25 Burst results for "Claremont Institute"
The Charlie Kirk Show
"claremont institute" Discussed on The Charlie Kirk Show
"And for those of you that are trying to lose weight, listen very carefully. So this is called PhD weight loss, and the program is very simple. Doctor Ashley Lucas, founder, she's amazing. She has a whole team and they customize a plan just for you works with your schedule. They don't really believe in calorie reduction. They don't believe in all the kind of typical sound bites that you hear, they look at all your medical history, they talk with you, they personalize it, and they also send you the food, and so it's super easy. It's right there. And then you get a personal coach, and I could tell you, for me, my coach, she's tough, she's great, and she knows her stuff, and that's exactly what I need, but also very compassionate and caring. And again, they provide you 80% of your food at no additional cost. They treat your entire person. And doctor Ashley believes that all the change starts with the mind. And so she helps you change your behavior and think differently about food, so you'll never gain this weight back. And look, one of the things I like best about PhD weight loss is their very understanding about where you're at in life. It's not judgmental. It's not like you're some sort of side project. You get your own coach, literally, if you do this. And then you get food on top of it. The best thing about this program is they have an 85% success rate of their clients maintaining their weight loss for life. I have no idea how much fat I'm going to lose. But hopefully more. And obviously, you know, it's not easy to do that, but they are able to guide me through it in a very successful and effective way. I think they could do it for you as well. No joke. I literally have my call with the coach tomorrow and looking forward to kind of maintaining and hopefully accelerating that success. They have a lifetime maintenance plan to keep you on track and maintenance is free. One of the most important things you could do for your overall health is to lose weight. And it's not easy, right? No judgment. I know it's hard. You're running a million places. So you should consider PhD weight loss. Not only have I vetted them, I'm working with them, and I think they're really onto something here. I think they could really help you out. If you're looking to lose weight and keep it off forever, go to my PhD weight loss dot com. That is my PhD weight loss dot com today and sign up for your consultation. Better yet give them a call right now at 864-644-1900. Again, that's my PhD weight loss dot com. I'm on a journey to hopefully lose more weight and I want you guys to check this out, okay? It's my PhD weight loss dot com. If I can do it, you can do it. That's 864-644-1900. And it's empowering. They work with you. They understand if you have food allergies, they're compassionate. They're clear, but they also help you really be held accountable to the standard that you want to go. So go to my PhD weight loss dot com. Check it out. I'm a believer in their program. I think they're really onto something. My PhD weight loss dot com. So I'm currently taking a class with the wonderful Claremont institute. I think the world of them, it's called telos learning about good life and good government. It's amazing and we have to read a lot and we have these weekly, very intense Zoom calls for 90 minutes, where we go back and forth to people that far more credential than I am, PhDs, lawyers, people, all.
The Charlie Kirk Show
"claremont institute" Discussed on The Charlie Kirk Show
"That's why we are here. Brought to you by Andrew and Todd a Sierra Pacific mortgage for personalized loan services you can count on, go to Andrew and Todd dot com, the wonderful Andrew and Todd dot com. One of the great successes of the Trump presidency that I don't think he got enough credit for president Trump was what he was able to do with the federal bench. One of the reasons why I support Donald Trump in 2024 is because of how clear and courageous he was in putting constitutionalist judges on both the Supreme Court and on the federal bench. It's a little nerdy and wonky, not everybody enjoys hearing about it, but these are people with enormous amounts of power. To interpret the constitution of whether or not your liberties and freedoms deserve to be protected or taken away. Someone's been really tracking someone's in tracking this in a really interesting way. I met him a year and a half ago at the Claremont institute deal. The Lincoln fellowship was tons of fun. I'm actually in the middle of another Claremont class right now, which is very challenging and worthwhile. And he's done some fabulous research on this and I look forward to discussing it with him. Jeremy Karl is with us. Jeremy, welcome to the program. Much, Charlie. Pleasure to be on. So Jeremy, walk us through your tweet and explain it to us where you say, quote, anti white discrimination in the Biden administration is universal, not just in the judiciary. What do you mean by that? Well, I mean, I think if you look throughout the administration, not just in the judiciary, you see just kind of blatant, not just like a thumb on the scale type of affirmative action, but a huge load of bricks where being dumped on the scale where race and gender and whether you're transgender or whatever other alphabet soup you can hit is more relevant than your actual qualifications to do the job. And at one level as a conservative, I'm kind of happy about that because it makes them less competent. On the other hand, as somebody who would like the government to run well and for people to be judged on merit, it's a very bad thing. Right. And so you say here, can you just walk us through or explain to us some of these numbers, you say, out of 97 federal judges, 5 or white men, 22, are black women? That's right. And you know, it's really kind of a startling disparity when you consider about half of the attorneys in America. Let's leave the quality issue aside for the moment. Our white men and about 2% a little bit less actually or African American women and yet you have a situation where out of 97 federal judges, Biden has selected 22 of them, and of course, including one on the Supreme Court, who he promised based on a race and gender or African American women in just 5 are white men. And you can't even use, I mean, obviously on the merits becomes absurd, but you can't even use a sort of representative argument argument or it's a political coalition because about 27% of Biden's voters were white men. But only 5% of the judges he's selecting are white men. Similarly, only about a little less than 5% of lawyers are African American and we already have a federal judiciary that is about two and a half times that in terms of its African American representativeness. So even if we want to cast aside issues of quality and fidelity to the constitution, which I would never ever suggest we do, these just can't be justified even on their own merits of kind of gross coalition politics..
The Charlie Kirk Show
Claremont Institute Fellow Jeremy Carl on Anti-White Discrimination
"The great successes of the Trump presidency that I don't think he got enough credit for president Trump was what he was able to do with the federal bench. One of the reasons why I support Donald Trump in 2024 is because of how clear and courageous he was in putting constitutionalist judges on both the Supreme Court and on the federal bench. It's a little nerdy and wonky, not everybody enjoys hearing about it, but these are people with enormous amounts of power. To interpret the constitution of whether or not your liberties and freedoms deserve to be protected or taken away. Someone's been really tracking someone's in tracking this in a really interesting way. I met him a year and a half ago at the Claremont institute deal. The Lincoln fellowship was tons of fun. I'm actually in the middle of another Claremont class right now, which is very challenging and worthwhile. And he's done some fabulous research on this and I look forward to discussing it with him. Jeremy Karl is with us. Jeremy, welcome to the program. Much, Charlie. Pleasure to be on. So Jeremy, walk us through your tweet and explain it to us where you say, quote, anti white discrimination in the Biden administration is universal, not just in the judiciary. What do you mean by that? Well, I mean, I think if you look throughout the administration, not just in the judiciary, you see just kind of blatant, not just like a thumb on the scale type of affirmative action, but a huge load of bricks where being dumped on the scale where race and gender and whether you're transgender or whatever other alphabet soup you can hit is more relevant than your actual qualifications to do the job. And at one level as a conservative, I'm kind of happy about that because it makes them less competent. On the other hand, as somebody who would like the government to run well and for people to be judged on merit, it's a very bad thing.
The Dinesh D'Souza Podcast
Danielle Welcomes Charles Kessler of the Claremont Review of Books
"I'm delighted to welcome to the podcast Charles Kessler. He's the senior fellow at the Claremont institute and the editor of the Claremont review of books. Charles, thanks for joining us. Well, Danielle, thank you for inviting me. It's always a great pleasure to be on the Jesus podcast. Oh my gosh. Well, yes, he's taking a little time off this week because of Christmas. So I've been hosting his podcast this week and whenever he takes off and so I wanted to invite on my favorite people and I loved going to your seminar this fall and it was so interesting because your guys information always really dives into the heart of what is most important. So I wanted to just ask you a little bit about your story and what inspired you to pursue political theory. Oh, sure. Okay. I guess I've always been interested in politics. I mean, my first political memories go back to the 1968 election when I would have been about 11 or 12 years old, I guess. Which end the late 60s were very anarchic time in American politics, very conflict ridden time. And so somehow or another I got the bug for politics and history back then. And then when I was in high school, I started reading political theory. I mean, I guess I was inspired partly by national review and sort of the conservative literature at the time that I was reading. But even more so, I think by a couple of my teachers in high school who were very good and very knowledgeable about American politics and about American history. And then I went to school. I went to college. I went to Harvard. I had a very good time in the 1970s when Harvey Mansfield, who my teacher, my main teacher, who still there teaching at age 90, this is his final year of teaching, however, but still it's been an amazing run.
77WABC Radio
"claremont institute" Discussed on 77WABC Radio
"To Mark Lofton show where we create the talking points, call in now, 877-381-3811. You know, there's nothing cutting edge or profound about this idea that professor vermeule is promoting. Thrilling, just activism, activism from a different political perspective. From your coin the term common good constitutionalism to describe alternative theory and he was not coy about what it would entail on like originalists and legal liberals, kind of a good constitutionalist would not suffer from a horror of political domination, and hierarchy writes, and they would display candid willingness to legislate morality. In sharp contrast to libertarian conservatives coming good constitutionalists would favor quota a powerful presidency ruling over a powerful bureaucracy on the constitutional front. The court's prudence on free speech, abortion, sexual liberties, and related matters were proved vulnerable to new challenges. The country freshly locked down by the pandemic, his article went viral, or at least as viral as 2500 word essay on academic jurisprudence can go. The right conservatives objected to his claim that originalism was nothing more than an instrument for advancing their political agenda on the left. Liberals seized on his critique as proof of a political agenda they long claimed that was behind originalism. For mules vision of a more muscular conservative jurisprudence, it's not a conservative jurisprudence. It's an activist jurisprudence. From a political conservative. They did strike a chord with certain sectors of the right and the American mind and online journal published by the Claremont institute where I went, one summer, fantastic place, the conservative legal scholar and prominent anti abortion activist Hadley arcs. Applauded vermeule for having the gall to say that there were principles in existence before the text of the constitution was drafted. I don't know what that means. Of course there were principles in existence before the constitution was drafted. A few months later, an anonymous conservative law launched a blog called I'm not going to give it out to serve as a platform for debates over the theory. And it goes on. And it goes on. Now, here we have at least in some instances a court that is originalist. At least three originalists on the court, it took decades to get to this point. And part of the problem we have in academia and part of the problem we have and not exclusively, but among young conservatives and some of them are very good, some of them are just not, some of them are flailing around. Is they want to come up with quote unquote new ideas. Given the tyranny that we be faced, but they often abandon, if not by word, by practice. The old ideas. In the old ideas are not political ideas. The old ideas are the principles. Based on hundreds, if not thousands of years of human experience. I have a book here. I've got literally dozens and dozens of books here, given the project I'm working on. The second bell of rights. Written by cash sunstein a leftist who worked for Obama. His wife worked for Obama and now she works for Biden. The second Bill of rights, this was the title. For socialism. That FDR came up with. Here's another one. The new freedom. This is the title for early American Marxism, 1913, the Woodrow Wilson came up with. Or how about compassionate conservatism? Remember that one? That's the one the bushies came up with. Hyphenated conservatism, the only hyphen that I support on conservatism is constitutional conservatism. So this is a very treacherous idea. It is not based on constitutionalism at all. It's the idea that you take the constitution and try and twist it and spin it in a way that gets you the ends that you want. Now, if you're serious about what I will coin a word tonight, reconstitution our country, our society, then you embrace a movement that is constitutionally authorized like constitutional convention of states. Which is why I get very frustrated with Republicans and conservatives who I don't know about that. Really? And they're coming up with new models. I don't need new models
The Charlie Kirk Show
"claremont institute" Discussed on The Charlie Kirk Show
"With us right now is a very smart man. I enjoyed spending a week with him at the wonderful Claremont institute Claremont institute is a terrific organization, and they have the Claremont institute center for the American way of life, and they have a very important story to share with us Ryan Williams is with us president of the Claremont institute, Ryan, welcome to the program. Thanks for having me, Charlie. So Ryan, you have this new story grooming future revolutionaries, woke and doctrinal at K through 12 schools on America's military bases. So these are schools on military bases. I didn't realize that was a big thing, apparently it is. What's going on here? Yeah, so we got a bunch of videos from a whistleblower who attended a virtual what didn't attend, but got videos from a virtual conference in which educators at our military based schools. So these are K through 12 schools, about 70,000 students across the globe, a bunch of presenters, the ones we saw are the worst ones were from schools in Italy, Spain, Great Britain, and Germany. And it's continuing a trend that we've seen on K through 12 schools across the country, which is this toxic blend of teaching gender ideology teaching kids to share their pronouns if they feel so moved. Even to keep this information from their parents and only discuss it with their teachers at ages as young as four years old, one of the presenters said, and then also the other part of it in addition to gender ideology is this racialized sort of systemic racism, anti racism, critical race theory teaching where you divide kids by skin color and tell them that the history of America is predominantly the history of oppression and we need to get beyond that all the rest. So these idea pathogens, we call it the WOAK, find themselves in obviously universities and in schools, but the military itself is not immune to this. In fact, the military is embracing this, is the federal government the one that is in charge of what is being taught on schools on military bases. So I would assume these are kids of active duty military personnel. Is that correct? That's correct, yeah. So therefore is the federal government in charge of this curriculum? Yeah, the agency that runs it is called the Defense Department of Defense, education activity, the DoD, and it's part of the DoD. It's got about a $3 billion budget, I think. So it's right now up for a debate, the national defense authorization act is being debated in the Senate now. It already passed the House. So Congress has a direct role to play. I should say they have the funding power. They could hold DoD's fire if they don't like what's being taught. But also, I mean, their military bases that Congress basically has plenary jurisdiction. So they could Congress could even set the curriculum or set guidelines if they wanted to get to that level of detail. So not only the power of the purse, but also some real oversight with teeth. And that's putting it mildly. Yeah, so just so everyone understands we've played this clip before we haven't played it in a couple of weeks. But this has real implications to our national security, to our ability to fight the Chinese, which seems increasingly likely given our administration and regimes and ability to engage in any sort of meaningful diplomacy. And so they want us to stumble into a proxy war in Ukraine, which would be the dumbest thing ever. And even if that was a good idea, are we prepared to do it? We'll meet your new LGBTQ fighting force. We might not be able to know how to load and fire a gun, be able to deploy missile with precision, but we will. Get our pronouns correct. Play cut 28. Hi, my name is Johnny, and I use he him pronouns. Hi, and I am conchi and I use Chi her pronouns. And we're here to talk about pronouns. What is a product? A pronoun is how we identify ourselves. Apart from our name and it's also how people refer to us in conversations. Using the right pronouns is really simple way to affirm someone's identity..
The Charlie Kirk Show
"claremont institute" Discussed on The Charlie Kirk Show
"He had like it or not. Define the politics of RA. In two 1016 and 2020, he was the political leader most fit to lead in our warlike circumstances. Trump inspired a movement. If properly deployed, this movement might challenge the woke calm. And God willing, save the country. Republicans, however, should not forget that it is his support, and the spirit they embraced that have become the life force of the Republican Party. Among the talked about alternatives to Trump, I have not yet seen anyone who possesses or even fully understands Trump's virtue. Nor have I seen anyone with his backbone and fortitude. One does not appreciate the strength of relentless Gale force wind until one is in the eye of the storm. That there is a speech that I have had emailed me and texted to me more so than anything else in recent memory. It's Tom klingenstein. Who argues about Trump's virtues and he's the chair of the wonderful Claremont institute, which I benefited from tremendously, in fact, I have another seminar. I'm going to be doing with them in January. And he joins us right now. Tom, welcome back to the Charlie Kirk show. Well, thank you for having me. So what are Trump's virtues? I'm told by the activist media and academia. He's nothing but an irritant and the worst stain on American politics. What are Trump's virtues? You know, before I answer that, you know, your viewers might be arrested to learn that he called me last night. He doesn't know me from Adam. He read my speech. He said he read it twice. And he said it in a way that made you think. Maybe he didn't read things twice. But obviously he liked this one. I asked him at some point. What were the two or three things he'd do differently were reelected? And he had a good answer, I think. It was people, people, people. He knew that he had been ill served, he was asking the wrong people he said for personnel advice and this time he do it differently. Now, as to his virtues, I was at a dinner party going, you know, people next to me, Republicans didn't think he had any virtues. He made America the center of political things. He laid bare the divide in this country. The press says that he caused a divide. No, he revealed the divide. He showed us that we're in a war. He smoked rats at a piety. He showed us just how corrupt the press and the intelligence agencies are. He's courageous. He's independent. He's fearless. He loves America unreservedly. And at this moment, when we suffer from self loathing when our young kids are taught to hate their country, unreserved patriotism is critical. There's one other thing that's important that people don't talk about very much. And that is his absence of white guilt. White guilt is killing us. White guilt is behind affirmative action and what I call outcome equality, and he doesn't happen. Unfortunately, most of the Republicans still have a certain amount of white guilt. And that makes them and that makes it difficult for them to defeat the America is racist narrative..
77WABC Radio
"claremont institute" Discussed on 77WABC Radio
"Not Trump himself, his virtue must be the standard by which we judge other candidate. There it is. Tom clinging Stein chairman Claremont institute, I hope. You felt as I did that that was quite an inspiring statement, by the gentleman he's a scholar, intellectual. And quite good, but you have not heard that. Put together in that way. Instead, you go to places where you think there are smart people. Like The Wall Street Journal editorial page, not particularly smart national view, not particularly smart. Certainly not anymore, and some of these other places. And this is what you get. It's much like the legal analysis we see that comes to us through the television. And through print, some people feel they need to be the very first to demonstrate how smart they are is professors or former federal prosecutors or former attorneys general. And if they're not, found to be correct they either pretending they never said it. Or they attack those who have. We have a judge cannon, the southern district of Florida. She has outstanding credentials. She was one of the last district court judges confirmed before president Trump left office, and after the election. But before he left. And she got all Republican votes and half the Democrat vote. But today she's not that bright we're told. In either credentials or stellar, even better than some of the people who attack her. Just so you understand, former federal prosecutors exist by the thousands. There are thousands of former federal prosecutors
The Charlie Kirk Show
"claremont institute" Discussed on The Charlie Kirk Show
"For an exclusive offer for my listeners, just go to mass zymes dot com slash Kirk, MASS ZY MES dot com slash Kirk. They're wonderful company. Check it out. Mass zymes dot com slash Kirk that is mass signs dot com slash Kirk. Michael Anton wrote the following recently. The regime can't allow Trump to be president, not because of who he is, but because of who his followers are, that class as Angelo Angelo codo via wrote is the country class. They must not be allowed representation by candidates who might implement their preferences, which also and above all must not be allowed. The rubes have no legitimate standing to affect the outcome of any political process because of who they are. But mostly because of what they want. Complaints about the nature of Trump are just proxies for objections to the nature of his base. I actually spent a week with Michael Anton last week in at the Claremont institute, I want to just read that again, complaints about the nature of Trump are just proxies for objections to the nature of his base. We warned about this on our program, we called this, we were entering the final phase, we did that on June 7th, I know we have a short clip that details that and trying to see what clip that is. And then we'll get to John Solomon in just a second here. Yeah, play cut 21. Is that right? Okay, play cut 21. They are now realizing wait a second. We can't destroy careers like we used to, conservatives won't fire their own. Our ability to be able to control them is weakening. And so they are recalibrating their attacks and their strategy as we enter this final phase. Remember, they were able to infiltrate society for 40 years and we ignored them, then we woke up and we started to talk about it and then they professionalized the name calling operation with this final phase. We said, you can call us whatever you want. We're going to build new stuff and run better candidates. Make better arguments, expose your treachery, shine a light on your deceit. What are you going to do about it? And the answer is this. This is what they're going to do about it. All they have left is brute force. They now know that the name calling thing is not going to get them anywhere. And so now they are going to rely on pure deplatforming, banning, and yes, criminal and civil force. That was June 7th. We laid it all out. That's where we are. We knew it was going to.
America First with Sebastian Gorka Podcast
Taiwan 101: Sebastian Talks to David Goldman of the Asia Times
"Known as the Spangler columnist for Asia times also PJ media Claremont institute on and on and on and most recently the author of you will be assimilated China's plan to sign a form the world David Goldman. Welcome back to America first. It's a privilege pleasure to talk to you thanks for the invitation. So I want to do a kind of one on one O one here. If you don't mind, because not everybody, we have 3 million plus lists. There's not everybody is assigned knowledge and understands exactly the significance of what happened recently in Asia. So if I may, please endow me, what is Taiwan, how was it formed, and why does it matter? Let's start with the basics with regards to Pelosi's recent trip. When the communists won the Chinese Civil War in 1947. The nationalist forces under Shanghai shek, our Friends, to camped en masse to the little island of then called formosa or Taiwan. And established an alternative Chinese state, the republic of China. All the international agreements agreed that this island was part of China the same way say Puerto Rico is part of the United States. However, they had opposing governments in the stood each other off. Now, in 1972, when Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger went to China and began the process of restoring diplomatic relations, they agreed that Taiwan and China were part of the same country and then it was up to the Chinese to the two sides to work out what their common future was without American interference. That was the Shanghai communique of 1972. And I spoke to one of the original members of the Nixon delegation who helped draft that communique. In 1972, and I was told that Pelosi's visit to China was a really terrible idea because it violated the spirit of the agreement. Why
The Dinesh D'Souza Podcast
"claremont institute" Discussed on The Dinesh D'Souza Podcast
"John has also been a lawyer for Trump and this is actually what we want to talk about is the is the actions of the left and trying to go after John and others. For their work for former president Trump. John, welcome to the podcast thanks for joining me. We actually go kind of way back as you might remember. I was a publius fellow at the Claremont institute right after Dartmouth, and that's where I met I met the whole gang of Claire monsters as we might call them who have had such a tremendous influence on American public policy. You've gone on to a really distinguished career. I'd like you to start by just talking about those kind of tense days in the maybe even leading up to the election, but certainly in the aftermath of the election, what is it that you did that is supposedly now driving the left off a cliff and causing them to sort of summon this big kind of lynch mob against you as if to say that you are a grave enemy of the country and the constitution. Well, in fact, in one of the litigations I'm currently involved with, the January 6th committee actually says not only was I wrong, but I was dangerous. I guess the danger there lies in standing up and speaking the truth to power. And I'm catching the same kind of assault that you've been under to Nash for the terrific movie you did 2000 mules. That starts to expose some of the corruption. You focus there on some very important evidence of outright fraud. I focused mostly on the evidence of illegality. Our constitution is very clear. Article two of the constitution gives to the legislatures of the states, the plenary power to quote direct the manner of choosing presidential electors. Most people would find this odd today, but for the first half century of our nation's history, the legislatures just chose the electors themselves. And even when they submit that decision to popular vote, as all the states have done since the Civil War, the manner that they set out is the election code. And when you had non legislative officials secretaries of state, county clerks, what have you simply ignoring the existing election code laws on absentee ballots on the requirement of signature verification? All of these steps that the legislatures put in to prevent fraud from occurring because it's so difficult to discover it after the fact. Those things were just dispensed with by non legislative officials. And that meant that the election was conducted illegally even unconstitutionally. And that's what we focused on. And the left doesn't want anybody talking about that. At least not talking about it since 2020. Of course, they talked about it a lot in 2018 and 2016 and what have you. And so what they are now attempting to do is criminalize those that spoke up against the admitted illegality in the conduct of the election. That is, as your movie and other investigations are showing actually led to the very fraud that those statutory restrictions were put in place to try and prevent. John, you're making a crucial point here and I want to slow it down because I want to make sure I understand it clearly. What you're saying is that even though Trump believed there was fraud and there were, of course, accusations of fraud from the very beginning, you're saying that your argument didn't really depend on that. It didn't depend upon being able to prove instance a, B, C or D of fraud, you're saying that there is a process that needs to be in place for the constitution to be upheld. The constitution dictates how election should be conducted and who should run them. And the constitution specifies that the answer to that is state legislatures. And so when the state legislatures and what they specifically put in the code is undercut by secretaries of state by other officials, then in a sense, we have an illegal illegally conducted election, even if you're unable to prove any fraud at all. Am I correct in summarizing that as the argument you're making? That's right. And the reason that's so important is because of how difficult it is to prove it after the fact. And I'll give you one very good example. Wisconsin prohibits drop boxes. Unmanned drop boxes of what have you. They also require extensive signature verification and witness signatures on the absentee ballots before they're counted. And the law is very clear. If it doesn't include those things, the ballot shall not be counted. Now, once you separate the ballot from the envelope, and after the fact, trying to determine, well, that one didn't have a signature. How do we know that was actually the illegal voter who cast that ballot? Well, you could say, okay, and now we've got evidence of fraud. But how was the vote cast? The ballot is now separated from the envelope, and it can't be proved which way it went. In 2018 in the North Carolina's 9th congressional district, there was an illegal ballot harvesting scheme that was conducted on behalf of one of the candidates without his knowledge I might point out. But the election sport said we can not prove that, given the number of illegal ballots that were collected, we can't prove or certify what the actual result of the election is. And they ordered a new election. This is the reason these rules are in place ahead of time. There was massive cheating went that went on. Whether that actually produced the fraud that it was designed to make it difficult to accomplish or not is immaterial to the illegality that occurred. And that's what I tried to focus on in our Supreme Court briefs, both in my motion intervene on behalf of president Trump and the Texas litigation. But in a certain petition filed from Pennsylvania on three of the illegally changed statutes.
The Charlie Kirk Show
Morgan Zegers Discusses One of Charlie's Favorite Books
"So there's a book that I read last summer. I spent a whole week at the Claremont institute and this is the book that I encourage everybody to read if you want to really understand what we are living through. It's called the age of entitlement by Christopher Caldwell. I've mentioned this book many times on this program. It's a relatively easy read and what makes this book so incredibly persuasive is that it really doesn't make arguments on the surface. You have to kind of decipher between it because it's kind of written in a historical context. Here's what happened. Here's what we got from it. Here's what happened. Here's what we got from it. Here's what happened. Here's what we got from it. And this book, more than any other book I think really frames modern American neoliberalism in its proper light, which is a total sham and a con. And it shows that a lot of the promises of the Civil Rights Act and the civil rights era actually had the opposite intended effect that we're talking about race more than ever, that we're more focused on the things that the Civil Rights Act were supposed to fix. One of our team members here at turning point USA recently read this book and is enthusiastic about talking about it. It's Morgan ziegler's who hosts freedom papers with turning point USA. Morgan, welcome to the Charlie Kirk show. Thanks for having me, Charlie. I'm really excited. I loved the book. So walk us through what your take was on the book age of entitlement by Christopher Caldwell. For me, I found it to be illuminating an eye opening, what was your take? I could say the same now. It's kind of funny. I had a friend recommend it to me because I am a bit more radical with looking at recent policies over the last handful of decades in the country. And after I read it, I said, you want to know who would love this? Connor Clegg. And I was going to gift it to him and I told him about it when we were on freedom papers together for turning point. And he said, wait a second, now I have to tell Charlie. So it turns out this is quite the book for a lot of young conservatives and not a lot of people talk about it, which is fascinating. Charlie, what got me is that a lot of these topics just aren't discussed in high school classes in American classrooms. I don't know if you had the same experience, but when I was going to school, a lot of things were just normalized. And so trillions of dollars of debt that we were in at a national level. The Department of Education, all of these concepts were just normalized in our minds, and it took me kind of re-educating myself over the last few years, and especially thanks to turning point to realize that these are all fairly new concepts. Our nation didn't always used to be in this massive level of debt. We didn't have to have these struggles of families needing two incomes to get by and then taking care of the children was done by other people by government services by other men and women that weren't parents. And it really just changed my whole perception on this and I'm just thankful that I found the book. So I tell everybody
The Charlie Kirk Show
"claremont institute" Discussed on The Charlie Kirk Show
"Please the audience of one, that's for sure. It was awesome. Thank you, man. Well, God bless you, thanks for your courage. I appreciate you speaking out. It would be easy to conform. So we appreciate that. Well, it's good having like mindedness when I open my phone to see what you've been able to do in your team. Thank you. To see what y'all are putting out, the content, asking the questions, be on campus, you're literally in the mud. You're literally in the dirt of it. And in the Bible talks about us being shepherd, shepherd is a nasty job, and so is leading somebody. Sometimes you gotta get in and help them share, getting clean. Thank you for what you're doing, brother. Thank you. You know, I just want you to know that you have a lot of people that want you to continue to be outspoken. The record labels and all this, they're all weak. They can have it, yeah. I got out of my deal yesterday. Yeah, we amicably said, you go your way, I'll go mine. I think we the people doesn't know. You'll be more fruitful this way. I agree. Yeah. God bless you, man. You two my friend. Thanks. Nice to meet you. Thanks. We're blessed to live in the greatest nation ever to exist in the history of the world. Luke 1248 says quote to whom much has been given, much will be required. We as Christians can shape our world. One of these ways is how we steward our finances and our money. If you have money in stocks, you have the power to affect change through your investments. Jesus spoke about money and roughly 15% of his teachings, and 11 out of 39 of his parables. How do we follow his teachings about money? Well, my friends at pax financial can help. I've opened an account with them. I think very highly of them. They are fiduciaries that will make sure you have a responsible plan to retire. I trust them with my money, and I hope you will as well. But look, they will also help you invest in companies that align with your beliefs, no companies that engage in pornography or in excessive drinking or in a degenerate lifestyle. If you have a $150,000 to invest, please text my name Charlie to the number 7 four 8 6 8, and even if you don't have a $150,000, maybe they'll make an exception for you. I don't know, but just learn more about them. Look, text Charlie to 7 four 8 6 8. Take advantage of the power to make a difference with your money, pax financial. It was great for me, I think it will be terrific for you. So there's a book that I read last summer. I spent a whole week at the Claremont institute and this is the book that I encourage everybody to read if you want to really understand what we are living through. It's called the age of entitlement by Christopher Caldwell. I've mentioned this book many times on this program. It's a relatively easy read and what makes this book so incredibly persuasive is that it really doesn't make arguments on the surface. You have to kind of decipher between it because it's kind of written in a historical context. Here's what happened. Here's what we got from it. Here's what happened. Here's what we got from it. Here's what happened. Here's what we got from it. And this book, more than any other book I think really frames modern American neoliberalism in its proper light, which is a total sham and a con. And it shows that a lot of the promises of the Civil Rights Act and the civil rights era actually had the opposite intended effect that we're talking about race more than ever, that we're more focused on the things that the Civil Rights Act were supposed to fix. One of our team members here at turning point USA recently read this book and is enthusiastic about talking about it. It's Morgan ziegler's who hosts freedom papers with turning point USA. Morgan, welcome to the Charlie Kirk show. Thanks for having me,.
The Charlie Kirk Show
Terry Schilling on Defeating a Gender-Bending Republican
"Terry Schilling. I spent a whole week with Terry in Las Vegas, but we were not doing what you might think we would be doing in Las Vegas, right, Terry. We were reading old books and talking about philosophy. It was with the great Claremont institute. It was in Vegas, I guess, because it was the only place they could find on the West Coast that would be open and actually has the hotel capacity, but Terry Schilling runs a phenomenal organization that everyone needs to get behind, and they do such a great job. And American principles project and they also have a pack and Terry, you have a great article out defeating this gender bending Republican will help protect American women nationwide, walk us through it. Well, Charlie, for the last several years, we've seen the Republican Party completely acquiesce to the LGBT movement. They started with getting Republicans to support the equality act, which just for your viewers and listeners. It would put sexual orientation into gender and gender identity into civil rights law. It's a total nightmare. Men and girls showers, men and women sports, men and women's prisons. It's a total nightmare. Well, along the way, the Republicans who are soft on this stuff came up with a quote unquote compromise bill. And it's called the fairness for all acts. And they say that they have religious freedom protections in it. So what we wanted to do this year is make politicians Republicans pay a price for supporting this law. And Nancy mace is one of the last Republicans on this bill. Charlie, we've actually, this bill is so extreme that we've actually gotten more moderate members off of this bill. Good. Claudia tenney is off of it. There are several others I'm just blanking on them right now. But we've gotten 5 members of Congress off of this bill, including at least stefanik. That's the highest profile Republicans gotten on off of it. But Nancy mace is still on him. In this bill would put men and women's prisons, men and women's sports, it would put men and women's locker rooms. The whole shebang. And we
The Charlie Kirk Show
"claremont institute" Discussed on The Charlie Kirk Show
"Independence. You're talking about you're talking about power. It's what you're talking about. Is that we must have the ability to be self governed. And look, this is a provocative view for a conservative. I believe in it, a 100%, by the way. And this is why you and I hit it off is that you are admitting that we are in the midst of a power struggle. Conservatives don't like admitting that, right? It's a postmodern view. It's built into kind of the nietzschean belief of struggle like basically you're going to have one person stronger than the other. And we're kind of like, yeah, we agree. We don't want to live in that country. I want speech to be supreme. I want dialog to be the way we solve things. But if it comes down to power struggles, we're going to win, and we're not going to be taken by surprise. Well, yes, but I wouldn't say it's just because it's in the service of political liberty. What I'm proposing is that there's no way but this. There are no silver bullets. There's no dreaming back a past America. It still exists in pockets. And so what I'm asking is to reclaim those pockets to make them full of yours and to expand them. That's the only way that this work gets with the left is so successful. I mean, you have to marvel at the left. You know, you have to just marvel at some of the people. Yeah, for sure. But the problem people have, though, is the tension between their ideology and what needs to be done. Because you said some things that are thought crimes, Arthur, you just violated the ten commandments. You talked about subsidies, and you talked about state power. So how do they reconcile that, right? So they say it's in the service of political liberty to the ends justify the means or we all machiavellians. Now like walk us through that. It's interesting. Yeah. Well, look, as I said before, look at what has happened over the past 40 years. Look at how every single institution was taken from the right. Look at now what the ideology is that is being used to govern those institutions and govern the public. It is an ideology that basically says that there are there is a sacred, unfalsifiable class of citizens who can not be contradicted to whom all things should be given. And then there's the oppressor class. Who has to be punished at every turn, who has to be punished through the laws, who has to be humiliated, who has to be crushed because he illegitimately ruled this country. When that's the dynamic, if you're not struggling for political liberty by understanding that you can not have political liberty without powerful institutions on your side, then you are just living in a romantic fantasy. And you will lose. And that is exactly where most conservatives live, a romantic fantasy of a country that is no longer exists. And I want to get back to that place. I want to get back to a place where the better argument wins, I grew up in that country. It's dead. And it's going to require us to be more powerful to be able to defeat these people and I believe if you want to, if you want to broker a detente, if you want to broker a ceasefire, if you have servers, banking systems, schools, then all of a sudden, what can they do to you? Then all of a sudden they might all of a sudden take you more seriously. Final thoughts. That is exactly it, Charlie, that the right will never be taken seriously. Until it has these things. And that's how some kind of, if it's possible, that is how some kind of return to normalcy takes place. Yes, that's exactly right. And the right never looks at, you know, they're constantly being interviewed with all these history books behind them. And, you know, they claim to have read them. And I take their word for it. And if they really did, then they would know that a lot of incredible countries have fallen in the past. And they think somehow that can't happen here. But it can. And the only thing that prevents it is smart people who think through the actual politics of this, not the talking for the sake of, you know, one little clip because you're in Congress and all the cameras are on you. We're on the campaign trail. But like a real single minded focus on building up these institutions and peeling back the other ones. That's how you get to some kind of return to normalcy ceasefire. And that's what will save us. Arthur, thank you so much for joining us. Claremont institute center for American way of life, Arthur millic. Thank you so much for watching back on. Thank you. Thank you, Charlie. Thank you so much for listening, everybody. Email us your thoughts as always freedom at Charlie Kirk dot com. You want to support the show, go to Charlie Kirk dot com slash support. Thank you so much for listening. God bless. For more, on many of these stories and news you can trust. Go to Charlie Kirk dot com..
The Charlie Kirk Show
Arthur Milikh Offers Analysis of the Current Political Landscape
"Who is the executive director at the center for the American way of life at the Claremont institute, Arthur, welcome to the Charlie Kirk show. Thank you very much, Charlotte. So Arthur, we've been kind of framing the conversation, if you will, right now, around how a majority of the political discourse is around things that are patently insane. The woke, if you will. And that there needs to be kind of a re centering around team reality, and that only conservatives can help make that consolidation possible. What are your thoughts? Well, I think that's true. But, you know, when you look at some of the polling, some of which is honest, I suspect, and you see that there's actually strikingly little support for a lot of these very radical left wing ideologies. And then you wonder, well, how on earth is it that these remain the center conversations of the nation, if they're so little public support? And then you begin to think through how much money and institutional support there is for these causes. And the immense disproportion in power. On the left versus the right. And then you start seeing how many conservatives over the last generation have been snoozing at the wheel. They've been fighting on some very irrelevant issues, one kind of trick that I like to think about is if you implemented the full agenda of many of the think tanks on the mainstream right. Nothing would change about America. A lot of things. It would all be a total domination of the left institutions. And so what we have not thought through is trying to win back territory in real ways. Trying to repeal the immense power of those institutions. We like to do lawsuits. That's fine. But when we lose in the courts, we just say, oh shucks, you know, we'll try again. We'll try to do the same thing again. Whereas when you look at the immense as I keep saying institutional power of the left, they own the universities, which we refuse to defund. They own a lot of K12. These are American tax dollars that are being used against patriotic Americans. It's an astonishing thing. And nobody ever really does anything about it. It's a really interesting
The Charlie Kirk Show
Joe Biden's Crypto Surveillance State With Ben Weingarten
"Right now is Ben white garten, who is a fellow at the Claremont institute and also from real clear investigations with a phenomenal new story about how the federal government via the Biden regime is putting together this crypto executive order. This might be a little wonky for some people if I want you to listen carefully because we know that there is a currency reset looming by the great reset crowd and this all ties together with the erosion of our liberty, Ben, welcome back to the Charlie Kirk show. Charlie, thanks for watching having me really appreciate it. All right, walk us through. What is this executive order and how does this apply to most Americans whether they own cryptocurrency or not? This executive order holds the potential to create the linchpin of a social credit system with American characteristics. What this order calls for and it's important to note that the Biden administration writes in the text of the order, my administration places the highest urgency on research and development efforts into the potential design and deployment options of a United States CBDC Central Bank digital currency. That's one plank of the order, another plank of the order is that the Biden administration seeks to build a regulatory regime around all manner of digital assets, including cryptocurrencies. So two things, regulating cryptocurrencies, which of course compete with the U.S. dollar. And then creating a digital version of the U.S. dollar. And it mobilizes a whole slew of federal agencies to create a CBDC. So we know what regulations of cryptocurrency will do. Obviously, it will make it more costly to transact them. It could potentially kill them. And of course, the basis of cryptocurrencies at the outset was in large part to create a hedge against or an alternative to Central Bank created dollars because central banks, of course, do all sorts of things to manipulate their currencies, erode the value of the dollar in your pocket, monetize their debt, paper currencies, of course, allow governments to act like drunken sailors.
The Charlie Kirk Show
James Poulos, Executive Editor of the American Mind, Describes 'Transhumanism'
"I listened to the American mind podcast, which is phenomenal from the Claremont institute. And I was listening a couple weeks ago. And I was texting Conor in the midst of the episode and I said, we have to have this guy. It was just so interesting to me. It's doctor James pulos. I hope I did okay with that, pronunciation. He's the cofounder and executive editor of the American mind at the Claremont institute and author of the new book human forever, and the digital politics of the spiritual war. And so let me just first kind of start with James. If you could introduce yourself to the audience then also introduce to our audience, what is transhumanism? So it's great to be with you. Thanks for having me on. The best way to think about transhumanism, I would say is in the following way, once upon a time, technology was firmly on America's side, the electric age was very good to us, the telegraph, the spread of the incandescent bulb, radio television, really the time when America became the world's leading power, superpower that was so, so powerful, not just in terms of military might, but also in culture, you know, in mass communications and every all the ways that that shapes people's inner and outer lives. Europe did pretty poorly during that time. Everyone's empires fell apart, massive world wars, genocide, disillusionment, loss of religious faith, really just kind of a wipeout of that of that civilization. It's just still barely trying to hang on in some ways. And so there was this big sense of optimism and triumphalism around the Internet when it came into being in the United States. You know, of course, we thought we created these technologies. They're super powerful. We have a huge head start on everyone else. And so they're really just going to fulfill our consummate. America's role as the most important country in the world, the country that can sort of turn the world into something that's American and its essence and its civilization. And that's not what these machines did. You know, the elites, the folks in charge, were really shocked by the way people use these technologies to put opinions on the Internet that they didn't like. And ultimately to elect a president that they didn't like very much. And so once that happened, there was this real kind of head check. Suddenly everyone had a smartphone and this technology wasn't just a cumulative. It wasn't just a progressive addition to the technological advancement of the past. But it was really something fundamentally different. A new medium, a new form of technology. And the way that it's reshaped our inner and outer lives, their senses, their sensibilities, maybe even our souls. Has already been super profound. People are now sort of realizing that every day is they look at the news that's coming out on a regular basis around the clock. And so what effect are these technologies having on who we are as human beings? And I think the effects very
The Charlie Kirk Show
"claremont institute" Discussed on The Charlie Kirk Show
"We go. Charlie, what you've done is incredible here. Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campus. I want you to know we are lucky to have Charlie Kirk. Charlie Kirk's run in The White House folks. I want to thank Charlie. He's an incredible guy, his spirit his love of this country. He's done an amazing job, building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created, turning point USA. We will not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries destroyed lives and we are going to fight for freedom on campuses across the country. That's why we are here. Hey everybody, welcome to this episode of the Charlie Kirk show. I've been looking forward to this one ever since our friends at hillsdale said there is an opportunity to get the legendary professor Al on our podcast. I couldn't wait, I read a lot of what he publishes and we missed each other extra over the summer at a link in fellowship deal that I did with Claremont institute, but everything we're going to be talking about is brought to you by hillsdale college the Beacon of the north the last college you guys can check it out at Charlie four hillsdale dot com, Charlie F four hillsdale dot com. I've completed 6 online courses about to be number 7, but I've not yet taken the civil rights course, but first, David, welcome to the Charlie Kirk show. Thanks for having me, Charlie, good to be with you. So there's a lot I want to unpack, but let's start with this idea of identity politics, which you correctly and very wisely frame more as oppression politics or kind of the elevation of certain groups that are deemed to be oppressed. Let's put it that way. Why do you put it that way? I thought that was really smart. Because identity politics is misleading because it would imply that everyone is entitled to have an identity of which they're proud and that they want a defense. So you would think, oh, we used to have class based politics. And now we're going to have identity politics. But it turns out that in the realm of identity, Baltics, not all identities are created equal. They basically come in two varieties. It's a mannequin framework. You have the people who claim to have been and to be oppressed, you know the roster, right? So called people of color with blacks always first and foremost hence the shift to bipoc, black and indigenous people of color to emphasize that black is the most depressed ahead of the so called white adjacent Asians. You know, they're having problems with the Asians because they do too well in America. Then, of course, LGBTQ, women, sometimes immigrants, Muslims, but the holy Trinity is really the first three. And then you have the bad identities, you know? I don't know if this is used to you, Charlie, but you seem to fit the bill of people who are a problem in America. Oh, I am. I mean, I don't know if you identify. Yes, I do identify as a male. I will not pronounce or whatever the traditional western heteronormative patriarchy would say they are, but I'm the worst. I'm also a wasp. So. Yeah, that's not good. And then you could do something about your sex and transition, but your race you're not allowed to change. That's right. You're part of the curse, the white race. So, you know, even oppression. I mean, I don't look, I don't exactly know what to call what to call the current dispensation in America. Identity politics isn't good, CRT is too abstract. What the hell is critical race theory? It's basically.
On The Media
"claremont institute" Discussed on On The Media
"Listener supported w nyc studios. This is the on. The media podcast. Extra i'm sasha pfeiffer sitting in for brooklyn stone in the months following his election loss as he made baseless accusations of election fraud. President trump floated a dangerous idea at mike pence had the courage to send it back to the legislatures. You would have had a different outcome in my value told him it was troubling talking point about a troubling claim the then vice president mike pence had the power to overturn the twenty twenty presidential election in trump's favor that same claim brought insurrectionist to the capital on january six. And as of this week it's been given. New context was a two page memo marked privileged and confidential january. Six scenario is the title that memo made public. And bob woodward and robert costa's new book peril outlines a six step plan for. How pence could refuse to tally votes from states with quote multiple slates of electors. That would throw the final decision to the house of representatives which was then controlled by republicans and that election overturned plan was written and proposed to pence on january fifth by john eastman. An attorney advising trump eastman isn't household name but he's come up on on the media before in twenty twenty. He was pushing another false theory. Birtherism burgers tried to call president. Obama's right to hold the highest office into question and birtherism resurfaced around comma harris's eligibility. I heard it today that she doesn't meet the requirements that was of course false. Kamala harris is a us citizen and fully eligible to serve as vice president. But that didn't stop that false claim about her. From seeping into the public conversation through a newsweek op ed written by john eastman and op ed that newsweek later apologized for last summer brooke spoke with slates. Marc joseph stern who described the origins of this birtherism falsehood and how eastern and his organization. The claremont institute used the media to spread it. This is a really old canard and unfortunately it still with us. Stern track the birtherism. Lie all the way back to an eighteen. Fifty seven supreme court decision. We have to go to the dread scott decision in eighteen fifty seven which was the notorious cream court ruling is said. Black people could not be citizens of the united states that they had no rights that the white man was bound to respect. They are an inferior order. The supreme court said and so they simply cannot obtain citizenship in this nation overt racism of the most rank and of forint hind and the dread scott decision was one of the sparks of the civil war and after that civil war the nation passed a constitutional amendment the fourteenth amendment. Who's very first. Sentence is a direct rebuke to dread scott's. What's it say. It says all persons. Born or naturalized in the united states and subject to the jurisdiction narrow our citizens of the united states. It doesn't just say they will become citizens. These people have always been citizens and we are now ensuring that their citizenship cannot be questioned. Nice idea here. We are in twenty twenty. It's still getting questions. So what is new about the kamla. Birther lie basically nothing because even though we'd seem to settle the question of birthright citizenship once and for all when the first black senator was sent to congress in eighteen seventy hiram revels some racists senders tried to deny him his seat to be a senator. You have to have had american citizenship for at least nine years so these racist congressmens that we only passed the fourteenth amendment two years ago. That was when this guy got citizenship. That was obviously rejected. Almost out of hand by the senators who had just passed the fourteenth amendment. Who were still there in the senate and they were able to say pretty definitively no we meant to say that these folks have always been citizens. What we did was confirm a truce that had been widely recognized up until dread scott reversed it. Could you give me a quick summary of the differences between the obama. birther lie and the harris birther lie. The obama birther lie asked dot if he was an american citizen but just whether he was natural. Warn the will ally asif. She is a citizen at all. So what does the argument being presented by such people as john eastman of the claremont institute in newsweek. The title of his op-ed was almost polite. Some questions for kamala harris about eligibility eastman's op. Ed presents an argument that he has been making for many years that those four words subject to the jurisdiction means something totally different from what everybody understood them to mean in eighteen. Sixty eight so backup little calmly. Harris's parents were immigrants to the united states. They were both here on visas. No laws broken. Of course individuals coming to the united states on visas can have children here and it has long been understood that those children become american citizens because they are born on american soil and they don't fall into the exceptions laid out by congress when it passed the fourteenth amendment but john eastman has a different theory. He thinks that the words subject to the jurisdiction. Have this secret meet. And that is that you have to. Oh your allegiance exclusively to the united states in order to pass on citizenship to your child. Even if your child is born in the united states he says that because kamla harris's parents were foreign nationals when she was born they owed their allegiance to other countries and so they were unable to pass along citizenship to kamla because they were not fully subject to american jurisdiction instead they were subject to the jurisdiction of india and jamaica but mocked this was in newsweek. It was an op-ed the claremont which you talk about where eastman is a senior fellow. What is the claremont institute. So the claremont institute is a conservative. think tank. Although i think think tank is a bit of a misnomer here. It's located in california. It was founded by four students of a guy named harry. Jaffa who was a kind of gold water. Conservative in the sixties and seventies. This was founded in one thousand nine hundred seventy nine and the idea was to spread. These goldwater ask ideas to revive the celebration of american nationalism and american exceptionalism at a time when conservatives perceived it to be on the decline. This was the later part of jimmy. Carter's presidency the malays speech yada yada and so. The claremont institute burst onto the scene and tried to kind of intellectualize fury's about american nationalism and american identity that had been a little bit further on the fringe of the rights. But we're at that stage making their way to the center of the gop but then it started to evolve. Let's say the nineties and in the early.
The Charlie Kirk Show
"claremont institute" Discussed on The Charlie Kirk Show
"Hey everybody. Welcome to this episode of the charlie kirk show with us. Today is thomas de klinge stein. Who is the chairman of the board of the wonderful claremont institute. Where i spent a week in las vegas as a lincoln fellow with some wonderful people there. Tom welcome to the charlie kirk. Show well thank. You have to be here so you gave a speech and also wrote an article. That really caught my attention. Which was the reason. I wanted to have you on this program because i have not heard anyone in recent memory. Put it so bluntly and concisely. And i say bluntly in a good way. We're you say we're in the middle of a cold civil war and it's just a question of whether or not we want to win it and we need wartime generals to kind of make that happen police. Summarize your argument kind of why cul civil war. And then we'll go from there. I will precede preceded by saying you know to win the war. You have to know. You're in one. And i think we have a lot of Particularly republican leaders in the senate who haven't figured that out Now the enemy the enemy i call. Whoa communists new people in the past have called entity politics multi-culturalism but we'll communism i think suggests totalitarian regime and this regime has different goals than america. This regime has a different understanding of justice. If something like in the civil war south wanted to grow slavery the north contracted well. Those were differences of ends. Ends cannot be negotiated. So what is the end of well communist. Well it's group outcome equality right. All groups having proportional to their representations society the same amount of prisoners and ceo's and you know school suspensions and all the rest bright the problem. There is that america whose understanding of justice is individual freedom. There will always be group outcome. Differences between men and women and also among various subcultures so to eliminate the only way to eliminate those outcome. Differences is by force by tyranny. And so that's why we can have no peace with the woke communism. And my i guess. The pitch of that speech was directed at the republicans. Your their job is to explain all this american people. I think many have a sense that there's something grievously wrong with america. But they might not be able to give a good accounting of it and that's what we need our leaders to do and so far they haven't been doing it. I totally agree. So when i talked to the police officer or the taxicab driver or the welder. The normal man they say man. We're losing our country. And if i press them which i don't because i don't want a jerk but sometimes i do they kind of fumble around a little bit because it's more just kind of a a cascading effect right. They're not even able to articulate it as well as you would not even close but they could see it they can feel it. They know it's happening so in your piece which is very well organized. We're going to put the peace up. Charlie kirk dot com linked to american greatness to that you start with this question the sentence of your pieces we find ourselves in cold civil war so i just wanna stop there. What some people would take exception with that type of language. I don't make the argument that we are indeed in the midst of a cold civil war. Well it was the argument. That i part of which i answered i think in the last last question. We are fighting. The regime has different understanding of justice and a different end begin. The analogy i gave was slavery. Right one side wanted to grow one side can. Those are ends. Ends cannot be negotiated. Now there are a lot you know what is the enemy has to do in this. Gets i think more closely to your question about war. Well it has to remake everything in american society and it has to remake to comport with their understanding of american. The future got. Change your history right. That means guy. Takedown statue chapter teach critical race theory. You have to teach sixteen nineteen to teach america that in its race in its. Dna is racism. That's not freedom. it's racist. You have to teach americans that america is systemically racist and we hear that every day and what that means is what the implication of that is if you think. America is systemically racist if you think. Racism hasn't itself into all nooks and crannies of american life. Then you'll have to throw out the american way of life so some of this is just the way they're thinking and talking now. A tech. censorship is another big one right. if if you're going to perpetrate lies like america's racist then you'll have to shut up. People challenge the lies. And i don't think most americans have any doubt that are being shut out even speech gains. You know we had to think long and hard about what to say censored we couldn't put it on you to write this stuff is just unbelievable interests and what we do on our show is we have a pre show meeting and we literally have to go. Through what stories are we going to describe in a certain way to not get censored we have to use different words. We have to phrase it differently and we're already living under that tyranny of not even political correctness but it is a tyranny of a one party state you right in this article here and you just mentioned it and i want to really zero in on this every time. Joe biden accuses america. Being systemically racist. He is though he doesn't know what calling for the overthrow of the american way of life. Now you mentioned this earlier in the piece. But i really want zero on this. As soon as i heard that phrase american way of life which originated from the claremont institute it might have been from you. I loved it. What is the american way of life. What's the best way could describe it for someone listening to this right now. Well at route. It's a commitment to free to individual freedom. The right of all individuals to pursue happiness generally as they see fit and that underlying phillips philosophical statement gives rise to certain attributes. Right were hard working. Were self reliant. Where a colorblind we believe. In american exceptionalism you know we think were good referring to the welder. The normal person who can't quite articulate what's going on and the way i articulate the simplest way i can think.
WAAM Talk 1600
"claremont institute" Discussed on WAAM Talk 1600
"Want to get through the rest of this piece, about three paragraphs left. So I hang. Take Dick. I want to take your call. But I want to get through the rest of this piece here. We're talking about the, uh E s G scores and how this is now coming down through the corporate, uh, entities that are now becoming part of the state. The deep state we've got. We've got a fascist America a fascist socialist America right now. Now let's jump into this back here, paragraph back where the Chinese are all in on this. The existential crisis concerns our understanding of who Where as a nation Yeah. Are we going to be America? First America last a pervasive American mentality of woke, ism, decadence and decline prevails. It's making us a miracle Last Now this goes on, the author goes on to say here, a nation that prioritizes politics over merit rewards mediocrity over excellence. Protects the connected and targets. The contrarian permits tyranny under the guise of health and safety. Oh, man, has that been more accurate over the past year and a half. Privileges foreigners over citizens and locates the ethos of national self loathing aimed at undoing the system on which it is based. No matter the resources and capabilities of those laboring under it. Wow. Will be poised to crumble. Well before it gets around the confronting its global falls domestic peace. And prosperity will erode. Morale will receive and the will to survive, Let alone thrive will be extinguished. Yeah, I think we're pretty much there. Now. The zeitgeist of woke ism, decadence and decline will defeat us before China has a chance to say Cotto. That are pure of punitive leaders. Already Cotto inward and, indeed, indeed are actively aiding, abetting and enabling our worst enemy demonstrates the extent the rot that has already set in. Wow, what a piece that says. I posted. It's over at, uh, Hercules Jones on Facebook. This is written by a guy named Benjamin Weingarten. Benjamin Weingarten. He's a big shot at the Claremont Institute. Well, there you go. That means he's a conservative. Yeah, he is, And he's a real smart one, too. Dick Kooky. Welcome down the edge. We'll hide their own. I thought it was very, uh, coincidental that you were talking about DSG scores and Just this past week. I gotta He is an email from my financial management fund that I use, and it was explaining about DSG scores and how, uh, well, they understand that some people are interested in them. That they have no way of knowing whether it will at this point in time, whether, uh, positive s G scoring will benefit somebody's portfolio and stuff. And they said they also don't know that it will hurt it. I wrote them back, and I said, I want to make it absolutely clear that I like my current strategy of income, security and growth, and I want absolutely no influence on my portfolio. With DSG scores Now I did not go quite as far as saying. Give me a negative. Give me you know, do the opposite of whatever it's did you get to have you got a response back on your plate? Yeah. Yeah, they said no, we're going to. We're going to stay the course Stick. No problem. Well, you know, you know what? That's all about it. In fact, it transcends you, though. I mean, it's good that your your portfolio managers is doing that and it's on your team, but the people he has to deal with have to deal with this stuff. Oh, yeah, yeah, all across the board internationally. That's we're talking here about Black Rock. They're all in on this. This is the latest push to get you to be controlled. Top down, bottom up inside out by the state. That's a huge That's what this is all about. Yeah, And I kind of figure that you know, if I mean, if they go well, we believe in these things and stuff like that. I would say, Well, then I'm looking for a new financial management firm because Um, you know, I can direct some things if I want to, like companies that are supportive of Of like abortion and things like that. I can say okay. I don't want any. Um, you know, uh, investments in any companies that support that or whatever, but I got to say, um, These guys were pretty straightforward about it. And I want to say they're very conservative. So, um so I'm pretty pleased. Good. Well, look, I gotta ask you, your financial manager What's it like to have one nickel in a second one to rub against it? What's it like? Oh, it's nice. Well, I'm retired now, and it's working very well. So I'm enjoying it. Except for my, uh do, uh, my radio show and other than that, I'm retired. Now you're retired from one of the biggest leftist operations in the world right now, Henry Ford is spinning in his grave. I know. Um and I want to say they, uh, when you when you do hear things about stuff that the Ford Foundation and stuff is is supporting that is actually a separate entities from the Ford Motor Company. But No, it is before before before more companies all in on the diversity, equity inclusion, racism, insanity, But no, no, I got that about the about the foundation wholly different than Yeah, I know. It fucks me. Um, And it was not always like that. And I know that people that work there are not like that. But some of the management is so our tickets still available for the soiree we're going to on Saturday. We can talk about that right? You know, I do not know. I should call Gary and find out this week are always always Yeah. In the past. Always been open to people that want to buy tickets, right? Yeah, And sometimes they sold out. But then they'll have a few left. So what? You're what you're talking about? Is the fence of the NRA dinner. Return county this week? Yeah. Yeah, President Endara dinners take place all across the country. They take place in different places, but usually the gun club. This one's taking place to try County on our moon road, And it's this Saturday and there's always a dinner fantastic dinner..
The Charlie Kirk Show
"claremont institute" Discussed on The Charlie Kirk Show
"So now i want to transition to the current regime that some people were stunned at the accelerated pace that biden and his allies implementing their agenda. But those of us that follow them closely. We're not that surprised by in fact the only that surprises me is how how unwise they've been at some of the implementation of it give us a status update of the biden regime. I think they're regime starting to fall apart for for reasons that i wouldn't even expected. What's your diagnosis. Yes so. I think i you're right. I mean. it wasn't surprising to any of us that they went in and they had all kinds of plans. They were ready to implement all kinds of crazy things. That are terrible for america in the world and of course this is because the left is organized and is as we were just saying that they know what they want to accomplish they. They don't have to pretend it's neutral. But i do think a funny thing happened along the way to the kind of tyranny. They wanted to enact and that is their own incompetence. Cut up with them right. You want an old doddering guy a to be in charge and you also want your technocrats to come in who have all the fancy degrees and whatever. Here's the problem you know. They're not able to govern in an effective way anymore because of their own incompetent so yes. They're doing terrible things every day. But what's going on is in in real time in front of the american people is become increasingly apparent in every sector right whether it's some whether we're talking about the virus and the virus restrictions and mandates etc the things. I don't make logical sense anymore. Right whether you're talking about afghanistan and insane way in which we tried to withdraw agree that we should get out but the way it happened right. I mean when you look at that. You can't hide it anymore. And then you look at the popularity of harris and the daughter in nature nature of biden as struts about the scene totters about the scene and it is. It's becoming harder to hide. And i think that the reaction to that is is real and you see people now right who are sort of in the middle of such a thing exists. We don't pay attention to what's going on. But they're they're they're aware that something isn't right and i think more and more people are are essentially radicalized. Right they're thinking. Wait a minute you're really gonna make me get this vaccine right. Lose my job will. Maybe i should move right and and that is happening every day on every in every sector. Yes so let's talk about kind of the corporate side of it in a second but just from the biden of power ruling structure. They seem to be falling out of favor with the american people. They don't seem to care. How do you process that. There's they're seeming. Indifference to normal checks and balances normal president would compensate a little bit. Right would not me had your how. There's two ways to process it right either. They just don't care and it's like we're going to run this thing out or they have some sort of plan up their sleeves. That's pretty insidious. And i don't even wanna guess what that is. Well i'll just say this i mean. I think that the the problem is that. They don't regard themselves as as living in a full fledged democracy They regard themselves as Deserving being deserving of the throne and that anyone who opposes them is illegitimate right. And this is why trump he was illegitimate. He was not a legitimate president because they have the divine right of kings. In there they have the The the mandate of heaven in their minds and so there's a certain sense in which they don't care and by the way look at what's happened over the last twenty years. I mean whether you're talking about you know california. Say the voting against gay marriage and the court side note doesn't matter what the people think Right now the recall and california's good example. Will it matter that. There's a recall election when this going to be fortified That elections can be fortified crazy with a month for mail in ballots in gavin nuisance political machines. There's a sense. In which these people they think that they have transcended democratic form of governance and they control the media that control the technology and so you can just see them. They don't care in and and they're they're pushing everything to eleven right. They're they're using an mersal capital at all of it. They're putting all of it on the line. And and just but moving forward and leaving democracy behind and so so then what what. How do we as conservatives. We have a lot of listeners to this program that run companies and give money generously to many different causes. How do we then countermove against that. Right you're right. They go to eleven. I mean for example. The the department of education has came out today and they said that if you have anti mandatory mass mandates in violation of the civil rights act i mean and by the way all i have to say as christopher caldwell was right. That's all i have is and we are by the way we're plugging his book everyday age of entitlement. It's that good. And i. I was only made aware of it. Thanks to the wonderful fellowship with you guys at the claremont institute. How what is the proper countermove then matt because people feel helpless people say. Get it charlie. I agree with you via those two one more podcasts. If you telling me that we're living through a blitzkrieg. How do i fight back. So there's look in general. I have to say the asking. The question is the first step because once you get to the point where you realize voting is not enough You know just listening to isn't enough. You have to take action. And that's what thank god there's groups like yours bringing people in so they can actually be become activists and so look a lot of it is that you have to find other ways find other people surround yourself with other people who also want to take action and good things will will come of that In my own life. I feel the same way and this is why i realized we need a cultural and commercial movement that ultimately points in the.
James Wilson Institute Podcast
"claremont institute" Discussed on James Wilson Institute Podcast
"We're pleased to be speaking with glenn. Elmer's glenn is the author of a new book. The soul of politics. Harry jaffa in the fight for america from encounter books glenn holds a phd in politics from the claremont graduate university. Where he studied under harry jaffa. He's visiting research fellow with hillsdale college. A senior fellow with the claremont institute served as a speechwriter for two cabinet secretaries as published numerous articles and essays in the clermont review of books the review of metaphysics modern age lawn liberty national review and american greatness. Also joining us on this podcast. Is seth route. One of our interns with james wilson institute seth. Don't you get started. Glenn omer thank you so much for coming on our program to discuss your great book on harry jaffa. We thought we start things off because many of our listeners are likely familiar. With professor harry jaffa but for the benefit of are those who aren't who was harry jaffa and why should more intellectual conservative intellectuals be aware of his ideas and influence on conservatism. Sure well thanks for having me on the program. Joffo was a very influential studio. Political philosophy taught most of his career at clermont college and graduate school in california people maybe familiar with his main institutional legacy which is claremont institute fairly influential think tank based in california now founded by some of the students and nine hundred seventy nine. Johnson was known really as lincoln scholar and he was an influential lincoln. Scholar wrote to major books on lincoln. As a as a real philosophic statesman his pioneering book in nineteen fifty. Nine was in a way the i really to take lincoln. Seriously as a philosophic statesman and to make the case for that but java was really primarily student of political philosophy especially classical political philosophy and was one of the first students of the great german emigre. Scholar leo strauss who many listeners will know strauss fled nazi germany and came to the united states and in the middle of the twentieth century. Almost single-handedly revived the serious. Study of classical political thought. Meaning the greeks especially play our stuttle not as antiquarian curiosity. he's but as sources of living wisdom Making the case. That truth indeed has transcendent. Meaning strauss very famously rejected. What's called historicism. That all thought is sort of bound up in our particular and place and resurrected in a way. The idea that classical political classical political philosophy could supply wisdom about human life. That's still true. Today and jocelyn away was a fairly political student of strauss and applied what he learned from strauss to the study of america of course are founder and director heavily. Arcus was a student of strauss although.
KHVH 830AM
"claremont institute" Discussed on KHVH 830AM
"Writes about it and say, Did you see what was selling me is such a such block. Get it? No, no, no, they wait'll I repeat it. And then somehow claim it originated with me. So after she set that up, she then went to the Grim Reaper, Barolo Rivera for his reaction. Talk of succession is treason. Russia. Emma's a powerhouse broadcaster, is one in the zillion. They come along once a generation, but that talking is reckless. It's irresponsible. We're one nation indivisible. Had a lap rush goes on to say that people where he is have no idea what people in New York were thinking. That's so different. They're like a different species. Half of New York lives in Florida, where Rush Limbaugh lives. It's preposterous leaders who accentuate the differences and exacerbate the divide our themselves is responsible. I didn't accentuate Or exacerbate it at all. I didn't originate it. It's something that is out there and being discussed by others. Now, here's Here's Martha MacCallum reacting to the Grim Reaper. That's a strong charge, and it is, as I said, It's a discussion that I think is being had in a lot of places. There's a piece by the Claremont Institute. Recently called the Separation which talks about this. I mean, nobody wants this to be the case, and I'm sure that Russia doesn't want succession to be where the country's headed, of course not. But see, she found that she's she's one of the quota place that talked about it. The separation that's from the Claremont Institute. Claremont Institute is a very highly reputed conservative think tank and library. I mean, it is a library of conservative philosophy and thought And They are discussing it there, so Martha did something that nobody else in the media did. She went out and actually listened. This program, and she found an audio soundbite of me that is appropriate to use and Fitz based on what all had been discussed in our program. So the Comments prior to this were Thursday night on Friday. She played a clip. Now imagine if the rest of the media cared about getting things right. She wouldn't be the only one to have found this. This is Rush Limbaugh. Because last night Geraldo sort of went after him for talking about this is session statement. I just want to play this real quick. Everybody at home. Simply referenced what I have seen other people say about how we're incompatible as currently divided And that succession is something that people are speculating about. I am not advocating it have not advocated. Never have advocated it and probably wouldn't just want to square the circle on that. Make sure that we gave Russia's do by playing that part of it. So thank you. Market for the deep digging into the archives of the program to find something that was readily available for anybody that wanted to Find it. Now. I don't expect this to change anything like what's gonna happen is is that these same critics of Ah ha. See, we got him. We could rush Rush. Rush knows he's getting cause He's trying to change what he said. They're gonna They're totally distort the whole thing again. Because I Represent. The opposition. I am the opposite view, if you somehow Come along and damage my credibility than they think. They've damaged the credibility of the entire opposition and so forth, which is why all of this stuff happens. There's one more I think of one more maybe chili for you. Maybe a couple more. Let's let's this is this is from Sunday morning on meet the depressed During the round table. And a discussion about people on the right talking about succession. And the moderator is F Chuck Todd. He's talking to the Hoover Institute senior fellow Lonnie Chen, who said this Kalimba the godfather of this sort of political rhetoric, godfather these days, also introduced and then said I was just talking about it. Talk about succession and the like, is nonsense, and it's dangerous. You talk about going against federalism going against the notion that you should ask the judiciary to be activists and overturning the will of the people. I mean, these are the kinds of things Chuck growing up in the Republican Party to me would have been fundamentally offensive. But you've got a bunch of people who are out there making this crazy argument, essentially T o Politically appease one man and two politically appease their electorate instead of explaining to them. Hey, look, here's the reason why this is madness. Why? What is madness? I'm not sure I know what Lani Chen is talking about here. I always thought the Hoover Institute was a conservative place. But it seems that they're getting rid of all the conservative thinking out there and replacing it with a bunch of rhino type thinking. He says What it seems to me. Um Enemy, right? This. This is the same people who lied about Russian collusion and trump stealing the election in 2016, the same people lying about me now, so that's that. I just wanted to set the record straight. I know it's not going to set anything straight, it's going to accomplish the exact opposite. But what what matters to me? Is you people in the audience and you understanding? What's what? On I'm perhaps the most direct communicator, I I do not speak it a riddles. On at all. And believe me if I were in favor of succession, you would have no doubt about you would have not. You wouldn't doubt it for a minute. I just did. Yeah. The divisions in this country. That exist. Um, are largely Because of people on the left anyway. So if there is anybody out there moving toward a drifting apart or a division People in this country, its people on the left. It isn't us. Okay? I have time to get this next bite the endless whenever anybody with him, Maybe maybe not. Let me take a brief break. We'll do that. We'll come back. I've got Rachel Maddow here trying to explain the magic of Rush Limbaugh. But I'm not quite sure I understand it really transfer big rush.