot of OnlyFans “creators.” But there aren’t that many, percentage-wise. So the sheer numbers do not reveal the full scope of this problem.
As I tried to explain a few days ago, although prostitution has always been prevalent in basically all human societies, in one form or another, it has almost always been the province of young, poor, desperate women. You would have to drive down to the sections of the city where these women congregated. That’s because prostitution was not a part of polite, mainstream society. It was kept out on the fringes, in the shadows, in the dank, dark places where normal people would never want to go.
That is all changing now, and very rapidly. Suddenly, prostitution has become a career option, or a way to earn extra spending cash, for middle class and upper middle class women. The kinds of women who would never stand on a physical street corner now have the opportunity to sell their bodies on a virtual street corner. And a depressing, even terrifying, number of women have jumped at that chance. Some of them have even become multi-millionaires in the process. That is another thing that separates old fashioned prostitution from the newer variety. There are OnlyFans “creators” making $20 or $30 million a year. The highest paid star running backs in the NFL don’t make that much.
That’s not to say that most of the hookers on OnlyFans are raking in millions. The sad reality is that the vast majority are debasing and dehumanizing themselves for the sake of a few hundred bucks a month at most. They could earn as much selling homemade candles on Etsy. They could earn significantly more if they went out and got real jobs. Instead they choose to become masturbatory aides for random, unseen men. And in return they make only enough money to feed their Starbucks habit. It is hard to imagine something more pathetic than that.
But even this does not fully capture the width and breadth of this crisis. It’s not just that so many women are becoming prostitutes. And it’s not just that women who have many other options are choosing to be prostitutes anyway. It’s that, through platforms like OnlyFans, prostitution — or “sex work,” as it is euphemistically called — is now mainstream. It is a part of popular culture in a way that it never was before. It has been validated, accepted, and therefore elevated, so that prostitution is not just a common practice, but a conventional one. Prostitution may be the oldest profession but it was never considered a “normal” one. Until now.
<h3><a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">JOIN THE MOVEMENT IN &#8217;25 WITH 25% OFF DAILYWIRE+ ANNUAL MEMBERSHIPS WITH CODE DW25</a></h3>
This didn’t happen out of the blue. The stage was set over the course of decades, with the proliferation of internet pornography. Nearly all of the moral guardrails around sex were torn down and replaced with a flimsy, woefully insufficient consent-based moral structure which says that anything is permissible so long as both parties verbally agree to it. But it turns out that just because both parties agree to something, that doesn’t make the thing good, or acceptable, nor does it mitigate the harm done by it. If you sacrifice your dignity while robbing someone else of theirs, it doesn’t matter that you consented to it. A thing is not dignified merely because it was done on purpose, with the willful acquiescence of all parties.
Most of all, we have removed shame from society. At least we have removed it from the things that are actually shameful. History shows that we can put an end to pretty much any type of conduct, or drive it into the shadows and out of public view so that very few people engage in it, simply by using shame. We stopped shaming whorish behavior, and now we have soccer moms turning to prostitution for some extra spending money. One follows from the other.
50 years ago, around half of all adults in the country smoked cigarettes. Now that number is down to about 10%. We have cast cigarette smokers out to the edges of society, and this has been accomplished largely through shame and social pressure. Our culture has relentlessly demonized cigarettes as disgusting, dangerous, and low class, and as a result cigarettes went from cool and mainstream to obnoxious and odious. It used to be that you could smoke cigarettes anywhere. Now cigarette smokers are given an eight foot wide box outside, 100 feet from entrance of any building. Society is more welcoming of sex offenders than cigarette smokers at this point.
Now, I think the anti-cigarette campaigns are quite overdone and hysterical. My point is only that when a behavior is targeted and shamed — even an addictive one — you will end up with less of it, and when it does happen, it will happen out of view, on the margins, where shameful things belong.
We cannot get rid of prostitution entirely. It will always be one of the unsightly barnacles that attaches itself to the hull of civilization. But that’s what it should be. A slimy, crustaceous thing clinging to the outside of the ship, below the water line. Not sitting up on deck, reclining on a beach chair in full view, while the wait staff serves it margaritas.
<h3><a href="https://www.amiracist.com/?_gl=1*jtghwp*_gcl_au*ODQ1NjYzNTg2LjE3Mjg5MDk3OTE.*_ga*MTc2NzM0NDQ2NS4xNzI4OTA5Nzkx*_ga_CZKR9ZYKJP*MTczMDEyMDgwOS40OS4xLjE3MzAxMjA4MzkuMzAuMC4w" target="_blank" rel="noopener">MATT WALSH&#8217;S &#8216;AM I RACIST?&#8217; NOW STREAMING ON DAILYWIRE+</a></h3>
This kind of behavior should be shamed. That goes for the customers, the men. Most people aren’t hesitant to call them out, nor should they be. But it also goes for the women. The women who choose this lifestyle. They are not resorting to it out of desperation, or forced into it. We should look at that choice with disgust and contempt, not acceptance and understanding. We should treat it with shame. Which is the primary reason why OnlyFans and all similar platforms should be outlawed. Prostitution is already illegal in most jurisdictions. It makes no logical sense that prostitution should be legal only if it is done with a camera and sold for a subscription. Why should the more accessible version of the thing be legal? If anything, it should be the other way around. Though I prefer for both versions to be banned. Would banning it stop women from selling their bodies online? No, not entirely. But it would go a long way towards ostracizing the behavior so that otherwise normal and financially comfortable people would not engage in it.
There is one side of the ideological divide that wants to actively normalize the most debased forms of human behavior. And the other side which, though not seeking to normalize it, has largely lost the wherewithal and appropriate sense of moral indignation to treat shameful things as shameful. Which is why the conversation around OnlyFans so often centers on how much pity we should have for the prostitutes, and how hard their lives must be, and the deep sadness you can see in their poor little puppy dog eyes. There is almost no one stating plainly what used to be commonly understood: that this kind of conduct is disgusting and reprehensible, and we are revolted by it. That message is harsh and impolite. It also happens to be true. It is honest. And if the recent history of our culture should have taught us anything, it’s that it is better to be honest than polite.

Woman getting ready to party.

This Is How We Stop The Festering Disease Called OnlyFans

OnlyFans

Pornography

Prostitution

Sex Workers

Women

There&#8217;s now a very noticeable pattern that plays out every time we witness a colossal failure on the national stage. It happened after the Secret Service allowed Donald Trump to get shot in the head in Pennsylvania. It happened after Harvard&#8217;s president was exposed for plagiarism, and after Kamala Harris lost the presidential election.
Here&#8217;s how it usually goes: Conservatives pointed out that DEI was involved in some way. And then everyone on the Left acted with shock and indignation at the mere suggestion that DEI might have backfired. 
DEI, they tell us, is an essential mandate that always adds value. It&#8217;s vital to every organization. And then, in the same breath, they tell us that DEI can&#8217;t possibly be related to any failure by any organization or government agency that practices DEI. In other words, DEI is either critically important or not important at all, depending on how things are going. 
As entire neighborhoods in Los Angeles are destroyed by fires, once again, we&#8217;re seeing this familiar pattern play out. As we talked about yesterday, conservatives have pointed out that DEI has infected every aspect of the government of Los Angeles, and in particular its Fire Department. And in response, as they usually do, the Left has insisted that DEI actually had nothing whatsoever to do with the fires, or the disastrous response to them. And they&#8217;re wagging their fingers at anyone who suggests otherwise.
Rolling Stone, in particular, was upset with my response to the wildfires. The published an article the other day <a href="https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/right-wingers-blame-los-angeles-fires-diversity-democrats-1235230047/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">entitled</a>, &#8220;RIGHT-WINGERS ARE BLAMING THE L.A. FIRES ON DIVERSITY.&#8221; Here&#8217;s <a href="https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/right-wingers-blame-los-angeles-fires-diversity-democrats-1235230047/">part of it</a>: &#8220;Climate-denying conservatives are instead blaming the devastation on California&#8217;s &#8216;woke&#8217; policies. &#8230; &#8216;Los Angeles deliberately set out to exclude white men from becoming firefighters, and now they don&#8217;t have enough firefighters to prevent their city from burning to the ground,&#8217; wrote right-wing commentator Matt Walsh in one post endorsed by Elon Musk. &#8216;DEI is a cancer that destroys everything it touches.'&#8221;
Now, first of all, I had to look up who wrote this article, because it reads like something our PR department would come up with. The whole article is just a series of quotes — from myself, Alex Jones, Elon Musk, Megyn Kelly, and so on. And sure enough, the author is one Nikki McCann Ramirez, a former Media Matters staffer. She&#8217;s apparently found another organization that&#8217;s willing to pay her to write articles about my tweets, after Elon Musk sued Media Matters into the ground.
The only original contribution that Nikki Ramirez made to the article is this line of commentary at the end. It reads: &#8220;There&#8217;s no evidence that the fire department&#8217;s push for diversity has any effect on its ability to fight fires.&#8221;
It&#8217;s a line that made me realize we need to do another deep-dive on DEI in the Los Angeles Fire Department, because it&#8217;s completely false. But a lot of people on the Left are still repeating it. And they&#8217;re repeating this line because they think it&#8217;s safe. In their minds, it&#8217;s impossible to find a &#8220;smoking gun&#8221; that proves DEI leads directly to failure. After all, DEI is a bureaucratic system. And the whole point of bureaucracy is to make it impossible to assign blame.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/mws-ep-1512-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show</a></h3>
Unfortunately for Rolling Stone and the rest of these activists, the leaders of the Los Angeles Fire Department haven&#8217;t been subtle about their DEI policies, and the impact these policies have on their job performance. In fact, they&#8217;ve actually been quite direct about it. Here&#8217;s a video of Deputy Chief Kristine Larson, the head of the Fire Department&#8217;s &#8220;Equity and Human Resources Bureau.&#8221; You may have seen a shortened version of this video online, because it&#8217;s going viral. I found a longer, unedited version of it. And it&#8217;s worth watching because it implicates both the LAPD and the LAFD. And it also includes the context, to the extent you need it. Here it is:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="001 DEI Responders" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/bnkHLJtjdB0?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
&nbsp;
It looks like some kind of AI-generated parody, but it&#8217;s not. So let&#8217;s review what we just saw.
The first claim from the Deputy Fire Chief is that, when you have a medical emergency or when your house is on fire, all you care about is seeing first responders who &#8220;look like you.&#8221; You don&#8217;t care if they&#8217;re good at their jobs. You&#8217;re not worried about their CPR certifications, or their ability to put out fires. Instead, the most important thing is the appearance of the firefighter — meaning their skin color and gender. And the LAPD sergeant agrees with that.
This isn&#8217;t a claim that needs to be broken down and dissected in a million different ways. But just for fun, let&#8217;s do that.
First of all, let&#8217;s assume this is true. Let&#8217;s assume that, when white people call 911 in Los Angeles because their house is burning down, they really don&#8217;t want to see black firefighters show up. So when a team of all-white firefighters show up, in Kristine Lawson&#8217;s worldview, it would be totally normal and appropriate for the white homeowner to say, &#8220;Thank God they didn&#8217;t send any black firefighters.&#8221; After all, he wants to see people who look like him. What&#8217;s wrong with that?
Of course, what Kristine Larson really means is that non-white firefighters should want to see non-white firefighters respond to their house. But there&#8217;s still a big problem here. I&#8217;d wager a lot of money that there&#8217;s not a single black person on the planet who would react with relief or joy, if they called 911 and someone like Kristine Larson waddled up to their door. That would be a moment of sheer panic for anyone, regardless of skin color. That would be the moment they knew that their life was over.
But even if we assume that black people demand to be saved by overweight black lesbian firefighters like Kristine Larson, there&#8217;s still another problem with Larson&#8217;s explanation, which is this: How exactly would dispatchers know what race of firefighters to send to a particular call? Should the dispatcher demand to know the callers&#8217; race? Should they dispatch race-matching fire crews? Is any of this happening right now in Los Angeles? By the logic of the Deputy Fire Chief, it should be happening.
And then, of course, comes the second part of the video, in which Larson responds to someone who&#8217;s worried that, as an overweight black lesbian, she won&#8217;t be able to lift a man and remove him from a house fire. Larson&#8217;s response is that the man shouldn&#8217;t have put himself in that position in the first place.
She couldn&#8217;t be making it any clearer that DEI hiring compromises the fire department&#8217;s ability to do its job. She thinks it&#8217;s a laugh line, apparently. This is how DEI hires at the highest levels of the Los Angeles Fire Department are talking about the impact of DEI on their jobs.
But Larson has never been disqualified or punished in any way. She has a job paying well over $300,000 a year at the Los Angeles Fire Department, in which she enforces various equity mandates while she laughs at people who ask why she&#8217;s so overweight. And part of that job apparently entails weeding out alleged &#8220;bigots&#8221; in the ranks of the Los Angeles Fire Department. Watch:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="002 Chief Kristine Larson" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Zy91lf-YNnY?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
&nbsp;
This is reminiscent of Lloyd Austin&#8217;s big plan to purge the Pentagon of &#8220;extremist white supremacists,&#8221; by which he meant, white people who support Donald Trump and refuse to take the COVID shot. It&#8217;s the kind of thing that no public agency in the United States should be doing, for about a million reasons.
First of all, the idea of &#8220;racism&#8221; in fire departments and police departments has been stretched beyond all recognition, to the point that it&#8217;s completely meaningless. As we discussed earlier this week, fire departments all over the country are getting sued right now for &#8220;racism&#8221; because they attempt to enforce basic standards of literacy and competence in the admissions process.
Secondly, this is a department that&#8217;s now very short of manpower during a historic crisis. Barring extreme circumstances, they should not be weeding out any competent firefighters right now. The Los Angeles Fire Department should be focused on retaining as many firefighters as possible — not firing them for liking an offensive meme or something. And if you doubt that, take a look at Ferguson, Missouri, or Minneapolis, or Baltimore. Have any of these cities become safer, after the BLM revolution? Of course not.
The real purpose of all of these purges is to punish anyone who thinks an unapproved thought that also happens to be true. They don&#8217;t want people to make obvious observations like this one: Women shouldn&#8217;t be firefighters at all. Any effort to include more women is by definition an effort to make the fire department less equipped and less capable.
The same is true for police departments, which are being gutted all over the country in the name of equity. Just this week, the Maryland State Police agreed to a $3 million settlement with Joe Biden&#8217;s DOJ over their hiring practices. As one local news station <a href="https://www.wbaltv.com/article/maryland-state-police-agree-27-million-settlement-civil-rights-lawsuit/63381102" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reports</a>: &#8220;The lawsuit claimed that the Maryland Department of State Police violated Title 7 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 when it used a certain physical fitness test and a certain written test to hire entry-level troopers. The lawsuit claimed the tests disqualified more women and African American applicants than others and were not job-related.&#8221;
In other words, in the world of policing, physical fitness and literacy are no longer &#8220;job-related,&#8221; apparently. This is how many police and fire departments now operate. They know they have to hire and promote incompetent people.
This is the kind of deliberate sabotage that has directly contributed to the disaster that&#8217;s unfolding in Los Angeles. Instead of spending every moment thinking about protecting their state, the leadership of California has been busy appointing &#8220;equity&#8221; overseers. So, when a disaster occurs, they have no idea what to do.
That led to this clown-car performance from Gavin Newsom yesterday. He told a constituent he was on the phone with Joe Biden. Then, when she asked to talk to Joe Biden, he admitted he didn&#8217;t have cell service. Watch:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="003 Woman Confronts Newsom" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/WVF3R_8k3no?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
&nbsp;
If thousands of people weren&#8217;t having their lives destroyed right now, the incompetence would be pretty amusing. Instead, given the staggering nature of this catastrophe, it’s infuriating. And people are very, very tired of this kind of thing. They want competence to make a comeback.
That would mean the Los Angeles Fire Department would have to fire some overweight lesbians who are making $300,000 a year. But it would also mean that, the next time a massive wildfire engulfs the city, Los Angeles might actually have water in the fire hydrants. They might have a mayor who&#8217;s on the scene, coordinating a response, instead of pandering in Africa. They might have enough firefighters to put out the blaze.
That&#8217;s a turn of events that outlets like &#8220;Rolling Stone magazine&#8221; desperately wants to prevent. But at this point, it&#8217;s looking more likely than ever. DEI has been tried, and it has failed in spectacular fashion. Now it&#8217;s time for competent people to take over — even if they happen to be white men. The residents of Los Angeles might not understand much, but they understand survival. And at this point, that&#8217;s exactly what survival will take.

TOPSHOT-US-WEATHER-FIRE

How DEI Is Destroying L.A.’s Fire Department

How DEI Is Destroying L.A.'s Fire Department

California

Firefighter

Fires

Gavin Newsom

Karen Bass

Los Angeles

In a sweeping interview, Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk and Daily Wire editor emeritus Ben Shapiro discussed “Identity Crisis,” a new film from both organizations that unmasks the “graphic brutality” of so-called gender transitions.
“Identity Crisis,” which premiered today and is free to stream on X through the weekend, scrutinizes the radical gender ideology movement, with a sharp focus on the societal failures enabling the continued mutilation of children.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/wp-admin/post.php?post=856247&amp;action=edit">WATCH THE FULL INTERVIEW HERE</a></h3>
Kirk says the film is an &#8220;accompaniment&#8221; to Matt Walsh’s “What Is A Woman?” and it will delve deep into “one of the moral crimes of the century.”
“This goes deep into the severity and the graphic brutality and the medieval nature of what transitioning actually is,” Kirk said.
The trans agenda, according to Kirk, “cloaks itself on its surface … as live and let live.”
“But it&#8217;s never been about that,” he continued. “Instead, it&#8217;s like, ‘No, allow me to propagandize your 13-year-old child, and then put them under general anesthesia and chop off their breasts because it&#8217;s good for them.’&#8221;
Shapiro says that the same “Normie Revolution” that swept Donald Trump into office could bring about a change to the transgender status quo.
“Because the Democrats have lost their minds and because they&#8217;ve swung so far to the Left, what that means is that what we are actually seeing is something that I&#8217;ve described as the ‘Normie Revolution,’&#8221; Shapiro said. “What we&#8217;re seeing is, it is now subversive to just be normal.”
In Trump’s second term, Kirk hopes to build support for a Department of Justice crackdown on hospitals and care centers that embrace “gender-affirming care” and perform sex-change surgeries on minors.
“This is one of the moral crimes of the century,” Kirk said. “We&#8217;re exposing it in this movie.”
“Identity Crisis” features interviews with activist Riley Gaines, detransitioner Chloe Cole, and author Dr. James Lindsay. It also documents the stories of parents and children who have been victimized by the transgender ideology.

Untitled design (4)

Charlie Kirk Tells Ben Shapiro ‘Identity Crisis’ Reveals The ‘Brutality’ Of Sex-Change Surgeries

Charlie Kirk

TPUSA

Transgender

The Daily Wire and Turning Point USA’s powerful new documentary scrutinizing the radical gender ideology movement, “<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/videos/identity-crisis-official-trailer" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Identity Crisis</a>,” is now available for free on X.
The documentary exposes the societal failures enabling the continued mutilation of children and features raw interviews with victims of the movement, including individuals who have detransitioned themselves, and parents in the throes of a familial transgender battle.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Parents silenced. Kids manipulated. Doctors profiting. &#8216;Identity Crisis&#8217; tells the stories the mainstream media won’t.
Watch &#8216;Identity Crisis&#8217; for FREE on X for 72 hours. <a href="https://t.co/vpJ77XBony" target="_blank" rel="noopener">pic.twitter.com/vpJ77XBony</a>
— Daily Wire (@realDailyWire) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDailyWire/status/1877716776274075718?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw" target="_blank" rel="noopener">January 10, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
“Identity Crisis dives headfirst into what was one of the most pressing issues of the 2024 election, and we’re thrilled to partner with Turning Point USA to distribute this project that is rooted in shared values and a commitment to fearless storytelling,” Daily Wire Co-Founder and Co-CEO Jeremy Boreing said.
The film is inspired by Matt Walsh’s groundbreaking 2022 documentary, “<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/videos/what-is-a-woman" target="_blank" rel="noopener">What Is a Woman?</a>,” which also tackled culturally important gender issues.
“Daily Wire and Matt Walsh’s ‘What is a Woman?’ was a triumph that changed the cultural and political landscape in America. ‘Identity Crisis’ is the culmination,” TPUSA co-founder Charlie Kirk said. “TPUSA is honored to partner with DW to make sure as many moms, dads, grandparents and kids get to see this film in hopes of ending one of the great human rights crimes of our era, the medical mutilation of America’s children.”
Along with firsthand accounts from victims of the trans movement, “Identity Crisis” features key players fighting that movement, such as activist Riley Gaines, detransitioner Chloe Cole, and author Dr. James Lindsay. The film explores the shocking origins of the trans movement, specifically the disturbing work of Dr. Alfred C. Kinsey, whose “degenerate” <a href="https://x.com/MattWalshBlog/status/1569321827578560513" target="_blank" rel="noopener">experiments</a> on children also feature in “What Is A Woman?&#8221;
The gripping and at-times challenging documentary ends with a message of hope — and a call to action from one father, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/one-fathers-nightmare-battle-for-3-year-old-son-mom-is-raising-non-binary" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Harrison Tinsley</a>, putting up the fight of his life for his son.
“We’re at a crazy moment in history, and people are gonna look back: you&#8217;re going to be remembered as a coward, or someone who stood up to protect children. And I’m gonna stand up to protect children,” Tinsley says in the film. “And I want you to do that, too.”
“We need to be brave,” the father says.
&#8220;Identity Crisis” is <a href="https://x.com/realDailyWire/status/1877716776274075718">free on X</a> through the weekend. The film will be available exclusively on DailyWire+ beginning Monday, January 13.

IDC-MovieThumb

Daily Wire And TPUSA’s Powerful New Doc ‘Identity Crisis’ Now Streaming On X

What Is A Woman

Not long after Justin Trudeau became the prime minister of Canada in 2015, he made a big announcement. Without any prompting, Trudeau said something no other Canadian prime minister has ever said. He declared that Canada, as a nation, doesn&#8217;t really exist. He came out and casually admitted something Americans have known for a long time, which is that Canada is a fake country.
Speaking to a reporter with The New York Times, Trudeau <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/13/magazine/trudeaus-canada-again.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">explained</a> that, &#8220;There is no core identity, no mainstream in Canada. There are shared values &#8230; Those qualities are what make us the first postnational state.&#8221;
Yes, Canada is a &#8220;postnational state&#8221; with no &#8220;core identity.&#8221; That’s what he said. No wonder this guy is being forced to resign.
Of course, no one paid any attention to Trudeau&#8217;s comments at the time, because no one ever pays any attention to what&#8217;s happening in Canada. Nobody stepped up to offer Canadians a &#8220;nation&#8221; that they can call home. No one suggested that Canadians could indeed have a &#8220;core identity,&#8221; just like the rest of the world. Instead, we allowed our neighbors to the north to wallow in their own self-pity and apparent non-existence. Their identity crisis festered. As a result, after a decade of self-loathing, Canada is now predictably falling apart. Justin Trudeau has resigned, parliament has been suspended, and their whole government has basically collapsed. Canada is sputtering along, barely staying alive in the cold, like a stray cat that everyone ignores.
But there is some good news for Canadians. Finally, at long last, against all odds, they may soon have a &#8220;nation&#8221; to call their own. They may find the &#8220;core identity&#8221; that they&#8217;ve been seeking for so long.
Admittedly, this development will come with some trade-offs. Canadians will probably lose the right to vote. And they may have to start working jobs they don&#8217;t like — and which may not pay them anything. And we still won&#8217;t take them seriously. But none of that&#8217;s important right now, because the key point is that Canadians could soon become Americans — or at least, they could soon become vassals of Americans.
Here&#8217;s Donald Trump&#8217;s olive branch to the oppressed people of Canada from yesterday&#8217;s press conference, in case you missed it:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="001 Taking Canada" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/JhXTMomnFgA?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Trump went on to explain all of the obvious arguments in support of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/canadian-politicians-are-not-happy-with-trump-claiming-they-will-be-51st-state" target="_blank" rel="noopener">annexing Canada</a>. We provide them military support — worth hundreds of millions of dollars — and they <a href="https://www.farmprogress.com/management/does-canada-really-charge-a-270-tariff-on-milk-" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reward</a> us with an import tax on dairy products that goes as high as 270%. They&#8217;re supposedly good at hockey, but they haven&#8217;t won a Stanley Cup since 1993. They also don&#8217;t believe in free speech, to the point that they freeze the bank accounts of political dissidents. If we were talking about a Middle Eastern country, we would have already invaded by now — or at least launched some rockets.
But as you heard, Trump doesn&#8217;t plan on doing any of that with Canada. The plan right now is a humanitarian, economic takeover. That&#8217;s why, after the press conference, Trump posted these upbeat images of a unified North America, with Canada and the United States combined:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Trump is going OFF about Canada on Truth Social 🔥 <a href="https://t.co/uS0gXeaTM8">pic.twitter.com/uS0gXeaTM8</a>
&mdash; Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) <a href="https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1876789581292421175?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 8, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
As you can see, once you get rid of the imaginary line between Canada and the United States, the whole continent looks a lot cleaner. It&#8217;s obviously the way it&#8217;s supposed to be.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/mws-ep-1510-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show</a></h3>
But pretty much every Canadian politician disagrees, apparently. And in voicing their outrage, they&#8217;ve only made the whole situation even more entertaining (and more pathetic for Canada). Here for example is someone using the name &#8220;Jagmeet Singh.&#8221; At one point he was supposed to be the Canadian incarnation of Barack Obama. And last night he uploaded this video threatening the United States. Watch:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="003 Jagmeet Singh" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/y-ueQ-WVFNU?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
This was the sentiment all over Canada. Even the conservatives were talking like this, although they were a bit less aggressive. It&#8217;s all extremely difficult to understand, frankly. They’re just assuming that being conquered is automatically a bad thing. I mean, they’re complaining about our plans to conquer them and yet they haven’t even seen the labor camps we’ve built for them. They&#8217;re really spacious — very comfortable by labor camp standards. You’ll even get one whole meal a day, except on weekdays obviously. And yet they still whine. It&#8217;s yet more evidence that we&#8217;re dealing with ungrateful brats.
Just to underscore the power dynamic here — Canada&#8217;s dollar is worth about seventy cents right now. The government is issuing emergency payments to around a third of the population so that people can afford groceries. But Jagmeet Singh wants us to believe that Canada has economic leverage over the United States. They&#8217;re going to raise the import tax on milk another 100%, I guess. They&#8217;ll shut off our supply of maple syrup. They&#8217;ll play hockey even worse.
Not to be outdone, an even less popular politician in Canada — Elizabeth May of &#8220;The Green Party&#8221; — proposed a counter-offer to Donald Trump. She suggested that Canada might take California, Washington and Oregon from the United States, which apparently is supposed to be some kind of threat. Watch:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="004 Canada Taking States" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/y108g3oHr8k?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
So the pitch to people in California, Washington and Oregon is that, if they join Canada, they can get some Canadian healthcare. Now, I&#8217;ve ragged on those states quite a bit over the years. They&#8217;re all terribly run. They&#8217;re all over-taxed. They&#8217;re all examples of the worst excesses of Left-wing ideology. But even with all of that in mind, I&#8217;ve never wished Canadian healthcare on anyone living in those states. I don&#8217;t want to see them put to death whenever they get a headache, or feel a little depressed. But apparently Elizabeth May sees things differently.
And she seems serious enough about the offer. And, admittedly, a lot of people in those states may be on board with the idea. So let&#8217;s compromise. How about this: We’ll send you the people in all of those states, but we’re keeping the land. That seems like the definition of a win-win.
If you know anything about Elizabeth May, it&#8217;s an offer she&#8217;ll probably accept, because she&#8217;s a raging alcoholic who&#8217;s also completely incompetent. She&#8217;s most famous in Canada for getting so <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpOE59SinhE" target="_blank" rel="noopener">intoxicated</a> during a speech a few years ago that her own staff had to lead her off-stage, as she started playing music from her phone and praising war criminals. Here&#8217;s the end of that speech:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="005 May Press Gallery" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/BDS-tbuqkhw?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
The person she mentioned at the end of her speech is a terrorist who pleaded guilty to murdering a U.S. soldier. And that woman went on to lead the Canadian Green Party. So that&#8217;s the caliber of Canadian politicians that we&#8217;re dealing with here. All we have to do is get them drunk — or, more accurately, wait a few minutes until they get drunk — and then we can do whatever we want in these negotiations.
For what it&#8217;s worth, Elizabeth May wasn&#8217;t the only Canadian politician to come up with a counter-offer. Ontario&#8217;s governor, Doug Ford, is also in the &#8220;bargaining&#8221; stage of grief. Watch:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Premier Doug Ford makes Trump &quot;a counter-offer&quot; to buy Alaska and Minnesota in response to talk of merging with Canada:
&quot;He may be joking, but under my watch, that will never, ever happen.&quot; <a href="https://t.co/gGxB63FqaI">pic.twitter.com/gGxB63FqaI</a>
&mdash; The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) <a href="https://twitter.com/TPostMillennial/status/1876395512569507959?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 6, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
Again, there seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding here. No one is offering to &#8220;buy&#8221; Canada. Trump is proposing that we take it. But Doug Ford seems to think that we&#8217;re haggling over prices here. And he also seems to think Canada can afford to buy a U.S. state, which is more than a little suspect.
At the same time, as amusing as the idea of taking over Canada is, the plan that Trump is floating for other parts of the North American continent is, I think, a bit more serious with some very real economic and strategic implications. The main benefit of conquering Canada is that it would be really funny. It would be the first conquest in history launched primarily as a joke. But the idea that we should buy Greenland and take over the Panama Canal — while also being kind of funny — is still very serious. At one point during the press conference, Trump was asked to rule out the use of military force to take Greenland and the Panama Canal, and he refused. Watch:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Reporter: Can you assure the world that as you try to get control of Greenland and the Panama Canal, that you won&#39;t use military or economic coercion?
Trump: &quot;No.&quot; <a href="https://t.co/JlvCxi9jtQ">pic.twitter.com/JlvCxi9jtQ</a>
&mdash; Greg Price (@greg_price11) <a href="https://twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1876678817084801471?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 7, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
This answer caused a lot of wailing on the internet, but it&#8217;s the right answer. There&#8217;s no reason for us to rule out anything at this point, especially when our national security is implicated. It also puts you in a much stronger bargaining position if you don’t show your cards ahead of time. If we take over Greenland, we&#8217;d gain an ideal position for shooting down missiles from countries like China, Russia and North Korea. We&#8217;d also gain access to rare earth minerals that are useful for various military technologies, batteries and so on. Greenland is a massive piece of land on our continent that has basically nobody living on it. The actual population is about 56,000, which, to put that into perspective, is significantly less than the average capacity of a professional football stadium. Why shouldn’t we at least discuss the possibility of acquiring it?
<h3><a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">JOIN THE MOVEMENT IN &#8217;25 WITH 25% OFF DAILYWIRE+ ANNUAL MEMBERSHIPS WITH CODE DW25</a></h3>
And of course, the Panama Canal would give us control over one of the most important shipping lanes in the world. We&#8217;d have more opportunities to limit China&#8217;s advancement in our hemisphere, as well.Whatever you think about these ideas, they make a lot more sense than fighting proxy wars in Eastern Europe or the Middle East. The Panama Canal and Greenland are on our continent. They&#8217;re in our backyard. What happens there affects us a lot more than a border dispute 6,000 miles away.
And in case you needed another reason to support Trump&#8217;s proposals, take a look at CNN&#8217;s reaction to the press conference. Their jaws were on the floor. Watch:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Dana Bash is left in shock after Trump&#39;s news conference: 
&quot;Some new information about what he intends to do, or at the very least is not ruling out&#8230; including a military invasion to conquer Greenland, the Panama Canal and perhaps the annexation of the country of Canada.&quot; 🤣 <a href="https://t.co/nzDiAlMwog">pic.twitter.com/nzDiAlMwog</a>
&mdash; johnny maga (@_johnnymaga) <a href="https://twitter.com/_johnnymaga/status/1876694905159909466?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 7, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
As a general rule, the more enraged CNN becomes, the more you know you&#8217;re on the right track. And by that metric, we should take Greenland, the Panama Canal, and all of Canada immediately.
It&#8217;s not just about the well-documented economic and strategic benefits. There&#8217;s another important reason to follow through with this — which is that it signals our direction as a nation. A country that grows and acquires new land and pursues new opportunities is a living, thriving country. It&#8217;s a sign of a nation on the rise, rather than a nation on the decline.
Americans once pursued their manifest destiny into the wilderness and all the way to the pacific ocean. That’s how our country took its current shape. But most of that happened in the 19th century. In the 20th century, the drive to reach out into the unknown took the form of the space program and brought us all the way to the moon. Since then however, we’ve been in stasis, jogging in place. Liberal imperialism took over, as we tried to export liberal values to far flung corners of the world, attempting to impose them on people and cultures that had no interest in them, and never will. That was and still is a disaster. That’s not the kind of expansion we should pursue. But claiming new land on our own continent, in our own part of the world, for our own interests, to help our own country and our own people — that is an idea worth considering.
That&#8217;s also why Trump proposed changing the name of the &#8220;Gulf of Mexico&#8221; to the &#8220;Gulf of America&#8221; yesterday. It&#8217;s a proposal that would be unthinkable in Canada, where they&#8217;re busy apologizing for their own existence. But in a country that&#8217;s proud of its history, and that has a plan for the future, it makes sense. In fact, as I suggested yesterday, we should think about renaming the Moon to “the Moon of America.” It is ours, after all. We put our flag on it.
So where do we go from here? Will Greenland and the Panama Canal soon belong to us? Will Canada do the right thing, and submit to rule by the United States? Will they affirm their own potential for greatness, by being our serfs? Probably not. But you never know.
The feeling we have now is the feeling that a great country should have. A feeling that says: anything is possible.

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

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

Canada

Federal Government

Greenland

Humor

Mar-a-Lago

Panama Canal

Presidency

a wall rack of wine bottles.

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

Public Health 'Experts' Set The Stage For A New Prohibition

Alcohol

Cancer

Health

Marijuana

Surgeon General

It’s great to be back after a long Christmas break. Much has happened in the world since my last post. Today, however, I’d like to begin with a story that’s unfolding in New York. 
There’s one thing we know: Government officials, whether they&#8217;re elected politicians in this country or despots in the third world, do not like being reminded of their failures. This is why the greatest crime in any dictatorship is noticing. You aren’t supposed to notice things that are embarrassing to the ruling regime. It’s also why comedy and satire are banned in places like North Korea, just like they&#8217;re banned on late-night talk shows in this country. Petty, corrupt and ineffective people can&#8217;t stand it when their incompetence is exposed. They&#8217;re willing to take extreme measures to prevent that from happening. Right now, in the city of New York, we&#8217;re getting a very clear sense of what those &#8220;extreme measures&#8221; look like, in practice.
If you&#8217;ve seen the news lately, you know that the subway system is one of the most obvious and unavoidable signs of New York&#8217;s decline. It&#8217;s a monument to the many failures of the city government. As of late last year, ridership on New York&#8217;s subway system is <a href="https://gothamist.com/news/nyc-subway-ridership-hits-new-milestone-but-still-far-short-of-pre-pandemic-levels" target="_blank" rel="noopener">down</a> more than 25% from pre-pandemic levels. That means that, every day, there are at least a million fewer people riding the subway in New York, as compared to five years ago.
It&#8217;s not exactly a great mystery as to why people are avoiding it. There&#8217;s a constant stream of violent attacks on the trains and the platforms — from people being <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/assailant-charged-after-allegedly-shoving-man-directly-iin-path-of-oncoming-ny-subway-train" target="_blank" rel="noopener">pushed in front of the trains</a> to a woman getting <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/nypd-identifies-woman-burned-to-death-on-subway" target="_blank" rel="noopener">burned alive</a>. Yes, if you didn’t hear about that, a woman was burned alive, on a train, in New York, in front of a crowd of people. This is what’s happening now in the third world country known as New York City. And that&#8217;s just within the last few weeks. These attacks are effectively endorsed and enabled by New York&#8217;s government, which has made the political decision not to incarcerate most criminals.
That explains why a man named Jamar Banks was able to use the subway the other day. The New York Post <a href="https://nypost.com/2025/01/05/us-news/madman-accused-of-two-nyc-train-stabbings-is-busted-carrying-large-knife-sources/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reports</a> that, &#8220;A subway maniac with 87 prior arrests was just busted for two transit stabbings — carrying the large knife he allegedly used in the violence &#8230; Banks&#8217; rap sheet includes arrests for alleged attempted murder, weapons possession, assault, criminal trespassing, turnstile jumping and petty larceny.&#8221;
If politicians in New York didn&#8217;t want to destroy the city, they&#8217;d immediately throw every criminal like Jamar Banks in prison. They&#8217;d start enforcing the law. It’s actually not hard to prevent people from getting randomly stabbed, torched, or thrown in front of trains. This is a very easy issue to address. The city could effectively end all of this madness overnight, in one fell swoop, if they wanted to. All you have to do is take all the people who are already known violent criminals and put them in prison. Then you have to ban homeless people from setting up camp in the tunnels or on the trains, and arrest anyone who causes a disturbance. This could all be done in one day.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-1508-the-matt-walsh-show" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show</a></h3>
But none of that is happening. Instead, rather than admit they&#8217;ve failed their constituents, politicians in New York have just decided to compel citizens to use the subway. They&#8217;ve opted to make it financially untenable for most New Yorkers to avoid public transit. That&#8217;s their solution to the fact that no one in the city wants to ride the subway anymore. They&#8217;re going to force them to do it.
I&#8217;m talking about so-called &#8220;congestion pricing.&#8221; After several years of debate, this &#8220;congestion pricing&#8221; has just taken effect in Manhattan. In essence, this is a tax on anyone who wants to drive a vehicle into the heart of New York during work hours — as if it wasn&#8217;t already expensive enough to live in that diseased, rat-infested, crime-riddled, reeking, filthy, godforsaken hellhole of a city. This new tax is a very clear effort to force New Yorkers to use the subway system, which has become an international embarrassment. People don’t want to use it because they don’t want to be assaulted by schizophrenic vagrants. So the solution isn’t to get rid of the schizophrenic vagrants. Instead it’s to simply force everyone to use it, basically offering law abiding citizens up as sacrifices to the dregs of the community.
Specifically, this new tax covers the vast majority of vehicles entering Manhattan between 60th Street and the Battery, which includes Times Square, Hell&#8217;s Kitchen, the theater district, and other high-traffic areas. From 5:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. on weekdays, and from 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m on weekends — which is obviously a huge block of time — the so-called &#8220;peak period toll rate&#8221; is in effect. For all &#8220;passenger and small commercial vehicles,&#8221; that toll rate is $9.00 during the peak period.
To be clear about the political dynamics here, the majority of New Yorkers oppose congestion pricing, as far as I can tell. A Sienna College <a href="https://abc7ny.com/nyc-congestion-pricing-nearly-two-thirds-of-new-yorkers-oppose-plan-siena-college-poll-finds/14721916/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">survey</a> from last summer found that nearly two-thirds of people living in the city didn&#8217;t want a $15.00 &#8220;congestion toll.&#8221;
In response to the outcry, the governor of New York briefly suspended the plan. Then she said she&#8217;d lower the toll a few dollars, claiming it would save New Yorkers some money. To reiterate, she claimed she was saving New Yorkers money by taking less of their money than she was originally going to take. This was a prime example of political &#8220;<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TUMgX7-yZZs" target="_blank" rel="noopener">girl math</a>,&#8221; as I outlined at the time. And now it&#8217;s taken effect.
Naturally, some Left-wing New Yorkers rallied in response to their government gouging them even more. But instead of rallying against it, they actually rallied to thank their overlords for the privilege of being bilked by them. Some of these scenes are so absurd that they don&#8217;t even seem like they can be real. 
Here for example is a crowd cheering as the signage for the congestion pricing is unveiled:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
&quot;3, 2, 1… Happy congestion pricing!&quot; &#8211; New Yorkers *applaud* as the MTA unveils new regulatory tolls on them <a href="https://t.co/o55GtYlw92">pic.twitter.com/o55GtYlw92</a>
&mdash; End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) <a href="https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1875782069361766504?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 5, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
Yes, you just heard someone shouting, &#8220;Happy congestion pricing.&#8221; They are celebrating the implementation of an unprecedented tax, as if it&#8217;s a national holiday.
 This would seem to be boot-licking taken to an unparalleled extreme, and it is. But we should also understand that really they&#8217;re celebrating the fact that, because of this tax, wealthy New Yorkers will have to contend with fewer working class people on the roads in Manhattan. The same people who celebrated the assassination of the health care CEO as some kind of twisted &#8220;victory for the little guy&#8221; are very, very happy about using a tax to keep poor people away from them.
<h3><a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">JOIN THE MOVEMENT IN 2025: GET 25% OFF DAILYWIRE+ ANNUAL MEMBERSHIPS WITH CODE DW25</a></h3>
That&#8217;s a pretty big clue that none of these people actually care about &#8220;the little guy.&#8221; If you ask them, of course, they&#8217;ll pretend otherwise. In particular, they&#8217;ll say that congestion pricing is necessary because it will help pay for improvements to the subway system. 
For example, when the governor briefly halted the plan for congestion pricing last summer, this was the response:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Pro-congestion pricing rally held in Manhattan" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/y-nnHGHfXi4?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
&nbsp;
If you want to explain to someone how cities like New York are collapsing, just show them that clip. According to the residents of New York, it&#8217;s a &#8220;great betrayal&#8221; that the government isn&#8217;t taxing them enough. That is how these people think.
To be fair, the first guy was arguably a little less pathetic. He was talking about all of the alleged benefits that will result from congestion pricing. He&#8217;s saying they&#8217;ll be able to improve the subway system to make it more &#8220;accessible,&#8221; which is a talking point a lot of these protesters used. Watch:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Parents with strollers rally in favor of congestion pricing in NYC" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/qTGJf7Y3NeI?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
&nbsp;
One of the many false assumptions these people are making is that more money will improve the subway system. But that&#8217;s not true. And we know that because the New York subway system is a comically obvious example of waste and mismanagement in government.
For example, the Second Avenue subway that was recently constructed in Manhattan somehow cost more money than any other similar subway system on the planet — by a lot. As <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-02-23/in-nyc-subway-a-case-study-in-runaway-transit-construction-costs" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Bloomberg reports</a>: &#8220;At $2.5 billion per mile, construction costs for the 1.8-mile Phase 1 of the Second Avenue Subway were 8 to 12 times more expensive than similar subway projects in Italy, Istanbul, Sweden, Paris, Berlin and Spain.&#8221;
So that&#8217;s one potential way to raise revenue, right off the bat. They could stop lighting money on fire. Secondly, if you&#8217;re worried about congestion in Manhattan, you could try a lot of things besides charging people to drive their cars. You could, for example, try opening more lanes, instead of closing them for cyclists and construction. Anyone who&#8217;s ever driven through Manhattan could tell you that. Here&#8217;s one example:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Couldn’t have said it better myself.
The city caused this “congestion”. And now anti-car activists are celebrating by taunting drivers at toll gantries.<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/FuckCongestionPricing?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#FuckCongestionPricing</a> <a href="https://t.co/nMIYOiWQLY">pic.twitter.com/nMIYOiWQLY</a>
&mdash; The Fight against Anti-Car (@NoBikeLanes) <a href="https://twitter.com/NoBikeLanes/status/1875717693355298824?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 5, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
This is something no one ever mentions as a possible solution. Get rid of the stupid bike lanes. You’ll find this same thing in cities all over the country. You have to sit in traffic because the city has blocked off entire lanes so that people can ride their bicycles in the street. As I’ve said many times, they might as well block off lanes so that you can use your ab roller or bench press in the middle of the street. If you want to exercise — that’s great, I support it. But you shouldn’t be doing it in the road when everyone is trying to commute to work.
One of the arguments you&#8217;ll hear from these activists is that, somehow, this new tax will reduce carbon emissions and change the weather and save the planet. This is science, you see. Step 1: you pay a toll. Step 3: hurricanes stop happening. The problem is that Step 2 is a bit foggy. And anyway, even if you assume that reducing carbon emissions by a tiny amount will change the weather for the better, it’s a moot point, because this won’t actually reduce carbon emissions. Instead, traffic is going to move elsewhere. People living in New Jersey understand that pretty well, which is why they&#8217;re suing to stop this tax.
<h3><a href="https://www.amiracist.com/?_gl=1*jtghwp*_gcl_au*ODQ1NjYzNTg2LjE3Mjg5MDk3OTE.*_ga*MTc2NzM0NDQ2NS4xNzI4OTA5Nzkx*_ga_CZKR9ZYKJP*MTczMDEyMDgwOS40OS4xLjE3MzAxMjA4MzkuMzAuMC4w" target="_blank" rel="noopener">MATT WALSH&#8217;S &#8216;AM I RACIST?&#8217; NOW STREAMING ON DAILYWIRE+</a></h3>
But regardless, even if you don&#8217;t buy any of the counter-arguments — even if you think that New York&#8217;s government urgently needs more money to improve the subway — it&#8217;s still not clear why &#8220;congestion pricing&#8221; is the best way to raise that revenue. Why not raise taxes on those evil corporations that the Left claims to hate so much? Why are they raising taxes on regular citizens instead?
It only makes sense when you realize, again, that the objective is to force more people into public transit, and get them off the roads.
Admittedly, this whole fiasco may seem irrelevant to anyone who has the good sense to not live in New York. But this sort of madness can be found, in varying degrees, wherever Democrats have power. The idea that Trump’s re-election would be some kind of wake up call for Democrats is a fantasy. They can’t be woken up because they aren’t asleep or in some sort of trance. They’re doing exactly what they want, and their policies are having precisely the effect they intend. 
Here for example is an image from the New York subway system:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
🚨 NYC subway riders are all terrified of being shoved in front of a train. <a href="https://t.co/HCXmcRJ69S">pic.twitter.com/HCXmcRJ69S</a>
&mdash; Breaking911 (@Breaking911) <a href="https://twitter.com/Breaking911/status/1876039855458979983?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 5, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&nbsp;
You&#8217;ll notice that everyone is standing against the wall, because they don&#8217;t want to get pushed on the tracks by some psycho. It&#8217;s straight-up dystopian and you have to wonder how long people will put up with it.
If there’s any waking up that can happen and must happen, it’s among the average citizens in places like New York. If they ever come to their senses and realize that the people they put in power are actively and intentionally making their lives worse in just about every measurable way, then maybe things will start to change for the better.
Unfortunately, for everyone living in New York, based on the celebrations we&#8217;re seeing in support of &#8220;congestion pricing&#8221; — which is really a tax on using your own property and going about your daily life — it doesn&#8217;t look like that will happen any time soon.

NY Congestion Pricing Plan’s Fate Unclear After Court Ruling

2025 Just Started And Things Are Already Getting Crazy

Automobiles

Cars

Kathy Hochul

Manhattan

New York

New York City

Subway

Traffic

While every serious study on gender confusion proves that most children <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/study-most-gender-confused-children-become-gender-co%20nforming-adults/">grow out of it</a> as they become adults, the progressive Left still hails gender transition as a viable, heroic choice for kids. Never has the opportunity been greater for us to model the powerful forces of masculinity and femininity. In an image-driven society that claims womanhood is an outfit, the definition of “male and female” remained under fire in 2024, and I’m proud to be one of the fiery women who beckoned to the call.
It only took a few brave soldiers to reveal the dangers of weakness. Terrified of offending people who bottom feed on offense, too many influencers shrunk back when it was high time to rise. It took people like Riley Gaines, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Isabel Brown, Brett Cooper, Elon Musk, Joe Rogan, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/the-ben-shapiro-show" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Ben Shapiro</a>, Ted Cruz, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/the-michael-knowles-show" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Michael Knowles</a>, and <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/watch/jordan-peterson" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Jordan Peterson</a> to show the world what strength really looks like. Their boldness ripped through the haze of public approval and showed young people how to take a stand.
Taking a stand on gender became the new way to go rogue. 
Women like lacrosse coach Kim Russell and P.E. teacher Jessica Tapia took a stand against men in women’s sports and men in women’s bathrooms, teaching athletes the meaning of righteous resistance. Authors J.K. Rowling, Helen Joyce, and Professor Kathleen Stock laid themselves on the altar to set an example for millions. There is one thing that Matt Walsh, Abigail Shirer, and even trans influencer Blair White proved we can be united about: male and female matters. Gender is physically immutable, but it is also a calling and an assignment.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/videos/what-is-a-woman" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: Matt Walsh&#8217;s documentary &#8220;What Is A Woman?&#8221;</a></h3>
In my bottomless search for the meaning of gender for my book &#8220;<a href="https://urmore.org/iamawoman/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">I Am A Woman: Taking Back Our Name</a>,&#8221; I excavated the words male, female, man, and woman penned in Genesis––and discovered gender is as holy as the imago-Dei. In God’s language, gender is an action. The “male” is a servant, steward, champion, and chief who passes the commands of God to the next generation. The “female” is a helper, protector, boundary-keeper, and life-giver who brings life to every environment she is in. A true man lays down his life for her; a true woman uses her voice to stand against injustice.
Men are created to protect, and when they don’t, they are not truly men in the deepest sense of the word. The men who stood up for us this year reminded us that chivalry’s not dead. At a time when children are being mutilated on the altar of lies; when trans activists claim tampons should be in the boys’ bathroom; and when women are treated as undeserving of protection in changing spaces, weak men stayed silent. Strong men, on the other hand, fulfilled the purpose of masculinity by relentlessly battling for our daughters and granddaughters to live free of tyranny.
The tyrants who allowed men in women’s Olympic boxing thrust women’s worth to the world stage — and the weak were separated from the strong. It was a Rosa Parks moment for women. Would we deny the truth that physically we are weaker? That men can punch over <a href="https://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=9827261" target="_blank" rel="noopener">2.5 harder</a> than women and <a href="https://www.thehotline.org/stakeholders/domestic-violence-statistics/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">one in three</a> women have been victims of male violence? Or would we rise, use our voices, and fight for our dignity no matter the stakes?
The “big red wave” Trump predicted came true, showing the world that real warriors don’t back down while evil prevails. As Dr. Jordan Peterson <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/84744973-when-you-have-something-to-say-silence-is%20a-lie-jordan-b-peterson-noteb?from_search=true&amp;from_srp=true&amp;qid=QQgPOZwZO4&amp;rank=1" target="_blank" rel="noopener">says</a>, “When you have something to say, silence is a lie.” Every influencer who used their voice in 2024 gave strength to the rest of us. We watched as ferocious mama bears rose to the surface on Instagram, blazing the trail as they ripped into feckless school boards. As Matthew Arnold <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/413325-if-there-ever-comes-a-time-when-the-women-of" target="_blank" rel="noopener">says</a>, ”If there ever comes a time when the women of the world come together purely and simply for the benefit of mankind, it will be a force such as the world has never known.” Women aren’t created to be weak, subservient creatures. We were created to speak, to protect children, and to redirect culture when it’s headed in the wrong direction. We are rising, and we will not give up until the gender ideologues are rendered mute.
I am thankful the word woman has been under fire because it is bringing out the gold in who we are.
Yet the war is not over. It will take strong fathers, fearless mothers, and resilient coaches, teachers, doctors, lawyers, and caregivers to eradicate gender confusion from our culture. Right now, you can take action by joining a coalition to save women’s sports, support legislation protecting women’s spaces, or <a href="https://urmore.org/donate/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">stand with me</a> to teach young people about their identity and provide resources for girls with body dysmorphia. It will take every single one of us to stop the madness and declare ourselves the victors before the war is won. When men and women stand together, we are a solid wall against the lies of gender fluidity. Male and female unity is the ancient path, the surprising answer, the unbreakable truth. It is <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%201%3A28&amp;version=NIV" target="_blank" rel="noopener">the only way</a> we “rule, subdue, and take dominion” against the anarchy threatening the future.
Someday, our descendants will look back on history and thank us for standing up for them. Yet even if they don’t, we will do it anyway because it was never about us; it will forever and always be about the children who follow in our stead.
We have been given the greatest opportunity to live up to our names: man and woman, male and female, mother and father. In ancient Hebrew, the letters that make up “man” spell “hand of fire.” A real man is a servant, steward, and champion who uses his hands of fire to protect us. The letters that make up “woman” spell “breath of fire.” A real woman is a life-giver, spiritual warrior, and stabilizer who uses her breath of fire to protect the children. In 2024, we rose together and showed the world the true meaning of gender. 
We didn’t bow.
We didn’t shrink back.
We rose to the call of the day.
And though the battle is not over, we will win.
* * *
Jennifer Strickland is the founder of <a href="http://urmore.org" target="_blank" rel="noopener">URMore.org</a>, and author of &#8220;<a href="https://urmore.org/iamawoman/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">I Am A Woman: Taking Back Our Name.</a>&#8220;
The views expressed in the piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Undecided Gender Choice Concept

Gender Wars: Why 2024 Was The Year We Went Rogue

Bathrooms

Women's sports

If you never watched &#8220;Squid Game,&#8221; it was a runaway success for Netflix a few <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/popular-netflix-series-squid-game-is-making-life-miserable-for-one-real-life-south-korean-woman" target="_blank" rel="noopener">years ago</a>. The basic idea was that 456 people with desperate financial problems are invited to a contest at an undisclosed location, where they all participate in a bunch of children&#8217;s games like &#8220;Red Light, Green Light.&#8221; The winner gets $40 million. Then, when they get there, they realize that if they don&#8217;t win the games, they get murdered.
The show&#8217;s popularity didn&#8217;t come down to its plot, or any kind of deeper meaning. There wasn&#8217;t much to it. You could spin it as a metaphor against capitalism just as easily as you could spin it as a metaphor against communism. It was basically just well-executed torture porn. You had to enjoy watching these characters fight for their lives in these bizarre, occasionally creative deathtraps — kind of like the &#8220;Saw&#8221; films, with a little more variety. And apparently a lot of people did get some mileage out of that conceit.
It&#8217;s now very obvious, though, that a lot of fans won&#8217;t be enjoying &#8220;Squid Game&#8221; season 2, the obligatory follow-up that will be released the day after Christmas. This is the season that will jump the shark for a lot of people, on all sides of the political spectrum. We know that because Netflix has now revealed the characters for the second &#8220;Squid Game.&#8221; And one of these characters is a male former special forces soldier who identifies as transgender — and who&#8217;s competing in this game to raise money for sex-change surgery.
Before we go any further, it&#8217;s important to establish right off the bat that Netflix does, indeed, appear to be serious about this. The creators of this show, and the actor who plays this male character, genuinely seem to believe that this is a brave, intelligent casting decision. 
Here&#8217;s part of the video where the actor introduces this new character. Obviously, he&#8217;s not speaking English, so you only need to see a small portion of it. Watch:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Squid Game: Season 2 | Meet the Cast | Netflix" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ReM6Msbts3w?start=335&#038;feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
&nbsp;
In case you couldn&#8217;t keep up with the subtitles, he says that this character is a &#8220;former special forces soldier and transgender woman&#8221; who joins the Squid Game because, &#8220;she&#8217;s short on money for her gender-affirming surgery.&#8221; This character &#8220;faces prejudice and tough situations,&#8221; but demonstrates &#8220;incredible strength and decisiveness,&#8221; and &#8220;breaks down stereotypes&#8221; on his journey to securing the cash to mutilate his own genitals.
We&#8217;ll give this character the benefit of the doubt for a second, and assume that this aspiring transgender character didn&#8217;t realize the Squid Game was a death-match when he decided to join. We&#8217;ll assume that, like many of the other contestants, he was tricked into participating, because he was so blinded by his desire for this trans surgery after getting out of the special forces — like so many special forces soldiers have been, throughout history.
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com" target="_blank" rel="noopener">50% OFF ALL DAILY WIRE ANNUAL MEMBERSHIPS FOR A LIMITED TIME!</a>
But even with that in mind, this is still coming off like some kind of very unsubtle Right-wing parody of trans ideology. Here you have someone who is clearly so reckless, and so consumed by his desire to disfigure his own body, that he somehow inadvertently joins a game where he has a 455 out of 456 chance of dying a horrible, excruciating death. That&#8217;s greater than a 99% chance of dropping off a bridge, or being shot by a machine gun, or being impaled or something like that. And he&#8217;s facing that fate because he was &#8220;short on money&#8221; for a sex change, and decided he&#8217;d do anything to get it. 
That is the premise that would probably be too on-the-nose if you were trying to mock the idea of transgender surgeries, and the trans cult in general. It serves no purpose but to highlight, as dramatically as possible, how deranged these people are — and how willing they are to engage in highly self-destructive acts in order to affirm their delusions. 
But apparently, we&#8217;re meant to feel sympathy for this character.  We&#8217;re also supposed to observe that, although he&#8217;s willing to do anything to get his genitals cut off, he&#8217;s also extremely brave and fearless under fire. He keeps his composure in life-threatening situations. He has &#8220;incredible strength.&#8221; He&#8217;s exceptionally stable, mentally speaking. Presumably that&#8217;s the &#8220;stereotype&#8221; that&#8217;s being &#8220;broken down&#8221; here.
Imagine being in the writers&#8217; room when they decided that this would be one of their prominent characters for their new season. It&#8217;s just stock, cliche&#8217;d pandering that everyone&#8217;s seen a million times by now. And incredibly, this isn&#8217;t even why a lot of people are outraged about the new season. Conservatives, for the most part, either don&#8217;t really care about this show, or they&#8217;re used to this kind of rote virtue signaling. Instead, all of the outrage is coming from the Left.
<h3><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/the-matt-walsh-show" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show</a></h3>
But of course, they&#8217;re not upset that this character is completely ridiculous. They&#8217;re on board with the whole &#8220;trans surgery&#8221; plotline. Their objection is that the character playing this &#8220;trans woman&#8221; character, in real life, is a man. They apparently wanted Netflix to find a self-identifying &#8220;trans woman&#8221; to play the part. And they&#8217;re upset that, instead, the actor — whose name is Park Sung-hoo — is in fact a male who does not identify as &#8220;transgender.&#8221;
As Breitbart <a href="https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2024/12/07/squid-game-season-2-sparks-backlash-after-normal-man-cast-as-transgender/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">summarized</a> the controversy, in one of the better headlines of the year: 
<blockquote>‘Squid Game’ Season 2 Sparks Backlash After Normal Man Cast as Transgender.</blockquote>
The article contains several distinct arguments by trans activists as to why, exactly, this casting decision is an outrage. And every single one of these arguments is completely and unequivocally terrible. It&#8217;s as if these people are incapable of generating a coherent, rational argument about anything. So let&#8217;s go in order here.
The first argument comes from someone using the name Dawn. And Dawn makes the argument that actors can&#8217;t play people who are unlike themselves — which is to say that actors can&#8217;t engage in acting. Here&#8217;s Dawn&#8217;s specific <a href="https://x.com/dawnmoer/status/1864457966948139257" target="_blank" rel="noopener">complaint</a>: 
<blockquote>This is not how you give representation&#8230; a cis man pretending to be part of a minority group just doesn&#8217;t sit right with me, especially when they could&#8217;ve hired an actual trans actress.</blockquote>
Then someone makes the obvious point that it&#8217;s the job of actors to &#8220;pretend&#8221; to be things they&#8217;re not. For example, an actor might pretend to be a police officer, when in real life, he&#8217;s just an actor. It&#8217;s a little trick that actors play all the time. That&#8217;s kind of the whole idea of acting. 
And then Dawn <a href="https://x.com/dawnmoer/status/1864487241977901410" target="_blank" rel="noopener">responds</a> with this: 
<blockquote>Yes but acting or pretending to be a police officer, burglar, villain, etc is a lot more different than pretending to be transgender, neurodivergent, and POC.</blockquote>
Dawn never says exactly what&#8217;s &#8220;a lot more different&#8221; about pretending to identify as transgender, as opposed to pretending to be a &#8220;police officer.&#8221; But apparently it&#8217;s a &#8220;lot more different.&#8221; Unfortunately for those of us seeking to &#8220;do the work&#8221; and educate ourselves on this particular issue, Dawn didn&#8217;t elaborate.
So in search of specifics on that point, I kept scrolling through the complaints from trans activists. Then I came across <a href="https://x.com/twittwitbb1/status/1864592867903328534" target="_blank" rel="noopener">this response</a>: 
<blockquote>I’m crying. Instead of a transfem actor they decided to slap a wig on Park Sung-hoon and call it a day.</blockquote>
Someone else followed up that response with <a href="https://x.com/babysealfan/status/1864904731321041012" target="_blank" rel="noopener">this post</a>, which belongs in a museum somewhere: 
<blockquote>Men playing trans women reinforces the harmful notion that trans women are just men in dresses.</blockquote>
So the claim is now that a male should not put on a dress and pretend to be trans on TV. But that&#8217;s exactly what being trans is. If anything, Park Sung-hoon is doing some serious method acting here. He&#8217;s taking his commitment to the craft to the next level. And he&#8217;s doing it in a country where gay marriage isn&#8217;t even legal at the national level. He&#8217;s really breaking barriers.
I guess if you try to understand their non-existent logic, the idea is that it&#8217;s okay for a man to put on a dress and pretend to be a woman, but a man can&#8217;t put on a dress and pretend to pretend to be a woman. That&#8217;s one level of pretending too far. 
And it&#8217;s not an exaggeration to say that it appears to be driving some of these people even more insane than they already are. 
As one angry fan <a href="https://x.com/arianaunext/status/1864456453035307202" target="_blank" rel="noopener">put it</a>: 
<blockquote>Could they not cast an actual transgender woman… this gonna piss me off.</blockquote>
Putting aside the fact that the phrase &#8220;actual transgender woman&#8221; is an oxymoron, the phrasing there does raise an interesting question — maybe the most important question of this whole debacle. And that question is: Shouldn&#8217;t these people be demanding that a female actor play the &#8220;trans woman&#8221;? They claim that trans women are women. They say there&#8217;s no distinction between an &#8220;actual transgender woman&#8221; and an &#8220;actual woman.&#8221; So wouldn&#8217;t the most &#8220;validating&#8221; option be a woman playing the trans woman — that is, a woman playing a man pretending to be a woman?
I scrolled through a lot of these angry comments, and I never found a clear answer to that question. As always, trans activists are screaming nonsense into the void. They&#8217;re not sure what they want, or why they want it. They&#8217;re just sure that they&#8217;re deeply unhappy and profoundly confused, which of course, is their natural state. They&#8217;re so angry, in fact, that even when Netflix tries to pander to them, they still find a way to lose their minds. 
Once again, in the process, they reveal that they have no coherent ideology, and are totally incapable of making rational arguments that withstand any scrutiny whatsoever. 
And that is why I, along with Team Sanity, won&#8217;t be watching &#8220;Squid Game&#8221; season 2.

MixCollage-23-Dec-2024-02-25-PM-4161

Why I Won’t Be Watching ‘Squid Game’ Season 2 On Netflix

Why I Won't Be Watching 'Squid Game' Season 2 On Netflix

Netflix

Menu