Transanger

Dennis Prager here. Thanks for listening to the Daily Dennis Prager Podcast. To hear the entire 3 hours of my radio show commercial-free every single day, become a member of PragerTopia. You'll also get access to 15 years' worth of archives, as well as the daily show prep. Subscribe at pragertopia.com. Hello everybody, welcome to the Dennis Prager Show. Apparently there are members of the trans community who are declaring a forthcoming day of vengeance. What is particularly interesting— actually, there are two particularly interesting aspects. One is that the mainstream media, which means the left-wing media— there is no mainstream other than the Wall Street Journal. That, uh, and the Wall Street Journal news pages are, while not as woke as the New York Times, are, are not conservative. Their opinion pages and valuable pages are. They are not reporting this apparently. Tucker Carlson made this point last night, and if that is accurate, and I believe it is, it is extremely important. See, if people who are declared by the left as victims do bad, that undermines the victimhood status to a certain extent, and that cannot be allowed. People who say that they are the other sex must not be judged by the normal moral standards of other people. The same holds true for all non-white heterosexual largely Christian groups on males. They're the only ones to be judged. I was told in the 1970s at Columbia University in graduate school that blacks cannot be racist. It was asserted as a given. Since that is a lie, and a stupid lie at that, I drilled or grilled— I did both, I grilled and drilled— the professors who would say that to me in a very nice way. I just say, I don't understand that. How is it possible that anyone cannot be a racist, let alone because of his or her color? And the argument was whites have the power and only the empowered can be racist. So if a black person harms a white because the person is white, that is not racist. I mean, This is what we have come to. So they don't want to report on anything evil percolating, percolating in the trans quote-unquote community. My second take on this matter is that as this terrible murder of the children and teachers at the Christian school in Nashville reveals, there is, there is a profound unhappiness and anger in many trans people that has nothing to do with transphobia. It is inherent to the issue. My friends, this is said in sympathy, but even more than in sympathy, with a desire to actually confront the truth. It is not easy. I'm not sure it's possible to be happy and have inner peace if you say to yourself— forget to others— if you say to yourself that you are not the sex that you are. It is inherently an unhappy place to be. This is said with as much compassion as with description. And when you are profoundly distressed And people, no matter how much they would even want to, people regard you in many ways as just as different, unless you don't make an issue of it, which I'll talk about in a moment. But even, even then, there is a voice in you that knows I was born male. I'm acting and looking and sounding female, but deep down I'm a male, certainly biologically down. And I have a brain, the brain of a male. The male brain is different from the female brain, not just chromosomes and genitalia and inner organs in the case of women having something called the uterus. And then many of these people have a tremendously difficult time, through no transphobia, whatever that means, they have a tremendously difficult time in so many cases in finding someone who will love them as they are now. If you become a trans woman and do not castrate yourself, then you have the male sexual organ and genitals. And let us say you want to love and be loved by and make love to and be made love by a man because you identify now as a woman. What man is going to want a woman with those parts? There are undoubtedly some, but very, very, very few. And it works in the other direction as well. So there is inherent to this condition among many, not all, but among many, understandably, an anger, a discomfort, a dis-ease. That's how we get the word disease. It's dis-ease that permeates their being. And they're angry. Some of them, I don't know how, what percentage, are angry. I don't accept fully that I am the other, and certainly there are many in society who do not. Although if you truly appear and talk like and have the name of the other sex. Nobody asks you what your private parts are. Nobody asks you what sex were you born. People treat you as you appear. Sir, can I— to the waiter— sir, can I have coffee please? Now, why do you say sir and not Hello, because you have inferred that this person is male. And likewise, ma'am, can I trouble you for some more napkins? You have inferred that this person is female. If that is what you communicate, that is what people pick up on. And 99% of the time, if not 99.9, people are right. They would like to do away with that, that there would be no way of identifying until you are told by the individual. That's the reason for preferred pronouns. Why are there preferred pronouns? Because there are people who do not communicate what sex they are. Or if you prefer, in the language of the progressives, what gender you are. And so that's why they have to tell you. But once this person has to tell you, that is not your fault. But that returns us to the issue of how many are unhappy and even angry And so they, they take it out on the people who are most likely to say a man cannot become a woman, and that is religious people. And in the case of America, whether religious or largely Christian, Catholic or Protestant, that is going to be a great source of hatred. Indeed, the left hates the Judeo-Christian value system. It is the opposite of it. And that is the reason that it has always hated it. The French Revolution killed thousands of French Catholic priests. The Russian Revolution killed thousands upon thousands of Russian Orthodox priests. The left always hates Christianity and Judaism because they know that is the opposite of what they believe. 1-800-PRAGER-776.

Every day when I pass a mirror, I still can't believe it.

It's me!

I'm looking back at myself. I never thought thought I'd be this fit again, but 42 pounds ago I decided to take control of my health, and with the help of My PhD Weight Loss and Nutrition, I'm so glad I did. The program is simple. Dr. Ashley Lucas and her amazing team customize a plan for your body to make it simple. They even provide 80% of your food at no additional cost. They treat your entire person as one. Dr. Ashley believes that all change starts with the mind. She'll help you to change your behavior when it comes to food and think differently about food so you'll never gain the weight back. Give them a call right now at 864-644-1900 and they can answer all your questions. If I can do it, you can do it.

Joe Biden, the most despicable man to ever hold the office of president, has decided to meddle in Israeli affairs, announcing, as he does in the United States, that if you are not on the left, you are a threat to democracy. What you are, if you're not on the left, is actually a protector of democracy in most cases. It is the left that threatens everything good, whether it is our medical systems or our universities or our children. And so I don't know when the last time an American president has so meddled in the affairs of a democratic country. It's having demonstrations shows that it is a free country at any rate. But he hates anyone on the right, including in a democracy, whether it was the Brazilian president or the Hungarian president or the prime minister of Israel. He hates them. The fact that they were democratically elected is of no consequence to the left in America, whether it is the New York Times or Joe Biden. It's quite remarkable, actually, to hear his comments. As the Wall Street Journal editorial page put it, if these demonstrations show anything, it's what a robust democracy Israel is. I've had a professor of international law on to explain the Israeli issue, which is a very complex one emanating from one simple fact: Israel has no constitution. Every day, every American who loves liberty and who loves this country and who loves its values should thank God for the Constitution. You know how judges decide what is legal or not in Israel? By what they deem rationally appropriate. I mean, or they use some term that has nothing to do with any body of law. To which they have to adhere. And basically, they appoint their successors, which the left would love. They don't want the public, the officials elected by the public, to appoint the judges. Having said that, there are members of the Israeli cabinet who are utterly morally objectionable to me, but that has nothing to do with the issue of judicial reform in Israel. I have never been particularly interested in the individuals. It's like in America, it's the same thing in America. I am not fixated on Donald Trump. Well, I thought he was the greatest president since Abraham Lincoln, but I'm not fixated on Donald Trump. I'm fixated on defeating the left, the greatest threat to America since the Civil War. Likewise, in Israel, I'm fixated on Israel's security. I'm not fixated on labor. I'm not fixated on the conservatives, on Likud. I'm not fixated on Netanyahu. People get too wrapped up in the individual, both here and in Israel. There are people on the right who— I think there are such people, and it's very distressing— who will only support Trump. They are as big a threat to the country as Never Trumpers. Only Trumpers is as big a threat as Never Trumpers. Because you are fixated on Donald Trump and not on America. In both cases, people lose sight of the big picture, whether it's in Israel or, or the, uh, or the United States. 1-800-PRAGER-776. The anger of the many in the trans community, that is what, uh, that is what I was addressing earlier. Do you know that I almost never review calls? I'm a man after all. I don't review conversations. It's something women do regularly. It's what keeps them up at night if they can't sleep. But I, I had a conversation with a caller yesterday who was annoyed with me, but he was respectful, and I kept him on for quite a while. He might be listening now. And I don't remember the age. I think he's a 5-year-old son. Who said that he is a girl. I believe that was the case. I may have the age off by a year, and it might be the other direction, but I think it is that. And I said either to him or after his call that I think the proper response of a parent to a 5-year-old boy who says that he's a girl is, no, you're not. That's the proper response. There's no question that had this occurred with the same human being, the same father and the same child, but happened 20 years ago, that is exactly what he would have said. He might be a reader of the New York Times, however. Or a consumer of CNN or NPR. And now the loving parent is supposed to say, "Of course you're a girl." Why is that loving? Loving for a parent is not, does it come from love? That is not the definition of loving, of a loving response to a child. A loving response to a child is synonymous with a proper response to a child, a good response, a response that is good for the child. That's the best way to put it. It is not, does it come from love? The amount of damage done that has come from love is as great as the amount of damage that has come from non-love, maybe more. A lot of people love the tyrants of the 20th century. Love is not the answer. Wisdom is the answer. We have two more days, today and tomorrow, in the fundraising month of March for PragerU. Every day of my show, I have had someone from PragerU, usually a young person affiliated with it, and they've told you in their eloquent way how, uh, PragerU has helped them tremendously in terms of their values. We do change minds, and so please help us do that. It's— we keep everything free, and it's only because of contributions to PragerU. PragerU.com. Whatever you give today or tomorrow will be tripled Thank you very much on behalf of America. Scranton, Pennsylvania, and Jeff, hello. Hello. Hi.

Hey, Mr. Prager, thanks for taking my call.

Mm-hmm. Thank you for calling.

Okay, I just had a comment to make. You're saying some people are only Trumpers. I'm a strong supporter of President Trump. And I think one of the reasons why I'm so strong about— I would vote for Ron DeSantis if Trump wasn't on the ticket. But I think Trump, for a lot of people, the first time actually see someone— I voted for Republicans. I got brainwashed in high school to vote Democrat for the poor and stuff. I found my lesson. I said, no, my values more aligned with Republicans. But then Trump exposed to me that even half of the Republicans You know, they don't really work for you either. It's all, you know, I'm saying Trump was the first politician or someone that came in and actually tried to do stuff that he said he was gonna do in for the people.

This first time, I'm with you, I'm with you. I completely understand why you have supported him and even support him now. All I'm saying is that maybe, and maybe I'm wrong, and God knows I hope I'm wrong, that there are Republicans who will only support Donald Trump. And is that true for you? Would you— let us say the nomination went to—

Oh no, no, no, definitely not.

Okay, then you're— fine.

I would vote for Ron DeSantis if Donald Trump won, but I think for some people that— like, Trump got a lot of people out there to vote that never voted before.

You're right on every issue. You're right on every count. I thank you. I'm with you. My— what is the gentleman's name? Jeff. Jeff is not my problem. My problem is with people who will be alienated from the party, the Republican Party with all its flaws, if the nominee is not Donald Trump, or will be hostile. I spoke to somebody recently, very recently. Who I will not name, is a prominent Republican, done an immense amount of good for the country, very talented man. Many of you would know who he is if I said his name. He has a very large following, and he might endorse— he's been asked to help the campaign of someone other than Donald Trump. For whom he worked. And, uh, what does he do? He, he fears that many of his supporters would abandon him if he supported someone other than Donald Trump. That is what I mean by only Trumpers. You are my fellow conservative, you are my fellow Republican, you are my fellow— I'm speaking for me— my fellow America saving individual. If you support DeSantis, if you support Larry Elder, if you support Vivek Ramaswamy, if you support Nikki Haley, you are my fellow Republican and conservative. You have made an honorable decision. That is what every Trump supporter needs to say. That my fear about the only Trumper is alienation, and even alienation from, and even hostility toward any Republican who supports somebody else at this time. That's what I fear, let alone some who simply won't vote. I hear a lot about how Republicans are part of the swamp. And there is some real truth to that. Absolutely correct. Nevertheless, the only opposition to the Democrats, which is the party of the left, not the party of liberals, therefore as damaging to the United States as the Southern Democrats were in the past, the Well, I'll finish this, I'll finish this when we return. This is an important point. Just when you thought it couldn't get any better, Mike Lindell with MyPillow is launching the MyPillow 2.0. When Mike invented MyPillow, it had everything you could ever want in a pillow. Now, nearly 20 years later, he discovered a new technology that makes it even better. The MyPillow 2.0 has the patented adjustable fill of the original MyPillow, and now with a brand new fabric that is made with a temperature-regulating thread. The MyPillow 2.0 is the softest, smoothest, and coolest pillow you'll ever own. For my listeners, the MyPillow 2.0 is buy one, get one free offer with promo code Prager. MyPillow 2.0 temperature regulating technology is 100% made in the USA and comes with a 10-year warranty and a 60-day money-back guarantee. Just go to mypillow.com and click on the radio listeners square to the buy one, get one free offer. Enter promo code Prager or call 800-761-7000. 6302 to get your MyPillow 2.0 now. Hi everybody, you know, I have a real dilemma. I have so much I want to share with you, so much I want to talk about. Uh, you would think 3 hours would suffice. This, this story in the New York Times is, is like an embodiment of our times. I will get to it. I'm going to begin with Chicago and its— What story in the New York Times? The New York Times, about a story that I noted at the end of the last hour. These East Side wealthy women are getting together at naked dinners with one another. And I will read to you their rhetoric. They're— I'm sure they're all college educated. I have warned about this all of my life. Secularism plus affluence equals boredom, and boredom is the mother of a lot of damage. Can you imagine? Wonder how many of these women are married. Where you going, honey? The husband asks, I'm going to a naked dinner with 10 other women. Oh great, have a great time. Can I come? That would be a man's instinctive reaction. I had a question about this, by the way, and then I'll get to this other, the Chicago subject. My question is, would they accept a trans woman? At their naked women's dinner, right? I mean, every one of them, I am certain, is woke, and they believe that a, a man who says he is a woman is a woman. So would they have a man and his buddy at their naked dinner? I really, I want— and would the New York Times report on the refusal of the group to have the trans woman at the dinner? Chicago is having a mayoralty runoff between the teachers union and favorite, a black candidate, and a white candidate who is not the teachers union candidate and who believes that they need more police. They're both on the left. One is lefter than the other. I'm about to disappoint many of you because I'm about to say something that isn't nice. And I'm not being cute, I mean it. I even challenge myself with regard to saying this, and that is, whom am I rooting for? I don't live in Chicago, but who am I rooting for? The candidate who will ruin Chicago even further with more crime And therefore, if the teachers union's candidate and the Black community's candidate wins, there will be more dead people. There'll be more murdered people in Chicago. That is as given as on an icy road there will be more car accidents. It is just It is a knowable truth. Or do I— so you would think, how could I possibly root for somebody who, as a result of his election, more people in Chicago will be murdered? And so therefore, I have to morally root for the other damaging person, but who is less damaging, who actually believes in more police and is not a tool of one of the two or three most destructive groups in the United States, the cartel known as teachers unions. The teachers profession has disgraced itself beyond redemption. There are some wonderful individuals who were teachers, that is a given. But they are part of something that is completely damaging, destructive to children and to society generally. Now, why would I root for the even more damaging candidate? In the notion that people will only awaken when there is so much damage done and they will say, wow, we really committed urban citywide suicide in electing a leftist. However, thinking this through with you, I don't know if there is any amount of damage leftists can do and still lose elections in left-wing cities? I don't— it's an open question. I don't know. When I say that, I mean it. I don't know. Give me an example of where the left has gone too far and as a result conservatives have won. Can you think of any? Well, in San Francisco. Well, San Francisco, you know, yeah. School board when they voted out. Well, okay, so they vote. Okay, that's true. Some school board races in the country, that is correct. But I'm talking about politicians. We don't think of school boards as politicians. I'm not saying it didn't happen. I'm just, I'm asking, does it, did it happen? Like, did Portland have an election since you're, you know, Oregon because your family's there? Has the— has— no, so not for mayor, it's not for senator, not for governor. Where they did have an election for governor, they had an election for governor, and who won? The leftist. Exactly. So there's no amount of damage. After all, it is not— it's not rural Oregon that voted for the Democrat, it's urban Oregon, basically. Basically Portland and maybe Salem. And so I don't know if it's possible to go too far. A candidate who says defund the police can win. A candidate who believes that it is a good thing to give children hormone blockers and even perform surgery on their breasts or on their genitals before they're 18. From my perspective, before they're 21. So I'm thinking aloud, whom do I root for? Not that it matters, obviously. I, I don't have such a vision of myself that I can engage in what the Bible would call sorcery, where I can influence outcomes through various sacrifices or prayers. I don't think that I have that ability, so whom I root for doesn't matter at all. But it is nevertheless important to work this out in how we address society individually. Do you want the leftist to do even more damage and thereby have people awakened to the horror of leftism, or not? Now, if I really thought they would awaken, then it might justify the terrible consequences that would ensue if the left— if the left candidate wins in Chicago. I mean, I wish I could sit down with 10 Black residents of Chicago who want to vote for the teachers union anti-police Black candidate. Are you so angry at white people and at the police that you're okay with the destruction of your children's schools that the teachers unions are involved in? Are you so angry with the police that you are okay with a reduced police presence in Black neighborhoods? That's it. Those would be my two questions. They're not voting for the black guy because he's black, I don't think, because they wouldn't vote for a black conservative. It's an interesting question here. You know, blacks vote— yes, blacks support black candidates, but not if the black candidate's conservative. So it's got you— you've got to be black and conservative, black and left. With all of the crime and all of the reduction in the quality of life in Chicago, Illinois, it's a tight race. Wow. Urban citywide suicide.

You know I can't stand it, you're running around.

So I promised you this, uh, it's, it's, it would be funny, but it's not funny. And let's, uh, let's go to the, uh, let's go to this, this article in the New York Times. Did you, uh It was— who was— Alan, you sent it to me? No, no, no. My beloved did. Well, you're my beloved too. Private dinner party, clothing not allowed. New York Times, March 28th. What's today? The 30th. Okay. So it was out yesterday in the print. Private dinner party, clothing not allowed. The Fude, or Fude, F-U-D-E, but pronounced as food. It's got an umlaut, two dots over the U. The Fude dinner experience gathers those who want to meet, eat, and drink only after leaving their clothing at the door. While two dozen women took took big synchronized breaths, stretched their arms up, and wobbled. One of the sheets covering the street-facing windows occasionally fell. Several of the women scurried over to tape it back up. This was necessary, after all, since everyone inside at a dinner earlier this month on the Lower East Side was naked. The food-dinner experience is hosted by the artist and model Charlie Ann Maxx. For $88, and after Ms. Max has approved the application, guests come together to enjoy, according to the website, quote, a liberating space that celebrates our most pure selves through plant-based cooking, art, nudity, and self-love. Sounds like an impressive group of women, though. Self-love. I'm not a big fan of that concept, to be honest. It's really worthy. Let's do that on an Ultimate Issues Hour. Self-love. So I know the answer to this question, though I have never asked this question to my, my dear producer and friend of many years. I've never asked you this, and I know you'll be honest with me. How many times a decade do you feel that you love yourself? He cracked up. Do you know how hard it is to crack him up? This was a, this was a real moment. You, you missed it, Sean. The man laughed. I will remember this forever, how I made Alan Estrin laugh by asking him how often in a decade does he think about how much he loves himself. Okay, so that answered the question, right? Never, ever. I never did either. I do think, do I respect myself? I think, am I proud of myself? I do think that, I admit it. If I have earned my own respect, it matters to me. Self-love, it's a very big part of the left. It is narcissism writ large, leftism. That's why it is all based on feelings, because they so love themselves they trust their feelings as guides to what is right. That's why they have contempt for religion. Religion says we don't really give a damn about your feelings, do what is right.

Wow.

Anyway, that's it. Their most pure self. So are you at your most pure self? It's another term I don't understand. What does it mean to be your pure self? You're naked and you're your pure self. Huh, that's fascinating. Well, I don't— I, I'm trying to think what it even means. You're more pure when you're naked. You're more naked when you're naked. That's the only thing one could say about being naked. That's what you are. You're more naked. You're not more pure. Okay, it doesn't mean anything anyway. It doesn't. And how are they more pure? Through plant-based cooking. Art, nudity, and self-love. I'll bet you they all went to college. That's where you learn to come up with meaningless phrases. You're more pure with plant-based cooking? On the contrary, you're far more pure if you eat animals. That's what humans do. That's the natural thing. I'm not saying you should eat animals. I have no issue with you if you're a vegan, but don't give me this nonsense. You're more pure. Art? Art is awesome. I don't know what, what it has to do with purity. Nudity, I already discussed. And self-love, I discussed that too. And that's what they do. I really, I ache to know if any of them did not go to college, and how many of them have a husband and children. More on this from the New York Times coverage of the group when we come back. All right, everybody, I'm gonna get back to that New York Times story on the sophisticated women who have these new dinners together on the Lower East Side of Manhattan. But first, actually something uplifting in the best sense. My next to last day of March, fundraising month for PragerU, and I get to speak to young people affiliated with PragerU, and you get to hear them and watch them at the Salem News Channel if you want to watch my show. And I welcome a pre-med student, Olivia Rutowski, who is someone who's been touched by, by PragerU, and she's in Buffalo, New York. And hello, Olivia.

Hello.

It's a pleasure indeed. We just met About 2 minutes ago, folks, just to check the technical aspects of this. So you're a pre-med student and I'm reading your bio here. You're a biology pre-med student aspiring to be a pro-life doctor that advocates on behalf of the unborn. Wants to thank Dennis and PragerU for connecting her with some of her closest friends because of the Prager Pairs program. She connected with two sisters who happened to attend the same church as she. Upon discovering all of the common values they shared, they started their own young adult church group that continues to grow and aims to bring together young people of faith both in their church and in the Buffalo community. She enjoys listening to both the fireside chats and to the Dennis and Julie podcast. Is that all accurate?

It is indeed, yes.

Is it a little funny for you to be speaking to me after watching me so much?

It is a little bit, but it's very exciting.

That's sweet. Well, I'm delighted. So tell me about Prager Pairs. There's so much that goes on at PragerU, I don't even know all of it. What is Prager Pairs?

So Prager Pairs is basically a program where PragerU connects young people either within a certain area or people from across the country. And it kind of works as like a pen pal system, but electronically. So you get connected with this person who has similar values or interests, and then you just kind of go from there.

So how does that— how does that differ from Prager Force?

So this is more of a one-on-one. You get paired up with someone who specifically meets your, uh, maybe interests or values, and then you get their specific contact information, and then you can connect with them individually.

So what year are you in at college?

I'm a junior.

And then you obviously hope to go to medical school.

Yes, I do.

So you have a few things working against you. One is you're white, and I'm not being cute, unfortunately. I'm sure you're aware of that. Well, you are female. That's better than being a white male. On the other hand, do you think that, uh, medical schools to whom you apply will know you're pro-life?

I do, based by— based on the different organizations that I'm affiliated with. And I've taken the attitude that if they don't want to have me, then that's not a school that I want to attend anyways.

Well, that's very healthy.

I—

it's fascinating. The school you now attend, which was a new name to me— tell everybody what college you're at, if you're okay with that.

I go to Canisius College, which is located in Buffalo.

And, and I asked you if it was a Christian school. He said it's a Catholic school, a Jesuit school. Is your school traditionally Catholic, or, or is it sliding toward wokeism?

It's sliding towards wokeism.

I wish you could see—

we do have that.

I'm sorry.

We do have math on a weekly basis that's offered here, but with some of the curriculum that's been shifting, I would say it's more woke.

Wow. Can you give an example?

Oh gosh, no, that's, that's difficult.

Well, for example, do they— are any of your classes' teachers asking for Or is a teacher asking for preferred pronouns?

Oh yes, yes.

You see, that's fascinating. I asked you for an example of how it's tending woke and you were stymied for a moment. It shows how taken for granted it is that you didn't even think to give that as an example of being woke.

No.

That's so illuminating what just happened. I'm saying this for all of my listeners. All right, I'm going to be back with you, Olivia, in a moment. Please, please hang on if you would. Hi everybody, welcome back. I'm speaking with a college student, Olivia Rutowski. She's in Buffalo area, the Buffalo area. She's pre-med and very much active at PragerU in various endeavors that PragerU has for young people. So I come back to you, Olivia. This was really an illuminating moment, even for you, I think. When I asked you, is your college, which is nominally Jesuit/Catholic, is it tending toward wokeism? You said yes. And then I said, can you give me an example? And you couldn't come up with one immediately. So I said, are they asking for preferred pronouns? And you said, of course. So it's the depth of the infiltration of left or woke into college is such that it's now difficult to distinguish between normal and woke. But 8 years ago, maybe 5, nobody was asking for preferred pronouns. They wouldn't have known what people meant. So what's Catholic about your college, Canisius, other than having Mass each week?

It was founded by Saint Peter Canisius of Loyola, and we still offer, as I said, the Mass, and campus ministry is fairly active on campus with different service trips. But the curriculum itself and the religious department, the religious education studies department, has been being cut. Their classes have been— they haven't been offered as frequently, and it's just not the same school that it once was in that kind of—

Is there a dean of diversity, equity, and inclusion?

I believe there is.

You hear that? At a Catholic college. Wow. So among your fellow students— am I losing Olivia? Something happened there.

Yeah. No, we're okay now.

Okay, we're good. Among your fellow students, how many would you say support the woke ideas? What percentage?

I would say more than half, if not maybe two-thirds.

Wow. So you're a minority at a Catholic college, you, Olivia?

Oh, very much so, yes.

Well, people need to hear that. Are your parents aware of that?

It's very isolating. Oh yes. Mm-hmm. But at the same time, it's not as bad as, say, a state school.

Right, correct. Where it would be 95%.

Yes.

Not 66 and two-thirds percent. I'll ask you the question I ask almost every, uh, young woman I meet under 30. That you certainly qualify. How old are you, 17?

I'm 20.

Oh, you're 20. Okay. And so perfect, even better in some ways. So I'm offering you two guarantees. You can choose one, and this is important to know. You're choosing a guarantee does not mean the other cannot happen. It just means it's not guaranteed. Am I clear?

Yes.

Okay. You could be guaranteed a great career or a great marriage. Which guarantee would you take?

A great marriage.

What percentage of the young women at your college would answer that, in your opinion?

Oh, maybe 5%.

Wow. That's a Catholic college, I might add. Well, I'm just letting that sink into people. I thought you might say 25%, but 5%— you're probably right. You're probably right. Well, that's a, that's a recipe for a less happy life on their part.

Being in New York kind of contributes to that as well.

Right. Which is interesting though, because people, I mean, I don't live in New York. I grew up in New York City, but it's been a long time. I think, and maybe incorrectly, I think of upstate New York, and you can't get more upstate than Buffalo. I think of it as different from New York City.

It is. It is. And the community is very— it's much— it's very much so different than New York City. But I would still say it's liberal.

Well, indeed it is. So how did you find PragerU? How did you discover it?

I can't remember exactly which video it was, but I came across your fireside chat, I believe, on YouTube, and I just started watching them over the pandemic while we were all locked down. And I just really absolutely loved them. I loved how real it was, and I— a lot of the topics just really resonated with me, and I just couldn't get enough of them. So I kept watching, and then I looked to see what other videos there were and how else I could get involved with PragerU. And I figured that there were more young people out there like me, and as it turns out, I was right. And then, as you mentioned before, through Prager Pairs, I got connected with some in my area who turned out to be some of my best friends.

God, you made my day. And it says here that you watch or listen to Dennis and Julie. Is that correct?

Yes, I always have it on in my car as I'm driving into school.

I want everybody to know this— not affiliated with PragerU, but it doesn't matter. We, we promote everything that is good. And I have been doing for Salem a weekly podcast with Julie Hartman. She's 23, and we have a rapport that is sort of magical, and you would all find it fascinating each week. Dennis and Julie, where could they go, Sean, for to watch or listen to Dennis and Julie? Uh, on, on YouTube to The Dennis Prager Show. That's what they would put in, and it's a channel. Or, or Salem Podcast Network. Good. Well, I'm going to tell Julie. She will, she will truly be delighted.

Well, she's such an inspiration.

Oh God, you, you made my day saying that. Well, listen, uh, you give everybody listening hope. I hope you and I meet in person one day. That's all I can say.

I do too.

Well, wonderful.

Thank you so much for this.

You're welcome, and thank you for this. Please, folks, help PragerU. You see its effect on people. PragerU.com. Hi everybody, Dennis Prager here. Gonna go to international affairs right now, and we speak to Michael Doran, who's been on this program before. He is senior fellow at the Center for Peace and Security in the Middle East at the Hudson Institute. Michael Doran, welcome to the Dennis Prager Show. Welcome back, actually. Where am I talking to you from? Where are you right now?

I'm sitting in a hotel room in New York City. Where do you— I usually work in Washington, D.C.

Lucky you, two great places to be with people with our values. It's okay, I'm in LA, I shouldn't be laughing at you.

It's my life, my entire life I've been surrounded by liberals and most of that time I haven't been a liberal. I don't know why it's worked out that way.

Because God has a sense of humor. That's why. It's clear, exactly.

He's got a great sense of irony.

Yeah, great sense of irony is even better than sense of humor. That's correct. So let's talk about China, Iran, and Russia. We both recall when George W. Bush spoke about the axis of evil. And let's see, that was Iraq, Iran, and North Korea, I think. Oh yeah, North Korea. That is correct. So do we have a new one now with Iran, China, and Russia?

Absolutely. In my mind, there's no doubt about it. Personally, I've been arguing that for well over a year. I think people are starting to catch up to it now.

Iran, China, and Russia— what do they have in common?

They all have in common that the thing that we need to worry most about is they all want to undermine the American order, the American internet, the American-led international order. Each one of them is operating in its own sphere to undermine America in that arena. Unfortunately, the Biden administration has not woken up to the fact that the— that, that those three are working together to undermine the United States in the Middle East. They, they continue to believe, the Biden administration, that there are overlapping interests remarkably between the United States and Iran and between the United States and China, uh, and also Russia in the Middle East.

I'm quiet because I'm dazzled by what you just said. There are people in the Biden administration who believe that the U.S. and China have parallel interests?

Absolutely, absolutely. The most obvious example of that is the response, the official response that we got from this deal that China just brokered between Saudi Arabia and Iran. And the response in the White House was, there's— we don't need to be worried about the fact that China just stepped into a superpower role reconciling our greatest Arab ally and our greatest enemy, Saudi Arabia, and our greatest enemy in the region, Iran, because the outcome of the deal is what the United States has been aiming for all along, namely a reduction of tension in the region. That's a, that's a, that's a clear statement that the United States and China are not, are not engaged in a serious competition over leadership in the Middle East and that China's goals and America's goals are compatible. And for the longest time, American officials have believed that China is not really competing with the United States in the Middle East because it benefits in this analysis from the American-led order in the region. All China wants to do is extract resources. That's the main thing it wants to do, wants to take care of business. And as long as the United States is taking care of the security in the region, that suits China fine. And the United States doesn't have to be worried about that. Now, there's a little bit of growing sense in a lot of— not a little bit, in a lot of quarters, there's a starting to be a sense that maybe China has much greater aspirations in the Middle East. But there's still a complacency that's left over from that earlier thinking.

It's, it's almost unbelievable in the literal sense of the word that there are people in the administration of the President of the United States of America who believe that America and China have parallel interests. I mean, let's go to this deal that that China brokered? I don't believe it was for oil. It would seem to me to be purely for influence.

I think the two are intimately connected. I don't think you can disconnect them. Obviously, you're correct that this deal was really about asserting China's role as a guarantor of order and peace in the region. It's new rule. And so in that sense, it had nothing to do with oil. But China's number one interest in the region is, is energy. As long as the United States is there, the United States is, is there as the primary military power. As long as it has military primacy in the Middle East, it is threatening the supply lines of China because China is completely dependent on on oil that either comes from the Middle East or transits through it. That's true also of all of America's allies in Asia, all of China's rivals. That's Japan, Australia, South Korea, India, Taiwan itself. They're all dependent on Middle Eastern oil. So if there was a war over Taiwan tomorrow, The United States could hold China's energy supply hostage. But if China can reverse that and can oust the United States and become the dominant power in the region, then it can hold all of its East Asian rivals, their, their supply, their oil supplies hostage. And so behind the push to be a great power in the Middle East is this desire to dominate the energy, the international energy market.

And not be held hostage to American control of their area. That's what you're saying.

Right.

I don't— so I don't know the answer to this. Prior to this agreement, was China not getting oil from Iran?

No, it's been getting oil from Iran and it gets oil— it gets oil from Iran at a very cut-rate price because of the American sanctions on Iran. and the Biden administration has turned a blind eye to sales to China. The Trump administration pretty much shut down the supply of oil from Iran, uh, to China. Uh, the Biden administration claims that the sanctions are still working, are still in place, because they have not formally lifted the sanctions, but informally they haven't enforced them. And so Oil sales to China from Iran are through the roof. And the administration is happy with that, by the way, because just as it's happy with Venezuelan oil on the market, it doesn't, it doesn't want to develop the fossil fuels industry in the United States, but it wants to keep the price down. And so it's happy to have our adversaries sell, uh, sell oil on the market.

Oh my God, I want people to digest what you just said. So it is better from the perspective of the Democratic Party of the United States to have the America-hating genocide-threatening totalitarian Islamic regime enriched by oil sales than have America produce oil. Is that correct?

That's, that's exactly right. Of course, they will never admit this.

What do you mean they won't? I don't— what will they say? How will they not admit?

Well, because they, they don't admit, for example, that they are allowing, uh, that they are allowing Iran to sell oil to China. When, when they're pressed about it and when they're asked, they say we're— as Tony Blinken, the Secretary of State, was pressed by Ted Cruz, Senator Ted Cruz, about 2 weeks ago. He was asked this very question and he said, we are working to shut down those sales. But, you know, this is— they will— they'll be making that effort all the way till 2024. And if Biden is reelected, they'll continue to make that effort without success.

Yeah, but you just said earlier that they welcomed the China-brokered Saudi-Iran peace deal. So how are they working to undermine a deal that they support?

Well, they're not very good at explaining how they're working.

I see.

It's an aspiration.

Well, look, 2 and 2 doesn't equal 4 in all schools anymore. So this would be part of that. I'm going to continue with you if you have a few moments.

I'd love to. Thank you.

Good. Thank you. Michael Doran, a senior fellow at the Center for Peace and Security in the Middle East at the Hudson Institute. The world is unraveling because of America's left. We continue. The Dennis Prager Show. Speaking to and with Michael Doran, and he is a senior fellow at the Center for Peace and Security in the Middle East at the Hudson Institute. So let me review the last points in a nutshell. The United States of America, because of who governs it now, the Democratic Party Dennis Prager and President Joe Biden prefers that Iran be enriched by oil sales to places like China rather than keep on developing oil and fossil-based fuel in America. Is that correct? I'm not hearing him, Sean.

You can't hear me now?

Now I can.

Yes, that's absolutely correct. There's an unofficial deal, a backroom deal between Biden and the progressives where he'll do everything possible not to develop, not to develop fossil fuels in the United States. And as a result, they don't— by the way, they don't want to develop fossil fuels abroad either.

Yeah, but they're making it possible.

They don't want new projects. They put out a cable in the beginning of the administration, no new fossil fuels projects, because we're only working on renewables. And then the Ukraine war hit and the reality hit. And they were— they had this problem of having to meet the needs of the Europeans. To fill in for the— fill the gap left by the Russian gas. And so they moved away from that a little bit. But there's still a desire within the system not to develop new fossil fuels. And so the only answer then, because demand for fossil fuels remains constant or increasing or is increasing. So the only answer then is to, is to have countries like Iran and Venezuela put their put their energy on the market.

Right. So it does absolutely nothing for the environment. All it does is weaken America and strengthen our enemies. Am I in any way overstating the case?

No, I don't think so. I think, look, what they are doing with their, with their view of the world, which means we have to push the world into this energy transition. Quickly, number one. And number two, this notion that there's no competition between— serious competition between the United States and China in the Middle East. What they are doing is they are creating a fossil fuel system, a global system that is dominated by China, which is China and Russia, China, Russia, Iran. And they are creating a renewables system that is also dominated by China. It's really remarkable. I mean, China, thanks to our sanctions on Russia and Iran, is getting, is getting fossil fuels at half the cost of the international market. And as a result, you see manufacturing moving from places like Germany to China because China, which has no, virtually no oil supplies of its own, has very cheap energy and is, and is willing to, to use it for manufacturing.

Right. Well, just for the record, we could have cheap energy too, and our own.

Absolutely.

We wouldn't even eat— we wouldn't need it from Saudi Arabia or Iran.

Absolutely. And we could have— we could have many— we have— we have— we have natural gas supplies that are unbelievable. We could have our— we could revitalize our own manufacturing sector with this. But instead, we prefer to deliver it to China. And then we— and then John Kerry wants— John Kerry wants us to buy solar panels built by slave labor in Xinjiang, which is also going to benefit China. It's— it's— everything is topsy-turvy.

And what about the statistic? Do you believe it's accurate? A coal mine every 2 weeks or more built in China?

I don't know about how accurate it is, but it's absolutely the case that our policies restricting fossil fuels are not doing anything to save the environment by the standards of the people who say they're saving the environment with these policies.

All right. Finally, I know this is not a Middle East question. And but nevertheless, if you have an opinion on it, and if you don't, I respect that. Do you think China will give arms to Russia?

Uh, I don't know. I don't know if it will give, if it will give arms to Russia. Um, clearly we've seen the reports that they, that they're considering it. Uh, but I think if you look at all the other ways in which China is helping Russia We don't need to, we don't need to be, you know, to gild the lily too much about whether they're in an alliance against us. I think it's quite obvious that they are. The drones that the Iranians are using, that the Iranians are supplying to the Russians in Ukraine, have Chinese engines in them. So, you know, there's all kinds of ways in which the Chinese are making sure that the Russians have.

Forgive me, I said it was the last question. It was really the penultimate question. Here's the last question. So guide me through this. Iran will now be paying for— or China will now be paying, I should say, with Chinese currency rather than dollars for Iranian oil. Is that correct?

Yeah, so what China is demanding or asking— Xi Jinping is asking of not just the Iranians, but also the Saudis, the Emiratis, is that the oil purchases from the Middle East be invoiced in Chinese currency, in yuan. And there's— exactly what the Saudis are going to do about this is not clear, but I think some percentage of the purchases by China will be done in yuan. In yuan. That's probably what will happen.

Wow.

In Iraq, Iraq is already accepting, which is an oil exporter to China, is accepting yuan. What the Chinese want here is they want to displace the dollar.

They want to displace us in every way.

They want to, they want to, they want to. They won't be able to displace the dollar. We're too strong. But they want to have, they want to have purchases that cannot be sanctioned by the United States.

That's very clarifying. Thank you, sir. Michael Duran. I appreciate you very much.

Thank you.

Dennis Prager here. Thanks for listening to the Daily Dennis Prager Podcast. To hear the entire 3 hours of my radio show commercial-free every single day, become a member of PragerTopia. You'll also get access to 15 years' worth of archives, as well as the daily show prep. Subscribe at pragertopia.com.