October 2, 2024 • 23 mins
Buck Sexton is joined by guest Inez Feltscher as they dive into a conversation about a recent #Newsweek article titled, How #HotGirls Became the Right’s New Obsession. They explore the media's portrayal of beauty, political implications surrounding attractive women, and why conservative figures like #AnnaPaulinaLuna and #SydneySweeney have become focal points in the conversation. Buck and Inez also discuss the left's reaction to beauty, societal standards, and body image.
Follow Clay & Buck on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/clayandbuck
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:11):
You're listening to the Buck Sexton Show podcast, make sure
you subscribe to the podcast on the iHeartRadio app or
wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 2 (00:20):
Hey, everybody, Welcome to the Buck Brief in As Felcher
is with us. She is a senior policy and legal
analyst at the Independent Women's Forum. She writes, she thinks
she speaks. She does all the good commentary stuff. And
you know, it always good to see again.
Speaker 1 (00:34):
How are you.
Speaker 3 (00:36):
I'm great, How are you. It's good to be back.
Speaker 1 (00:38):
Yeah, I'm good.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
You know we've known each other like over a decade.
Now you realize this, we are getting old. I'm just
going to start off by telling you this. Yeah, I
was thinking about this beforehand.
Speaker 3 (00:45):
Since we're going to talk about Sidney Sweeney.
Speaker 2 (00:47):
You know, you have to tell me what the cool
kids are talking about these days. Let me let me
jump right into this Newsweek. This is a real headline
from a real thing that Newsweek wrote, how hot girls
became the rights new obsession, and then it jumps into
all the like really attractive conservative people and even people
(01:11):
who are maybe conservative, like you mentioned Sidney Sweeny. This
thiss never come out as Republican. Uh, just just take
this and run with it for a second, Like it's
a surprise to Newsweek that pretty women are something that
does well in media.
Speaker 1 (01:25):
I don't know.
Speaker 3 (01:26):
Yeah, I mean, look, if they want to hand this
one to us on the right, I'll take it. Right.
I'm a cited expert in this article. By the way,
I just want everyone to know not everyone can make
it as a public intellectual. Sometimes you have to come
up with at least one really great and original idea,
like guys like hot chicks, and you just have to
be the bravest of the brave one to say it first,
you know, like, just put it out there. That's my recommendation. No,
(01:50):
this is ridiculous, right, If they want to hand this
to us, the fact that you know, people like looking
at attractive women, and men in particular like looking at
attractive women, and they want to label that right wing,
well I'm all in favor of that.
Speaker 1 (02:00):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (02:01):
This is about as basic a a human need desire
as you know. It's like people are thirsty and they're like,
what people like food that tastes good because they have
to eat food, and like men like.
Speaker 3 (02:14):
Starting to sound like a right wing extremists.
Speaker 2 (02:16):
Now, I know, men like attractive women. You know, well,
this is the things that they try to tag us
with on the right these days. And then tag us
I guess you put in quotes like they try to
hit us with, like how do you know that? There
have been pieces written about how? And I wish this
were more true for myself. I need to get the
gym more right wing. How how if you work out more,
you become more right wing. And it seems like in
(02:36):
the commentary space, if you're an attractive woman, you tend
to be more likely to be right wing. And I
think that's in part because beauty is inherently unequal, Like
there's something about beauty that, to people that are obsessed
with collectivism and and a kind of radical egalitarianism, is
inherently unfair.
Speaker 3 (02:56):
I mean, like a lot of things, there's a truth.
There's a sort of grain of truth underlying to this,
and I think you're kind of getting at it, which
is not that it's right wing for men to appreciate
hot women. That's pretty universal, right, But but what you're
getting at in that inequality, there's a harrison Burgian kind
of quality to the left where they want to label
all things equally equally beautiful, right, and the fact that
(03:20):
beauty exists in a hierarchy is inherently if offensive to
somebody who has deeply leftist sensibilities, right, which is why
we get these campaigns around obesity being beautiful or you know,
everybody is beautiful, which that's a meaningless statement, right, if
everybody is beautiful, there is no such thing as beauty,
and so like, yes, there's that underlying truth that anything
(03:42):
that is, especially something that is inborn right, something that
might be just granted to people on the basis that
just seems extremely unfair, and so much of the leftist
worldview is raging against the state of nature, raging against
the inherent unfairnesses of life. That, yeah, I guess that's
(04:05):
the underlying truth under this, But it's all phrased in
a very funny way in this article, like noticing the
fact that Sidney Sweeney is hot makes you a right
wing extremist, or like the tweet they quoted for me was, yeah,
a little bit more political in the direction that we're
talking about, which is Sidney Sweeney just seems happy to
(04:25):
be an object of desire, And yeah, that is in
a certain way anti leftist, right, it doesn't mean she's
a right winger or political at all, or that hot
women are political, right, but that attitude towards men oggling
her essentially is something that is now forbidden by a
large part of the left and considered oppressive and whatever.
(04:48):
So that that's the underlying kernel of truth to all
of us. But as far as I'm concerned, they can
write as many articles about as they want about the
fact that if you like to look at hot women,
you're a right winger and you should vote for Donald Trump.
Speaker 1 (05:01):
I mean, great, it was pretty funny.
Speaker 2 (05:02):
I mean that they single out Anna Pauline A Luna,
who's a friend of mine, remember of Congress now, so
Congresswoman Anna Polina Luna, you know, also now a mom
and you know, married for a number of years to
a guy, great dude SF a Special Forces guy. But
they cite her and it's almost like, hey, Congresswoman Luna,
she's good looking.
Speaker 1 (05:22):
What's up with that?
Speaker 3 (05:23):
You know?
Speaker 1 (05:24):
Is this a cause for suspicion?
Speaker 3 (05:25):
Now?
Speaker 2 (05:25):
I mean, I'll just say this, if AOC weighed one
hundred pounds more than she does, she wouldn't have eight
million Twitter followers or whatever and be a household name.
It's just the truth, like it's it's advantageous, particularly for women,
but really in general for people. I mean, look at
the ABC News guy David Weir. I'm not even sure
(05:46):
he could string a sentence together off camera any of
any merit. But I mean, that guy's handsome. I mean,
let's just be honest, he's handsome.
Speaker 3 (05:55):
Yeah. I think the difference in mentality, if there is
a political difference of mentality, is feeling victimized by that fact, right,
that fact of life, versus just addressing it head on
and whether it advantages you or not realizing that that's
that's the state of things. But I do think there's
a segment of the left that feels victimized by the
(06:15):
mere hierarchy of beauty, the fact that some people are
more beautiful than others, the fact that it is advantageous. Right.
I've even seen a similar kind of DEI game being
played academically, for like, oh, if you're overweight, for example,
your lifetime earnings are smaller than somebody who isn't overweight.
That probably overlaps a lot with glass, first of all,
But in any case like that, they're trying to build
(06:38):
the same victimhood structure around something that is just not
equally granted across the board, and that is actually a
deeply left wing mentality to feel the need to kick,
to spend your whole life kicking against the sort of
currents of nature or the basic underlying nature, rather than
just accepting that as a fact and then trying to
(07:00):
build the best life you can around it.
Speaker 2 (07:03):
We're going to talk about Kamala's campaign in the final
weeks here. We've also got the VP debate contup tomorrow,
so we'll get that in a second. But you know,
you didn't vote for this recession or inflation, but you're
sure paying for it at the pump grocery store, perhaps
a stack of unpaid bills. A lot of people out
there have financial stress that is just crushing. But there
is a solution. Done with debt. Dot Com, unlike others
(07:24):
done with debt, created new aggressive strategies designed to get
you out of debt permanently without bankruptcy or loans. Done
with debt stands between you and bill collectors. They negotiate
with your creditors to write off balances, cut interest, and
stop penalties. Let done with debt help you make your
money yours again. Visit done with debt dot com. That's
done with debt dot com. Or call eighty eight three
two two ten fifty four right now chat with one
(07:46):
of their debt relief strategies for free go to done
with debt dot com. That's done with debt dot com.
Kamala is out there and doing some podcasts. Now you
might have seen that she's making some appearances, and she
really I think, manages to make herself in a worse
(08:07):
but like it's bad that she's done so few interviews,
but every time she does an interview, it actually makes
things worse.
Speaker 1 (08:12):
What is she supposed to do? Like it just feels
like there's really no good option.
Speaker 3 (08:19):
I mean, this is the advantage of having the entire
media run your campaign for you, right. I think her
handling team and she herself understands that she's not good
at this. I think that's why the Democratic Party kicked
so hard, the leadership kicked so hard against ousting Joe
Biden for as long as they did until they absolutely
could not, you know, even lie about the condition of
(08:44):
the president right after that debate. It's because they know
that she wasn't good at this. But we're seeing right
now is the benefits the fact that she's in this race.
I think the benefits of swapping someone out really late.
She didn't have to go through a primary, she didn't
have to go through any instance where like the Democrats
were at each other's throats, and therefore the media was
actually doing their job right because I didn't know who
(09:06):
to listen to within their Democratic pay masters to listen to.
That all happened behind the scenes, and that's why we
had that three weeks of media acting like media around
Joe Biden all of a sudden that was so puzzling
to so many of us. But now that's over and
once they've they've unified behind her, they're basically trying to
(09:27):
run a cover up campaign. She's saying things that are
directly contradictory to everything she's ever said and done in
her life. Nobody is going to press her that on
those contradictions, on those lies, and you know, yeah, she
can do a few interviews. You can do one with Oprah,
like if it's good, they'll pull out, you know, one
clip that's salvageable and they'll kind of try to blast
it around that. But really, the media is running her
(09:49):
campaign even more so than We've seen a Democratic campaigns
in the past, in my opinion, so I don't know
if it's going to work or not. The poles are
pretty close, but it's very obvious to me that if
she had had to do a regular campaign season, she
would have had enormous difficulty with that. And the evidence
(10:10):
says she did right even for a Democratic you know,
a Democratic audience. She never got a single vote. She
had to drop out before Iowa and I had to
watch all of those debates for work, So I had
to watch her repeatedly on the debate stage over and
over again in twenty nineteen.
Speaker 1 (10:23):
She is not good at this. She is a DEI
elevated politician. And I'll say it.
Speaker 2 (10:30):
I mean, you see what people say, Oh, she was
the attorney general in California and then she was a
senator from California. Sit there, go yeah, because Democrats tell
us things like we need to have a black female
attorney general, we need to have a black female senator,
we need to have a black female vice president. And
so it's not about whether Kamala Harris was particularly up
(10:51):
for the job a stude record of accomplishment, it was
she fit the superficial characteristics of a Democrat that they
were looking for at the time to promote. You know,
it's amazing you talk about diversity, right if you bring
this up and people say, oh, how Darius, No, you
tell us that you want to promote diversity, and that
means that you're going to put people forward who are
(11:11):
more diverse, and that means you're going to elevate them
for reasons that don't have to do with competency, ability
or track record of accomplishment. And then when we mention that,
you're not allowed to say, well, you can't talk about that, right,
which is effectively what's happening with Kamala.
Speaker 3 (11:25):
Now there's the double standard that you're pointing to, right,
which is they can say that they select it, like
Biden said, I want a black female VP, and we're
not allowed to draw the obvious conclusion that there were
factors involved other than merit in selecting Kamala Harris as
vice presidential candidate right for Joe Biden four years ago.
(11:48):
And so it's obvious if you select on criteria other
than merit, you're not going to get the best person
for the job. And there is this lay again, this
double standard. They can say that they're doing it. But
if the right notices that they're promoting people on the
basis of race and sex, that they are literally saying
that they are doing that, it's how illegitimate to talk about.
(12:11):
And that's very clearly what's happened with Kamla Harris. By
the way, every stuff of the way, she's really had
two things in her corner, the first and most important
of which are her physical characteristics. She has always been
the beneficiary of a Democratic party who wants to promote
black women into positions of power as many of them
as possible. Right, By the way, the right's not blameless
(12:33):
in this either. I mean, the right picks candidates on
DEI considerations all the time.
Speaker 1 (12:37):
I know, and we don't talk about it enough on
our side. People are.
Speaker 2 (12:42):
People all of a sudden, they're like, oh my gosh,
you see this, look at this great this great black
Republican candidate. And I'm like, great candidate. Maybe, sure, Like
why why do we should we care?
Speaker 1 (12:52):
You know?
Speaker 2 (12:53):
Or are we supposed to care about the race or
gender of a candidate. I thought we're not supposed to care, really,
but we kind of do care on the right at
the same time, same thing with women. People were saying, oh,
Trump needs to have a woman VP. Now I understand
these are just political considerations that people are making, but
we're we're not really supposed to do that, right, Like, oh, well,
we need to have a different gender on the ticket too,
(13:13):
because that'll appeal the more women. We play the game
a little bit. On the right, we're not obsessed with
it the way the left is. But there's DEI on
the right as well. I think that's an important point.
Speaker 3 (13:23):
Yeah, I think it comes from a different motivation in
a certain way. The right has this this just like
imbibes too much of the criticism of the left and
feels the need to defend itself. Right, So it's like, no, no, no,
we're not We're not what you say. We are right,
we're not racist, we're not sexist. Look at all these
women and minorities that we put in our convention, and
look at all these women and minorities that we make
(13:44):
as our candidates, and we over emphasize that, and in
some ways it can be you know, I actually disagree
with you. I think that the sort of benefit that
you get as a candidate on the Republican ticket as
a minority a racial minority or a woman is probably
even higher than it is on the left, and part
because they have a larger pool to choose from right.
(14:06):
But there's the first in the Republican Party to make
sure that we don't have don't we don't have representatives
that are those boring old white men. Which actually I
like that this ticket to some extent, which again is
not merit and but we live in this world now,
so I like that our ticket this time around is
Trump and Vance because to some extent it's a middle
(14:28):
finger to this entire type of thinking like this is
not helpful thinking. This does not help us choose the
best candidates, the best leaders. These these checkbox candidates are
you know, some of them are great and some of
them are terrible. Like that's that's the nature of this.
Speaker 2 (14:44):
We'll come into the VP speaking of the ticket, the
VP debate here in just a second. But you know,
for the past decade I've worked on off with Stansbury Research,
and they are one of the best in the world
when it comes to publishing independent financial research. Period They've
just produced an insightfuled new report about how all cross
America are there strange so called accidents that are happening.
We've seen reports of nine one one call centers going offline,
(15:05):
red reports of a plane falling apart mid flight. One
of the big reveals the number of train acts in
last year, some forty seven hundred in all. So why
is this all happening? Learn why so many big accents
are taking place across America and where the next big
accent it's most likely to occur. It's very likely to
affect you, especially if you especially if you have money
in the bank or the markets. Go to America disaster
dot com for the full story. You're not going to
(15:27):
read this anywhere else. Check it out here America disaster
dot com. That's America disaster dot com. I just started
with the obvious one in as anybody really care about
the VP debate? I mean, really, like, do you think
it could even if could it move things even one point?
Speaker 3 (15:47):
I actually think it could and say in the same
way that I thought the last debate was important and
I actually may be in disagreement with a lot of
folks on the right about I think Trump should continue
to take debates because of what we talked about earlier.
I think the media is running Kamala Harris's campaign for her,
and they're willing to let her basically run a basement
(16:08):
campaign and not actually ever get challenged on the fact
that everything she's saying now is directly contradictory to her
entire record as anytime she's had a hand in governance
and anytime she's been on a stage describing her views
for the last twenty years. She's now contradicting that the
media is never going to press that case. So it's
(16:30):
it's up to Trump Advance to press that case. Vance
has been doing an amazing job of exactly that, of
going on the campaign trade and highlighting over and over
again these discrepancies. I hope he continues to do that
tomorrow night. And I do think it could be really
helpful because we have to remember, like a lot of
people in the you know, are only tuning in to
politics right now. They don't remember what Kamala Harris said
(16:53):
in twenty nineteen on the Democratic debate stage, right, So
any opportunity, even if the vice vice presidential debate does
not get the kind of viewership that a presidential debate does,
I think any opportunity to speak directly to the American
people and circumvent the media is even more important in
this campaign than it is for Republicans in like previous campaigns.
Speaker 2 (17:14):
I also think Tim Walls has been a very apparent
weak choice for Kamala Harris, and I do believe that
it was her choice because to me, the obvious choice
would have been Shapiro in Pennsylvania.
Speaker 3 (17:28):
Not not.
Speaker 1 (17:29):
I mean, I think everybody says that, right, It's not
like I came up with this and oh.
Speaker 2 (17:32):
Look look at my analysis, Like Pennsylvania is the key,
It's the only way Kamala can really win. I do
have a theory that maybe Shapiro realize that Kamala's chances
aren't that high and he'd rather run on his own
terms in really what will be a couple of years, right,
but assuming she loses. But nonetheless, Waltz to me, they
(17:52):
you know, they came out with this all, Oh, he's
a coach, he's a military guy, and you can trust him.
And every time he appears anywhere everyone goes.
Speaker 1 (17:58):
Guy's kind of weird. Something's off about him, he says,
other people are weird.
Speaker 3 (18:04):
Yeah. I find him extremely off putting. And the reason
I find him off putting is he is almost like
a walking avatar of the hapless white guy, white dad
in commercials, right, we can't ever have a you know,
portrayal of a white man, god forbid, as kind of
the leader of the family or as competent. And there
(18:27):
there's sort of a caricature, a caricature or a character
that's played in a lot of these commercials. That's like
the Bubbling or think about you know, family guy or
the Simpsons. Right, And it's not that there are no
people like that. Obviously they're playing off a real, real type.
But the more it becomes ubiquitous, the more it annoys me.
And Tim Tim Wolt is that guy, right, He's constantly
(18:50):
downplaying his own competence. He's constantly kind of playing the
clown in a very awkward way. And I think it
is built into the racial views of the Democratic Party. Uh,
they're offering with this whole white dudes for Kamala you
know disaster. They're they're offering a handout to white men,
(19:10):
a demographic that they're bleeding. Right, They're offering a handout.
And their deal that they're offering is you can stop
being the villain for thirty seconds if you just become
a court jester. And that's what I see with Waltz,
aside from all of his obvious, like his obvious radical beliefs,
so how he governed very very far to the left
in Minnesota. But that's the point, that's the idea behind
(19:35):
the Waltz pick is let's just tell all these these
white guys, like, hey, there's a place for you. You
can play the kind of Robin figure to the poc batman, right,
you can be the jester, the backup, the clown, the
you know, sort of the person who's cheering in the background.
And that's really the role he's playing. And it rubs
(19:57):
me the wrong way. I just I rarely make personal
comments about that, must vastly prefer to talk about policy,
to talk about ideology. But there is something about Tim
Waltz that rubs me the wrong way personally, and it's
that performance.
Speaker 2 (20:11):
Yeah, I think, like I said, he's a big weirdo
and I don't believe that anyone who I don't think
he helps with the man problem that Kamala has, meaning
male voters.
Speaker 1 (20:20):
I don't think he helps at all.
Speaker 2 (20:21):
I think people look at him and they go, you know,
the bumbling buffoon guy is not what we're looking for
here to make us feel like there's a balance on
that ticket. But you know, tensions in Israel continue to
be really high over the past week, and Israeli citizens
were threatened by more than one hundred incoming missiles and
drone attacks. The International Fellowship of Christians and Jews, though,
has been on the front lines for decades, helping to
(20:43):
provide Israeli citizens with food and medicine, for bomb shelters,
for stays that can last up to several days. For
more than forty years, the IFCJ has been on the
ground in Israel. In anticipation of a show of support
for our friends in Israel, hundreds, if not thousands, of
churches here in America will honor them in the days
immediately leading up to October seventh, the anniversary date of
Israel being attacked by Hamas. Your generous donation today will
(21:05):
not only provide a flag symbolizing your support in churchyards
across America, but it will also support the fellowships ongoing
emergency efforts in Israel. Visit support IFCJ dot org. That
support IFCJ dot org is I don't know if you
saw this. Not only do they the israelis kill Hassan Esrala,
the leader of hesbe Law. They killed his replacement within
twenty four hours, Like who takes that job?
Speaker 3 (21:28):
Now, yeah, it is. It has been an interesting week
in terms of the things that Israel husband able to
pull off may really change the shape of the Middle East,
which you know, that doesn't happen very often in the
Middle East, And sometimes I think people exaggerate the thousand
year nature of the conflict, right, but it's true that
(21:50):
the paradigm doesn't change very often and oftentimes the all
of the options seem impalatable. That seems to be the
region for for all unpalatable options. But yeah, I mean
it's it's it's hard not to cheer for what has
has been able to accomplish in terms of competency, in
terms of being able to do this targeted and now
(22:11):
a number of strikes, initially with the pagers and the
beepers and the second round of walkie talkies they have
in a week and a half completely dismantled. It seems
like Hesbola's entire leadership and Hesbla was not just threatening Israel,
it was a thorn in the side of a lot
of people. In the Middle East and has prevented a
(22:32):
lot of countries from perhaps pursuing what might more be
closer to their self interest in terms of negotiating with Israel.
So the big question now is how Iran responds to this.
They have to be a little nervous the fact that
this is possible, and it's not only obviously this is
this is a direct threat to Iran as well, because
(22:54):
they are really pulling the strings behind the scenes here,
and the question is are they going to cut hesbel
loose or are we going to have a wider war
in the region between Iran and Israel? And that, you know,
really makes me wish that we had somebody who wasn't
a vegetable sitting in the presidency United States. Right now,
the world generally seems extremely volatile, and in ways that
(23:17):
I know, all the comparisons are always to World War two.
This seems to me to be much more of a
pre World War one kind of arrangement where there are
multiple theaters all over the world, any one of which
could explode into the kind of huge conflagration that involves
great power warfare. And yeah, we don't have anybody in
(23:38):
the driver's seat, So that's I mean.
Speaker 1 (23:41):
It's extremely conserve scrap. It's not not a good place
to be. But don't worry.
Speaker 2 (23:45):
If Kamala takes over things somehow get worse in as
Felcher Stem and everybody go check her out on social media.
Speaker 1 (23:50):
Independent Women's Forum in is my buddy. Good to see
you as always.
Speaker 3 (23:53):
Thank you, it's always great to see you back
You're listening to the Buck Sexton Show podcast, make sure
you subscribe to the podcast on the iHeartRadio app or
wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 2 (00:20):
Hey, everybody, Welcome to the Buck Brief in As Felcher
is with us. She is a senior policy and legal
analyst at the Independent Women's Forum. She writes, she thinks
she speaks. She does all the good commentary stuff. And
you know, it always good to see again.
Speaker 1 (00:34):
How are you.
Speaker 3 (00:36):
I'm great, How are you. It's good to be back.
Speaker 1 (00:38):
Yeah, I'm good.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
You know we've known each other like over a decade.
Now you realize this, we are getting old. I'm just
going to start off by telling you this. Yeah, I
was thinking about this beforehand.
Speaker 3 (00:45):
Since we're going to talk about Sidney Sweeney.
Speaker 2 (00:47):
You know, you have to tell me what the cool
kids are talking about these days. Let me let me
jump right into this Newsweek. This is a real headline
from a real thing that Newsweek wrote, how hot girls
became the rights new obsession, and then it jumps into
all the like really attractive conservative people and even people
(01:11):
who are maybe conservative, like you mentioned Sidney Sweeny. This
thiss never come out as Republican. Uh, just just take
this and run with it for a second, Like it's
a surprise to Newsweek that pretty women are something that
does well in media.
Speaker 1 (01:25):
I don't know.
Speaker 3 (01:26):
Yeah, I mean, look, if they want to hand this
one to us on the right, I'll take it. Right.
I'm a cited expert in this article. By the way,
I just want everyone to know not everyone can make
it as a public intellectual. Sometimes you have to come
up with at least one really great and original idea,
like guys like hot chicks, and you just have to
be the bravest of the brave one to say it first,
you know, like, just put it out there. That's my recommendation. No,
(01:50):
this is ridiculous, right, If they want to hand this
to us, the fact that you know, people like looking
at attractive women, and men in particular like looking at
attractive women, and they want to label that right wing,
well I'm all in favor of that.
Speaker 1 (02:00):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (02:01):
This is about as basic a a human need desire
as you know. It's like people are thirsty and they're like,
what people like food that tastes good because they have
to eat food, and like men like.
Speaker 3 (02:14):
Starting to sound like a right wing extremists.
Speaker 2 (02:16):
Now, I know, men like attractive women. You know, well,
this is the things that they try to tag us
with on the right these days. And then tag us
I guess you put in quotes like they try to
hit us with, like how do you know that? There
have been pieces written about how? And I wish this
were more true for myself. I need to get the
gym more right wing. How how if you work out more,
you become more right wing. And it seems like in
(02:36):
the commentary space, if you're an attractive woman, you tend
to be more likely to be right wing. And I
think that's in part because beauty is inherently unequal, Like
there's something about beauty that, to people that are obsessed
with collectivism and and a kind of radical egalitarianism, is
inherently unfair.
Speaker 3 (02:56):
I mean, like a lot of things, there's a truth.
There's a sort of grain of truth underlying to this,
and I think you're kind of getting at it, which
is not that it's right wing for men to appreciate
hot women. That's pretty universal, right, But but what you're
getting at in that inequality, there's a harrison Burgian kind
of quality to the left where they want to label
all things equally equally beautiful, right, and the fact that
(03:20):
beauty exists in a hierarchy is inherently if offensive to
somebody who has deeply leftist sensibilities, right, which is why
we get these campaigns around obesity being beautiful or you know,
everybody is beautiful, which that's a meaningless statement, right, if
everybody is beautiful, there is no such thing as beauty,
and so like, yes, there's that underlying truth that anything
(03:42):
that is, especially something that is inborn right, something that
might be just granted to people on the basis that
just seems extremely unfair, and so much of the leftist
worldview is raging against the state of nature, raging against
the inherent unfairnesses of life. That, yeah, I guess that's
(04:05):
the underlying truth under this, But it's all phrased in
a very funny way in this article, like noticing the
fact that Sidney Sweeney is hot makes you a right
wing extremist, or like the tweet they quoted for me was, yeah,
a little bit more political in the direction that we're
talking about, which is Sidney Sweeney just seems happy to
(04:25):
be an object of desire, And yeah, that is in
a certain way anti leftist, right, it doesn't mean she's
a right winger or political at all, or that hot
women are political, right, but that attitude towards men oggling
her essentially is something that is now forbidden by a
large part of the left and considered oppressive and whatever.
(04:48):
So that that's the underlying kernel of truth to all
of us. But as far as I'm concerned, they can
write as many articles about as they want about the
fact that if you like to look at hot women,
you're a right winger and you should vote for Donald Trump.
Speaker 1 (05:01):
I mean, great, it was pretty funny.
Speaker 2 (05:02):
I mean that they single out Anna Pauline A Luna,
who's a friend of mine, remember of Congress now, so
Congresswoman Anna Polina Luna, you know, also now a mom
and you know, married for a number of years to
a guy, great dude SF a Special Forces guy. But
they cite her and it's almost like, hey, Congresswoman Luna,
she's good looking.
Speaker 1 (05:22):
What's up with that?
Speaker 3 (05:23):
You know?
Speaker 1 (05:24):
Is this a cause for suspicion?
Speaker 3 (05:25):
Now?
Speaker 2 (05:25):
I mean, I'll just say this, if AOC weighed one
hundred pounds more than she does, she wouldn't have eight
million Twitter followers or whatever and be a household name.
It's just the truth, like it's it's advantageous, particularly for women,
but really in general for people. I mean, look at
the ABC News guy David Weir. I'm not even sure
(05:46):
he could string a sentence together off camera any of
any merit. But I mean, that guy's handsome. I mean,
let's just be honest, he's handsome.
Speaker 3 (05:55):
Yeah. I think the difference in mentality, if there is
a political difference of mentality, is feeling victimized by that fact, right,
that fact of life, versus just addressing it head on
and whether it advantages you or not realizing that that's
that's the state of things. But I do think there's
a segment of the left that feels victimized by the
(06:15):
mere hierarchy of beauty, the fact that some people are
more beautiful than others, the fact that it is advantageous. Right.
I've even seen a similar kind of DEI game being
played academically, for like, oh, if you're overweight, for example,
your lifetime earnings are smaller than somebody who isn't overweight.
That probably overlaps a lot with glass, first of all,
But in any case like that, they're trying to build
(06:38):
the same victimhood structure around something that is just not
equally granted across the board, and that is actually a
deeply left wing mentality to feel the need to kick,
to spend your whole life kicking against the sort of
currents of nature or the basic underlying nature, rather than
just accepting that as a fact and then trying to
(07:00):
build the best life you can around it.
Speaker 2 (07:03):
We're going to talk about Kamala's campaign in the final
weeks here. We've also got the VP debate contup tomorrow,
so we'll get that in a second. But you know,
you didn't vote for this recession or inflation, but you're
sure paying for it at the pump grocery store, perhaps
a stack of unpaid bills. A lot of people out
there have financial stress that is just crushing. But there
is a solution. Done with debt. Dot Com, unlike others
(07:24):
done with debt, created new aggressive strategies designed to get
you out of debt permanently without bankruptcy or loans. Done
with debt stands between you and bill collectors. They negotiate
with your creditors to write off balances, cut interest, and
stop penalties. Let done with debt help you make your
money yours again. Visit done with debt dot com. That's
done with debt dot com. Or call eighty eight three
two two ten fifty four right now chat with one
(07:46):
of their debt relief strategies for free go to done
with debt dot com. That's done with debt dot com.
Kamala is out there and doing some podcasts. Now you
might have seen that she's making some appearances, and she
really I think, manages to make herself in a worse
(08:07):
but like it's bad that she's done so few interviews,
but every time she does an interview, it actually makes
things worse.
Speaker 1 (08:12):
What is she supposed to do? Like it just feels
like there's really no good option.
Speaker 3 (08:19):
I mean, this is the advantage of having the entire
media run your campaign for you, right. I think her
handling team and she herself understands that she's not good
at this. I think that's why the Democratic Party kicked
so hard, the leadership kicked so hard against ousting Joe
Biden for as long as they did until they absolutely
could not, you know, even lie about the condition of
(08:44):
the president right after that debate. It's because they know
that she wasn't good at this. But we're seeing right
now is the benefits the fact that she's in this race.
I think the benefits of swapping someone out really late.
She didn't have to go through a primary, she didn't
have to go through any instance where like the Democrats
were at each other's throats, and therefore the media was
actually doing their job right because I didn't know who
(09:06):
to listen to within their Democratic pay masters to listen to.
That all happened behind the scenes, and that's why we
had that three weeks of media acting like media around
Joe Biden all of a sudden that was so puzzling
to so many of us. But now that's over and
once they've they've unified behind her, they're basically trying to
(09:27):
run a cover up campaign. She's saying things that are
directly contradictory to everything she's ever said and done in
her life. Nobody is going to press her that on
those contradictions, on those lies, and you know, yeah, she
can do a few interviews. You can do one with Oprah,
like if it's good, they'll pull out, you know, one
clip that's salvageable and they'll kind of try to blast
it around that. But really, the media is running her
(09:49):
campaign even more so than We've seen a Democratic campaigns
in the past, in my opinion, so I don't know
if it's going to work or not. The poles are
pretty close, but it's very obvious to me that if
she had had to do a regular campaign season, she
would have had enormous difficulty with that. And the evidence
(10:10):
says she did right even for a Democratic you know,
a Democratic audience. She never got a single vote. She
had to drop out before Iowa and I had to
watch all of those debates for work, So I had
to watch her repeatedly on the debate stage over and
over again in twenty nineteen.
Speaker 1 (10:23):
She is not good at this. She is a DEI
elevated politician. And I'll say it.
Speaker 2 (10:30):
I mean, you see what people say, Oh, she was
the attorney general in California and then she was a
senator from California. Sit there, go yeah, because Democrats tell
us things like we need to have a black female
attorney general, we need to have a black female senator,
we need to have a black female vice president. And
so it's not about whether Kamala Harris was particularly up
(10:51):
for the job a stude record of accomplishment, it was
she fit the superficial characteristics of a Democrat that they
were looking for at the time to promote. You know,
it's amazing you talk about diversity, right if you bring
this up and people say, oh, how Darius, No, you
tell us that you want to promote diversity, and that
means that you're going to put people forward who are
(11:11):
more diverse, and that means you're going to elevate them
for reasons that don't have to do with competency, ability
or track record of accomplishment. And then when we mention that,
you're not allowed to say, well, you can't talk about that, right,
which is effectively what's happening with Kamala.
Speaker 3 (11:25):
Now there's the double standard that you're pointing to, right,
which is they can say that they select it, like
Biden said, I want a black female VP, and we're
not allowed to draw the obvious conclusion that there were
factors involved other than merit in selecting Kamala Harris as
vice presidential candidate right for Joe Biden four years ago.
(11:48):
And so it's obvious if you select on criteria other
than merit, you're not going to get the best person
for the job. And there is this lay again, this
double standard. They can say that they're doing it. But
if the right notices that they're promoting people on the
basis of race and sex, that they are literally saying
that they are doing that, it's how illegitimate to talk about.
(12:11):
And that's very clearly what's happened with Kamla Harris. By
the way, every stuff of the way, she's really had
two things in her corner, the first and most important
of which are her physical characteristics. She has always been
the beneficiary of a Democratic party who wants to promote
black women into positions of power as many of them
as possible. Right, By the way, the right's not blameless
(12:33):
in this either. I mean, the right picks candidates on
DEI considerations all the time.
Speaker 1 (12:37):
I know, and we don't talk about it enough on
our side. People are.
Speaker 2 (12:42):
People all of a sudden, they're like, oh my gosh,
you see this, look at this great this great black
Republican candidate. And I'm like, great candidate. Maybe, sure, Like
why why do we should we care?
Speaker 1 (12:52):
You know?
Speaker 2 (12:53):
Or are we supposed to care about the race or
gender of a candidate. I thought we're not supposed to care, really,
but we kind of do care on the right at
the same time, same thing with women. People were saying, oh,
Trump needs to have a woman VP. Now I understand
these are just political considerations that people are making, but
we're we're not really supposed to do that, right, Like, oh, well,
we need to have a different gender on the ticket too,
(13:13):
because that'll appeal the more women. We play the game
a little bit. On the right, we're not obsessed with
it the way the left is. But there's DEI on
the right as well. I think that's an important point.
Speaker 3 (13:23):
Yeah, I think it comes from a different motivation in
a certain way. The right has this this just like
imbibes too much of the criticism of the left and
feels the need to defend itself. Right, So it's like, no, no, no,
we're not We're not what you say. We are right,
we're not racist, we're not sexist. Look at all these
women and minorities that we put in our convention, and
look at all these women and minorities that we make
(13:44):
as our candidates, and we over emphasize that, and in
some ways it can be you know, I actually disagree
with you. I think that the sort of benefit that
you get as a candidate on the Republican ticket as
a minority a racial minority or a woman is probably
even higher than it is on the left, and part
because they have a larger pool to choose from right.
(14:06):
But there's the first in the Republican Party to make
sure that we don't have don't we don't have representatives
that are those boring old white men. Which actually I
like that this ticket to some extent, which again is
not merit and but we live in this world now,
so I like that our ticket this time around is
Trump and Vance because to some extent it's a middle
(14:28):
finger to this entire type of thinking like this is
not helpful thinking. This does not help us choose the
best candidates, the best leaders. These these checkbox candidates are
you know, some of them are great and some of
them are terrible. Like that's that's the nature of this.
Speaker 2 (14:44):
We'll come into the VP speaking of the ticket, the
VP debate here in just a second. But you know,
for the past decade I've worked on off with Stansbury Research,
and they are one of the best in the world
when it comes to publishing independent financial research. Period They've
just produced an insightfuled new report about how all cross
America are there strange so called accidents that are happening.
We've seen reports of nine one one call centers going offline,
(15:05):
red reports of a plane falling apart mid flight. One
of the big reveals the number of train acts in
last year, some forty seven hundred in all. So why
is this all happening? Learn why so many big accents
are taking place across America and where the next big
accent it's most likely to occur. It's very likely to
affect you, especially if you especially if you have money
in the bank or the markets. Go to America disaster
dot com for the full story. You're not going to
(15:27):
read this anywhere else. Check it out here America disaster
dot com. That's America disaster dot com. I just started
with the obvious one in as anybody really care about
the VP debate? I mean, really, like, do you think
it could even if could it move things even one point?
Speaker 3 (15:47):
I actually think it could and say in the same
way that I thought the last debate was important and
I actually may be in disagreement with a lot of
folks on the right about I think Trump should continue
to take debates because of what we talked about earlier.
I think the media is running Kamala Harris's campaign for her,
and they're willing to let her basically run a basement
(16:08):
campaign and not actually ever get challenged on the fact
that everything she's saying now is directly contradictory to her
entire record as anytime she's had a hand in governance
and anytime she's been on a stage describing her views
for the last twenty years. She's now contradicting that the
media is never going to press that case. So it's
(16:30):
it's up to Trump Advance to press that case. Vance
has been doing an amazing job of exactly that, of
going on the campaign trade and highlighting over and over
again these discrepancies. I hope he continues to do that
tomorrow night. And I do think it could be really
helpful because we have to remember, like a lot of
people in the you know, are only tuning in to
politics right now. They don't remember what Kamala Harris said
(16:53):
in twenty nineteen on the Democratic debate stage, right, So
any opportunity, even if the vice vice presidential debate does
not get the kind of viewership that a presidential debate does,
I think any opportunity to speak directly to the American
people and circumvent the media is even more important in
this campaign than it is for Republicans in like previous campaigns.
Speaker 2 (17:14):
I also think Tim Walls has been a very apparent
weak choice for Kamala Harris, and I do believe that
it was her choice because to me, the obvious choice
would have been Shapiro in Pennsylvania.
Speaker 3 (17:28):
Not not.
Speaker 1 (17:29):
I mean, I think everybody says that, right, It's not
like I came up with this and oh.
Speaker 2 (17:32):
Look look at my analysis, Like Pennsylvania is the key,
It's the only way Kamala can really win. I do
have a theory that maybe Shapiro realize that Kamala's chances
aren't that high and he'd rather run on his own
terms in really what will be a couple of years, right,
but assuming she loses. But nonetheless, Waltz to me, they
(17:52):
you know, they came out with this all, Oh, he's
a coach, he's a military guy, and you can trust him.
And every time he appears anywhere everyone goes.
Speaker 1 (17:58):
Guy's kind of weird. Something's off about him, he says,
other people are weird.
Speaker 3 (18:04):
Yeah. I find him extremely off putting. And the reason
I find him off putting is he is almost like
a walking avatar of the hapless white guy, white dad
in commercials, right, we can't ever have a you know,
portrayal of a white man, god forbid, as kind of
the leader of the family or as competent. And there
(18:27):
there's sort of a caricature, a caricature or a character
that's played in a lot of these commercials. That's like
the Bubbling or think about you know, family guy or
the Simpsons. Right, And it's not that there are no
people like that. Obviously they're playing off a real, real type.
But the more it becomes ubiquitous, the more it annoys me.
And Tim Tim Wolt is that guy, right, He's constantly
(18:50):
downplaying his own competence. He's constantly kind of playing the
clown in a very awkward way. And I think it
is built into the racial views of the Democratic Party. Uh,
they're offering with this whole white dudes for Kamala you
know disaster. They're they're offering a handout to white men,
(19:10):
a demographic that they're bleeding. Right, They're offering a handout.
And their deal that they're offering is you can stop
being the villain for thirty seconds if you just become
a court jester. And that's what I see with Waltz,
aside from all of his obvious, like his obvious radical beliefs,
so how he governed very very far to the left
in Minnesota. But that's the point, that's the idea behind
(19:35):
the Waltz pick is let's just tell all these these
white guys, like, hey, there's a place for you. You
can play the kind of Robin figure to the poc batman, right,
you can be the jester, the backup, the clown, the
you know, sort of the person who's cheering in the background.
And that's really the role he's playing. And it rubs
(19:57):
me the wrong way. I just I rarely make personal
comments about that, must vastly prefer to talk about policy,
to talk about ideology. But there is something about Tim
Waltz that rubs me the wrong way personally, and it's
that performance.
Speaker 2 (20:11):
Yeah, I think, like I said, he's a big weirdo
and I don't believe that anyone who I don't think
he helps with the man problem that Kamala has, meaning
male voters.
Speaker 1 (20:20):
I don't think he helps at all.
Speaker 2 (20:21):
I think people look at him and they go, you know,
the bumbling buffoon guy is not what we're looking for
here to make us feel like there's a balance on
that ticket. But you know, tensions in Israel continue to
be really high over the past week, and Israeli citizens
were threatened by more than one hundred incoming missiles and
drone attacks. The International Fellowship of Christians and Jews, though,
has been on the front lines for decades, helping to
(20:43):
provide Israeli citizens with food and medicine, for bomb shelters,
for stays that can last up to several days. For
more than forty years, the IFCJ has been on the
ground in Israel. In anticipation of a show of support
for our friends in Israel, hundreds, if not thousands, of
churches here in America will honor them in the days
immediately leading up to October seventh, the anniversary date of
Israel being attacked by Hamas. Your generous donation today will
(21:05):
not only provide a flag symbolizing your support in churchyards
across America, but it will also support the fellowships ongoing
emergency efforts in Israel. Visit support IFCJ dot org. That
support IFCJ dot org is I don't know if you
saw this. Not only do they the israelis kill Hassan Esrala,
the leader of hesbe Law. They killed his replacement within
twenty four hours, Like who takes that job?
Speaker 3 (21:28):
Now, yeah, it is. It has been an interesting week
in terms of the things that Israel husband able to
pull off may really change the shape of the Middle East,
which you know, that doesn't happen very often in the
Middle East, And sometimes I think people exaggerate the thousand
year nature of the conflict, right, but it's true that
(21:50):
the paradigm doesn't change very often and oftentimes the all
of the options seem impalatable. That seems to be the
region for for all unpalatable options. But yeah, I mean
it's it's it's hard not to cheer for what has
has been able to accomplish in terms of competency, in
terms of being able to do this targeted and now
(22:11):
a number of strikes, initially with the pagers and the
beepers and the second round of walkie talkies they have
in a week and a half completely dismantled. It seems
like Hesbola's entire leadership and Hesbla was not just threatening Israel,
it was a thorn in the side of a lot
of people. In the Middle East and has prevented a
(22:32):
lot of countries from perhaps pursuing what might more be
closer to their self interest in terms of negotiating with Israel.
So the big question now is how Iran responds to this.
They have to be a little nervous the fact that
this is possible, and it's not only obviously this is
this is a direct threat to Iran as well, because
(22:54):
they are really pulling the strings behind the scenes here,
and the question is are they going to cut hesbel
loose or are we going to have a wider war
in the region between Iran and Israel? And that, you know,
really makes me wish that we had somebody who wasn't
a vegetable sitting in the presidency United States. Right now,
the world generally seems extremely volatile, and in ways that
(23:17):
I know, all the comparisons are always to World War two.
This seems to me to be much more of a
pre World War one kind of arrangement where there are
multiple theaters all over the world, any one of which
could explode into the kind of huge conflagration that involves
great power warfare. And yeah, we don't have anybody in
(23:38):
the driver's seat, So that's I mean.
Speaker 1 (23:41):
It's extremely conserve scrap. It's not not a good place
to be. But don't worry.
Speaker 2 (23:45):
If Kamala takes over things somehow get worse in as
Felcher Stem and everybody go check her out on social media.
Speaker 1 (23:50):
Independent Women's Forum in is my buddy. Good to see
you as always.
Speaker 3 (23:53):
Thank you, it's always great to see you back
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show News
Hosts And Creators
Clay Travis
Buck Sexton
Show Links
WebsiteNewsletterPopular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!