Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
The Michael Berry Show. That we're joined by Professor Victor
Davis Hanson, American classicist, military historian, and I would say
pre eminent conservative political commentator. Professor, thank you so much
for joining us.
Speaker 2 (00:10):
Thank you for having me so, Professor.
Speaker 1 (00:12):
As we get up to celebrate America two fifty, I
want to start actually talking about America two fifty, specifically
America two fifty and Freedom two fifty. Now these are
two separate organizations, but they're both planning celebrations for the
United States. Is two hundred and fiftieth birthday. So America
two fifty is, of course the official Bipartisan Commission, it
was created by an Act of Congress. And Freedom two
(00:32):
fifty is the White House created public private partnership. And
I guess my question to you is, how can something
meant to be bringing us together as a nation is
still somehow so polarizing, Like, are there any institutions in
American life that are not manifested through political polarization today?
Speaker 2 (00:48):
It's hard to think of any. When we were just
coming off the Caitlin Clark women's professional basketball fiasco, which
is completely policized I mean entertainment. Is we see that
and Late Night Comedy and Robert De Niro's Outburst Rose
the O'donnald's The corporate boardroom is politicized, Academy is K
through twelve is foundations are the media, both new and
(01:11):
old are so it's hard to find and why is that?
I think part of the reasons is that the progressive
socialist agenda does not win fifty one percent of support.
So they find themselves now without the White House, without
the Supreme Court for the most part, without the Congress,
either the House or Senate. But they have institutional support,
(01:33):
which we just talked about, and they can feel through
court decisions, lower district judges suing people use, indoctrinating people
in college, and doctrinating people from the media, they can still.
Speaker 3 (01:46):
Be viable if they want.
Speaker 2 (01:48):
And that's why one of the reasons they hate Donald
Trump because I unlike most past Republicans who complained about
those institutions, he actually tried to say, I'm not going
to deal with the symptomology of the left. I'm going
to go with the causation NPR should be refunded, USAID
should be defunded. So we tried to get to the
route that causes this institutional monopoly, and he was very
(02:11):
successful given the short time he's had so far, and
that's why they hate him Annal, in addition to all
the other reasons that we all know so well.
Speaker 1 (02:20):
So then let me pick up on that progressive socialist
agenda you're describing and turn to the DSA, the Democratic
Socialist of America. You have a Democratic nominee and presumptive
Member of Congress, Darra Liza Chevrolet. She has stated that
she wipes her hands with the American flag. You have
Avir kawas a MOMDNI endorsed daughter of an actual deported
Jordaanian national who had suggested that America deserve nine eleven.
(02:43):
So again she won. She will be the next state
senator in New York. You have another DSA winner, presumptive
Member of Congress, Claire Valdez. She argued the need to
abolish US prisons, the need to abolish borders, and that
America should in fact apologize to the world for its
foreign policy. So it seems like Professor hating America is
not only the new normal, but it's actively being celebrated
(03:05):
amongst the left. Number one, is that a fair characterization?
And then number two perhaps most foundationally, How do we
reverse this trend?
Speaker 2 (03:12):
Yeah, I can't find an objection to that. I don't
know any member who says of any of that group
that I have a fair minded appraisal of Israel, and
I have an unqualified love of the United States. So
I think you're correct there. How do we address it? Well,
so far, I think we need to point out.
Speaker 3 (03:31):
Who these people are.
Speaker 2 (03:32):
They have definite characteristics, and I know there's a generalization
because they're a diverse group, but generally they're urban creatures.
Speaker 3 (03:41):
They live in the.
Speaker 2 (03:42):
World of taxis, uber subway buses, high rise They don't
know where their food or water, their fuel comes from.
They have nowhere idea where their sewage and waste goes.
They're urban creatures, and they're right next to financial centers,
insurance and so for their world, it's all about. They
have no idea what rural America is like. They have
(04:04):
no idea that the vast majority of so called white
people they despise are working class and happy people. As
we're discovering from the World Cup, their world of white
people are fellow urban elites that are very dissatisfied. Most
of these people, in addition, are highly educated or at
least degreed but not really knowledgeable. They took studies, courses sociology, psychology,
(04:29):
social science. They came out and they felt that their
degrees gave them entree into the world of the elites.
And then they ended up as baristas or like Mondamie
of prolonged adolescens or AOC and they're very unhappy.
Speaker 3 (04:44):
Or this woman.
Speaker 2 (04:46):
Chevalet, is she the PhD student for seven years? I
think she can't finish for PhD. Most people who can
get out in four or five. But the point I'm
making is there, and then to that, they're very hypocritical.
They damned the wealthy, but I mean Bernie Sanders especially,
(05:06):
but he has three homes the Obama have are worth
one hundred million. George Sorols broke the Bank of England.
He finances him. This fellow from China who fled to
communist China as a billionaire, who's funding them Neville Singham, Yes,
Singham and Mark Zuckerberg gave them four hundred and nineteen
(05:27):
million in twenty twenty to take over the work of
the registrars. And then you know, look at Mandami. He's
a prolonged adolescent who grew up from very well, a
well endowed professor at Columbia. Mother was a filmmaker. So
they're very hypocritical. And you know, Illian Omar talks about
genocide and causa, but her family, her father was a
(05:48):
colonel in the army of said Berry, and she her
family and many families when that genocidal maniac was overthrown
after killing almost a quarter million peace people, they fled
to the United States. But no one ever says to her, well,
what was your dad doing as part of that genocidal
government and why did we take you in when you
(06:09):
had that Your family has, by association, blood on your hands. Armandami.
He's always talking about israelis settler colonials, settler colonials, and
you think, okay, but your family was one of the
one percent from India that went into Uganda and settled
as colonialists and today exercises control over sixty five percent
(06:30):
of the economic commerce of Uganda. And then you came
from that country, very very wealthy, and our Rocanna he's
now a fellow traveler. He's the beneficiary of his in
laws trust that's worth millions of dollars, hundreds of millions
of dollars wife drives a two hundred thousand dollars range
Rover in inspection. So all of these people are hypocritical.
(06:52):
They're from a small urban size. They're very disappointed that
they feel their glibness should have earned them greater rewards
on on one hand, and I don't think they represent
most of America. They're also I know this will be controversial,
there's a disproportionate number of people who are immigrants. They
(07:14):
have just come here. It seems like Rashid talib Aoc
the New Bunch in New York, some of them in Colorado.
And it's very strange because they came from what we
used to call the Third World, perhaps shelvinistically, but these
are failed states in the Caribbean, Latin American, African Asia.
(07:35):
And they came here because or their parents came here.
They're either first or second generation, and they were the
beneficiaries of American magnaminity. They got generous grants to go
to schools Ilian omore AOC, all of them did. And
yet they repaid that gratitude with angers, and it wasn't
and there was no reciprocity, and they ever said thank you,
(07:56):
we were saved from these awful places, and then they
get here and find it it's career rewarding. On the
left said down the very country that allowed them to come,
welcome them, gave them things, and then they even add
insult to injury in the case of somebody like Rashid
talib Or, they start bragging on the failed states that
they'd left, So the aubage begging the question why don't
(08:20):
you go back? So they have a typical profile, they
I mean, there's exceptions. They also and this is even
more controversyal A grand Platner, a tall Rico, an AOC.
Many of these new people they have not married, they
have not had children. They're not nuclear family. That's fine,
(08:40):
but they talk about diversity and they're disproportionately urban and
single and often child is So, what point is they
don't have an immediate interest in our concern of school curriculum, vouchers,
charter schools, safety in the streets, what their child is
reading in this public school. And I don't think they're
(09:02):
going to win. I'm in twenty twenty four, Kamala Harris
was a socialist. She had the most liberal voting record,
I think, even more liberal than Bernie Sanders, and.
Speaker 3 (09:11):
She tried to disguise it. She said, I'm four fracking.
Speaker 2 (09:13):
I don't. I'm now for the wall, i am now
for deportation, I'm now for drilling.
Speaker 3 (09:19):
But she's still lost.
Speaker 2 (09:21):
So the point is, why would they think the Democratic
Party that of a socialist law lost because they were
so far left that four years later a communist would
win even more left wing. It makes no sense.
Speaker 1 (09:33):
So, professor, let's get to the real breaking news. In
a six to three decision, the US Supreme Court actually
struck down President Trump's executive order against birthright citizenship. They
affirmed in the words of the Court, and I want
to make sure I get this right. The quote children
born in the United States to parents unlawfully or temporarily
present are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States
and or citizens at birth under the Thirteenth Amendments citizenship clause.
(10:00):
Thoughts to the Supreme Court actually upholding the birthright citizenship clause, I.
Speaker 2 (10:04):
Think two things. I think they understand privately that that
was never the intent of the Fourteenth Amendment. It dealt
largely with slavery and indigenous people, So they know that
it's an aberran. They know three things. It was not
the intent of the legislation and the amendment. Originally, it's
not normal in anywhere else in the world. And more importantly,
(10:26):
it's being abused by people who were flying in here
from China, from Latin America to have a baby and
then to anchor it. I can tell you that I
live in a very rural area with a predominantly Hispanic
and about ten years ago a woman knocked on my
door pregnant about one in the morning, and in Spanish,
she said to me, I need the name of a doctor,
(10:49):
and she handed me a piece of paper of a
local doctor or a town is very small at the er,
and she had heard from Wahaka that this person would
deliver your baby and get you medical. So and she
was almost ready to deliver, so that what she was
basically telling me she was going. She came pregnant through
a very difficult trek a week from delivery. Knew where
(11:10):
to go in this little town of mine, because people
in her village had gone here and wanted to have
a baby here and have it all paid for. Fifty
percent of all births in California or on medical twenty
seven percent of the population was not native born, and
so the justices knew all that, but they also knew
(11:32):
that this would probably be the most confroverty It would
be up there with a Dobs decision if they ruled,
because then millions of people and we probably have fifty
three million people were not born in the United States,
sixteen percent of the population, the highest we've ever had.
But of that fifty three thirty million who were foreign
(11:54):
born but may have children here or either here illegally
or on resident green cards, and their children are future
children would be you know, it would be. It would
affect millions, is what I'm struggling to say.
Speaker 3 (12:10):
And they didn't.
Speaker 2 (12:10):
They always do that. They always avoid the very, very controversial.
Even the Daubs decision was not as controversial because it
outsourced the decision to the states, and they and they
in this case, because that was a prior court room
ruling and this was an amendment, they couldn't have done that.
Speaker 1 (12:28):
So on that note, in response to the Supreme Court ruling,
President Trump has called for a constitutional amendment to what
he calls the expensive and unfair aspects of birthright citizenship.
So I guess my question is twofold number one, professor,
do you view that there is a legal, legislative and
realistic pathway of ending birthright citizenship. And then number two,
(12:49):
where do things like dhs ice and mass deportations fall
in sort of quelling this surge of immigration into the
United States.
Speaker 2 (12:58):
Well, I don't think we can get I think it's
two thirds of the of the Congress and three quarters
of the state legislatures to approve a new amendment. I
don't think that. I don't That's very hard to do,
and so I don't see that happening. And it would
be better if we had passed I mean, I don't
(13:19):
know if you if you had just said we were
going to adopt the same policy toward birthright citizenship as
the country of origin does. So if you come from
Mexico or you come from I don't know, China, do
you have birthright? No, So we will not give accord
you that. And I think that would make a stunning
(13:42):
That would have been a smarter campaign to publicize. If
Trump had said, I'm going to issue an executive order
that says anyone who comes here from a country that
does not afford birthright citizens shall not enjoy it in.
Speaker 3 (13:55):
The United States.
Speaker 2 (13:57):
And I think that he would have won a lot
more public support that reciprocity. But as far as the
immigration goes, it will make it more difficult because what's
happening is people are coming across the border and having
children and then going back to China or going back
(14:17):
other places, and then when they grow up or they
want to come to college, or they want they come
back as US citizens. So it you know, you can
see somebody who who might not speak the language at all,
who might not have any appearance or any of being foreign,
who has no English facility, no knowledge of Americana, but
(14:39):
gets off a plane from China because he was born
here eighteen years ago, and what's iced to do. And
as soon as they arrest the person for being a foreigner,
perhaps without ID when they come here for the first
few weeks, then they're going to be libeled as a
native is arrested a US citizen. And so that's why
I think a lot of the concern is that people
who are born here, not in the majority of cases,
(15:02):
but in many cases go back to their home country
enjoy that kind of.
Speaker 3 (15:06):
Life raft or safety valve.
Speaker 2 (15:10):
So if their country gets in trouble or they want
to come to school, here or they want to become
later in life. They can come here, but they have
none of the characteristics of American because they've never been here.
Speaker 1 (15:20):
Professor, it would seem there's a confluence in this ruling
of border and people. So President Reagan famously quit that
you can go to live in Germany or Turkey or Japan,
but you can never become a German or a Turk
or Japanese. But anyone at present Reagan can of course
come from any corner of the earth, and you can
in fact come to live in America and become an American.
But at the same time there is this, i would say,
(15:40):
bizarre resurgence in our movement, the conservative movement of what's
called heritage American, the idea that the greater your American
lineage can be traced, the greater legitimacy you have to
claim to be an American. So in this clash of
American creed, which is I would say defined nationhood by
shared democratic values and then the heritage Americans, what would
(16:02):
you say does it mean to be an American today?
Speaker 2 (16:05):
Well, I'm a sixth generation Californian and I just talked
yesterday to a person who was working on the gutters
that I know, and he's a first generation Mexican American
legal and he doesn't have the knowledge of America that
I do because I lived here, but he has enough
(16:25):
knowledge that he should be considered equal to me as
a citizen. I have no problem with that. Where I
do have a problem is that people who come here
in the first or second generation, who make no effort
to assimilate, make no effort to master the language, make
no effort to be acquainted with our hallmarks of our civilization,
(16:45):
the Gettysburg Address, the Battle of the Ajima, anything like that,
no attempt, what is the Bill of Rights? And then
they start lecturing us on what's wrong with our country
the moment they set foot here and money who's been
here three or four generation, who is acquainted I think
(17:06):
as a legitimate right to be angry at that. But
so it has to be a case to case base.
But you want to avoid people who say that my
you know, my grandparents came over in the Mayflower and
are more American than you are. To take an extreme case,
and then you want to really identify people who just
got here and may or may not even be citizens,
(17:29):
or they may be anchor babies, and then they start
lecturing people with all the wrongs of America without knowing
anything about it. And we've been very lucky with the
World Cup, as people have remarked, because as all of
this socialist democratic extremism has come and we've seen these
immigrant people come here and without gratitude and damn our country,
(17:51):
and they're mostly in these coastal bicoastal elite places, then
we have this whoever dreamed up the idea of having
World Cup game in Middle America was a genius because
that's the best publicity for traditionalism in the Republican Party,
you can imagine, because these people are seeing actual Americans,
not the whiny, no nasal, NPR voiced elite whom they
(18:15):
see all the time and don't like. And so the deplorables,
the irredeemables, the chumps, the garbage that clingers turn out
to be nice people after all, and that's good. And
so that's been a wonderful thing to see.
Speaker 3 (18:27):
Professor.
Speaker 1 (18:28):
Right now, I said, we're at a time, but really,
last question then I'll shut up. What is your message
of hope or optimism to our audience at PRAGER you
and really to the American people probably speaking who are
about to be celebrating America two fifty.
Speaker 2 (18:41):
I actually believe we're in a period of renaissance. I
really do, and I think by all the historical metrics
of a successful civilization, we're getting very close. We are
now the largest producer of oil and gas in the
history of civilization. We're going to get up to sixteen
or seventeen million. We're going to be the largest exporter
(19:02):
as well. We're the largest producer of food in the
world's China imports thirty percent of its food. Our fertility
rate has gone back up to about one point seventy five.
We're getting back to the millennium at two point zero.
For all my criticism of the social sciences and the
humanities and the studies courses, when you look at professional
(19:25):
schools like medicine or business, or computer engineering or regular engineering,
and the times educational supplement, for example, takes fifty universe,
about forty five of them are American. So all the
things that people said that we're going to happen by now,
if you go back and look twenty years ago, China
(19:45):
is going to crush you in GDP, the EU is
going to crush that didn't happen, or we have thirty
one trillion dollars China has four times, the population has
twenty eight trillion, Europe has four hundred and fifty million
people twenty All the problems that were existential are known
now that they are existential or or we're dealing with them.
(20:09):
An open border was national suicide. Before Trump leaves office.
We'll either have a wall from San Diego to the
Gulf of America, or we'll have some electronic surveillance and canyons,
but it will be secure, and I think we will
have legal only immigration. We will have a renewed defense.
We have the most powerful defense industry in the world,
(20:32):
but it's now pivoting in the right direction to quantity
as well as quality. The main things that we're worried
about are I think twofold one is debt. We're thirty
trillion dollars in debt and the interest is three billion
dollars a day, which is in an annual terms is
about equivalent to the defense budget. Are not large and
(20:54):
nobody's talking about that.
Speaker 3 (20:55):
Seriously.
Speaker 2 (20:56):
Trump tried with doge and it called hysteria. But something's
going to have to go back to the Clinton years
gain rate within two of them figured out something to
stop the wild spending. And then second, we have a
requescence of tribalism where people's like being Chicano or black,
or Asian or gay, Our trans is not incidental to
(21:19):
your American identity. Now it's becoming essential. Tribalism doesn't work.
It's a pre civilizational idea. When you look at multi
racial tribal democracies that are large, like ours, Brazil, India, Indonesia,
they don't.
Speaker 3 (21:33):
Work very well.
Speaker 2 (21:35):
So we've got to go back to the melting pot.
And the only way I can see to do that
is to suspend all illegal immigration, curtailed legal immigration to
memocratic diverse limited in numbers maybe one hundred or two
hundred thousand, and then some skills that evidence self support
(21:56):
and knowledge of English, et cetera, and then assimilation of
culture integration. So we have some suppressing problems, but the
historical basis of a society, defense, economic productivity, food fuel,
constitutional stability. We have that all and the other countries don't.
Speaker 1 (22:18):
So Professor, it seems like you are suggesting that we
have in fact made America great again. That is a
perfect way to end it, I want to wish you
a happy July fourth and that we can celebrate all
the accomplishments of the past two hundred and fifty years,
and here's to the next two hundred and fifty years.
On a personal note, I certainly was a liberal on
my college campus, so I know quite intimately what you're describing,
(22:39):
and people like you, people like Dennis Praeger, were very
much instrumental in my political evolution. So thank you for
everything you do. Professor Victor Davis Hansen is an American classicist,
military historian, and pre eminent conservative political commentator. Thanks again, Professor,
Thank you same here.
Speaker 3 (22:54):
People. If you like Michael.
Speaker 4 (22:57):
Berry Show in podcast, please tell one friend and if
you're so inclined, write a nice review of our podcast. Comments, suggestions, questions,
and interest in being a corporate sponsor and partner can
be communicated directly to the show at our email address,
Michael at Michael Berryshow dot com, or simply by clicking
(23:20):
on our website Michael Berryshow dot com. The Michael Berry
Show and Podcast is produced by Ramon Roeblis, The King
of Ding. Executive producer is Chad Knakanishi. Jim Mudd is
the creative director. Voices Jingles, Tomfoolery, and Shenanigans are provided
(23:46):
by Chance McLean. Director of Research is Sandy Peterson. Emily
Bull is our assistant listener and superfan. Contributions are appreciated
and often incorporated into our production. Where possible, we give credit,
where not, we take all the credit for ourselves. God
(24:07):
bless the memory of Rush Limbaugh. Long live Elvis, be
a simple man like Leonard Skinnard told you, and God
bless America. Finally, if you know a veteran suffering from PTSD,
call Camp Hope at eight seven seven seven one seven
(24:28):
PTSD and a combat veteran will answer the phone to
provide free counseling.
The Michael Berry Show. That we're joined by Professor Victor
Davis Hanson, American classicist, military historian, and I would say
pre eminent conservative political commentator. Professor, thank you so much
for joining us.
Speaker 2 (00:10):
Thank you for having me so, Professor.
Speaker 1 (00:12):
As we get up to celebrate America two fifty, I
want to start actually talking about America two fifty, specifically
America two fifty and Freedom two fifty. Now these are
two separate organizations, but they're both planning celebrations for the
United States. Is two hundred and fiftieth birthday. So America
two fifty is, of course the official Bipartisan Commission, it
was created by an Act of Congress. And Freedom two
(00:32):
fifty is the White House created public private partnership. And
I guess my question to you is, how can something
meant to be bringing us together as a nation is
still somehow so polarizing, Like, are there any institutions in
American life that are not manifested through political polarization today?
Speaker 2 (00:48):
It's hard to think of any. When we were just
coming off the Caitlin Clark women's professional basketball fiasco, which
is completely policized I mean entertainment. Is we see that
and Late Night Comedy and Robert De Niro's Outburst Rose
the O'donnald's The corporate boardroom is politicized, Academy is K
through twelve is foundations are the media, both new and
(01:11):
old are so it's hard to find and why is that?
I think part of the reasons is that the progressive
socialist agenda does not win fifty one percent of support.
So they find themselves now without the White House, without
the Supreme Court for the most part, without the Congress,
either the House or Senate. But they have institutional support,
(01:33):
which we just talked about, and they can feel through
court decisions, lower district judges suing people use, indoctrinating people
in college, and doctrinating people from the media, they can still.
Speaker 3 (01:46):
Be viable if they want.
Speaker 2 (01:48):
And that's why one of the reasons they hate Donald
Trump because I unlike most past Republicans who complained about
those institutions, he actually tried to say, I'm not going
to deal with the symptomology of the left. I'm going
to go with the causation NPR should be refunded, USAID
should be defunded. So we tried to get to the
route that causes this institutional monopoly, and he was very
(02:11):
successful given the short time he's had so far, and
that's why they hate him Annal, in addition to all
the other reasons that we all know so well.
Speaker 1 (02:20):
So then let me pick up on that progressive socialist
agenda you're describing and turn to the DSA, the Democratic
Socialist of America. You have a Democratic nominee and presumptive
Member of Congress, Darra Liza Chevrolet. She has stated that
she wipes her hands with the American flag. You have
Avir kawas a MOMDNI endorsed daughter of an actual deported
Jordaanian national who had suggested that America deserve nine eleven.
(02:43):
So again she won. She will be the next state
senator in New York. You have another DSA winner, presumptive
Member of Congress, Claire Valdez. She argued the need to
abolish US prisons, the need to abolish borders, and that
America should in fact apologize to the world for its
foreign policy. So it seems like Professor hating America is
not only the new normal, but it's actively being celebrated
(03:05):
amongst the left. Number one, is that a fair characterization?
And then number two perhaps most foundationally, How do we
reverse this trend?
Speaker 2 (03:12):
Yeah, I can't find an objection to that. I don't
know any member who says of any of that group
that I have a fair minded appraisal of Israel, and
I have an unqualified love of the United States. So
I think you're correct there. How do we address it? Well,
so far, I think we need to point out.
Speaker 3 (03:31):
Who these people are.
Speaker 2 (03:32):
They have definite characteristics, and I know there's a generalization
because they're a diverse group, but generally they're urban creatures.
Speaker 3 (03:41):
They live in the.
Speaker 2 (03:42):
World of taxis, uber subway buses, high rise They don't
know where their food or water, their fuel comes from.
They have nowhere idea where their sewage and waste goes.
They're urban creatures, and they're right next to financial centers,
insurance and so for their world, it's all about. They
have no idea what rural America is like. They have
(04:04):
no idea that the vast majority of so called white
people they despise are working class and happy people. As
we're discovering from the World Cup, their world of white
people are fellow urban elites that are very dissatisfied. Most
of these people, in addition, are highly educated or at
least degreed but not really knowledgeable. They took studies, courses sociology, psychology,
(04:29):
social science. They came out and they felt that their
degrees gave them entree into the world of the elites.
And then they ended up as baristas or like Mondamie
of prolonged adolescens or AOC and they're very unhappy.
Speaker 3 (04:44):
Or this woman.
Speaker 2 (04:46):
Chevalet, is she the PhD student for seven years? I
think she can't finish for PhD. Most people who can
get out in four or five. But the point I'm
making is there, and then to that, they're very hypocritical.
They damned the wealthy, but I mean Bernie Sanders especially,
(05:06):
but he has three homes the Obama have are worth
one hundred million. George Sorols broke the Bank of England.
He finances him. This fellow from China who fled to
communist China as a billionaire, who's funding them Neville Singham, Yes,
Singham and Mark Zuckerberg gave them four hundred and nineteen
(05:27):
million in twenty twenty to take over the work of
the registrars. And then you know, look at Mandami. He's
a prolonged adolescent who grew up from very well, a
well endowed professor at Columbia. Mother was a filmmaker. So
they're very hypocritical. And you know, Illian Omar talks about
genocide and causa, but her family, her father was a
(05:48):
colonel in the army of said Berry, and she her
family and many families when that genocidal maniac was overthrown
after killing almost a quarter million peace people, they fled
to the United States. But no one ever says to her, well,
what was your dad doing as part of that genocidal
government and why did we take you in when you
(06:09):
had that Your family has, by association, blood on your hands. Armandami.
He's always talking about israelis settler colonials, settler colonials, and
you think, okay, but your family was one of the
one percent from India that went into Uganda and settled
as colonialists and today exercises control over sixty five percent
(06:30):
of the economic commerce of Uganda. And then you came
from that country, very very wealthy, and our Rocanna he's
now a fellow traveler. He's the beneficiary of his in
laws trust that's worth millions of dollars, hundreds of millions
of dollars wife drives a two hundred thousand dollars range
Rover in inspection. So all of these people are hypocritical.
(06:52):
They're from a small urban size. They're very disappointed that
they feel their glibness should have earned them greater rewards
on on one hand, and I don't think they represent
most of America. They're also I know this will be controversial,
there's a disproportionate number of people who are immigrants. They
(07:14):
have just come here. It seems like Rashid talib Aoc
the New Bunch in New York, some of them in Colorado.
And it's very strange because they came from what we
used to call the Third World, perhaps shelvinistically, but these
are failed states in the Caribbean, Latin American, African Asia.
(07:35):
And they came here because or their parents came here.
They're either first or second generation, and they were the
beneficiaries of American magnaminity. They got generous grants to go
to schools Ilian omore AOC, all of them did. And
yet they repaid that gratitude with angers, and it wasn't
and there was no reciprocity, and they ever said thank you,
(07:56):
we were saved from these awful places, and then they
get here and find it it's career rewarding. On the
left said down the very country that allowed them to come,
welcome them, gave them things, and then they even add
insult to injury in the case of somebody like Rashid
talib Or, they start bragging on the failed states that
they'd left, So the aubage begging the question why don't
(08:20):
you go back? So they have a typical profile, they
I mean, there's exceptions. They also and this is even
more controversyal A grand Platner, a tall Rico, an AOC.
Many of these new people they have not married, they
have not had children. They're not nuclear family. That's fine,
(08:40):
but they talk about diversity and they're disproportionately urban and
single and often child is So, what point is they
don't have an immediate interest in our concern of school curriculum, vouchers,
charter schools, safety in the streets, what their child is
reading in this public school. And I don't think they're
(09:02):
going to win. I'm in twenty twenty four, Kamala Harris
was a socialist. She had the most liberal voting record,
I think, even more liberal than Bernie Sanders, and.
Speaker 3 (09:11):
She tried to disguise it. She said, I'm four fracking.
Speaker 2 (09:13):
I don't. I'm now for the wall, i am now
for deportation, I'm now for drilling.
Speaker 3 (09:19):
But she's still lost.
Speaker 2 (09:21):
So the point is, why would they think the Democratic
Party that of a socialist law lost because they were
so far left that four years later a communist would
win even more left wing. It makes no sense.
Speaker 1 (09:33):
So, professor, let's get to the real breaking news. In
a six to three decision, the US Supreme Court actually
struck down President Trump's executive order against birthright citizenship. They
affirmed in the words of the Court, and I want
to make sure I get this right. The quote children
born in the United States to parents unlawfully or temporarily
present are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States
and or citizens at birth under the Thirteenth Amendments citizenship clause.
(10:00):
Thoughts to the Supreme Court actually upholding the birthright citizenship clause, I.
Speaker 2 (10:04):
Think two things. I think they understand privately that that
was never the intent of the Fourteenth Amendment. It dealt
largely with slavery and indigenous people, So they know that
it's an aberran. They know three things. It was not
the intent of the legislation and the amendment. Originally, it's
not normal in anywhere else in the world. And more importantly,
(10:26):
it's being abused by people who were flying in here
from China, from Latin America to have a baby and
then to anchor it. I can tell you that I
live in a very rural area with a predominantly Hispanic
and about ten years ago a woman knocked on my
door pregnant about one in the morning, and in Spanish,
she said to me, I need the name of a doctor,
(10:49):
and she handed me a piece of paper of a
local doctor or a town is very small at the er,
and she had heard from Wahaka that this person would
deliver your baby and get you medical. So and she
was almost ready to deliver, so that what she was
basically telling me she was going. She came pregnant through
a very difficult trek a week from delivery. Knew where
(11:10):
to go in this little town of mine, because people
in her village had gone here and wanted to have
a baby here and have it all paid for. Fifty
percent of all births in California or on medical twenty
seven percent of the population was not native born, and
so the justices knew all that, but they also knew
(11:32):
that this would probably be the most confroverty It would
be up there with a Dobs decision if they ruled,
because then millions of people and we probably have fifty
three million people were not born in the United States,
sixteen percent of the population, the highest we've ever had.
But of that fifty three thirty million who were foreign
(11:54):
born but may have children here or either here illegally
or on resident green cards, and their children are future
children would be you know, it would be. It would
affect millions, is what I'm struggling to say.
Speaker 3 (12:10):
And they didn't.
Speaker 2 (12:10):
They always do that. They always avoid the very, very controversial.
Even the Daubs decision was not as controversial because it
outsourced the decision to the states, and they and they
in this case, because that was a prior court room
ruling and this was an amendment, they couldn't have done that.
Speaker 1 (12:28):
So on that note, in response to the Supreme Court ruling,
President Trump has called for a constitutional amendment to what
he calls the expensive and unfair aspects of birthright citizenship.
So I guess my question is twofold number one, professor,
do you view that there is a legal, legislative and
realistic pathway of ending birthright citizenship. And then number two,
(12:49):
where do things like dhs ice and mass deportations fall
in sort of quelling this surge of immigration into the
United States.
Speaker 2 (12:58):
Well, I don't think we can get I think it's
two thirds of the of the Congress and three quarters
of the state legislatures to approve a new amendment. I
don't think that. I don't That's very hard to do,
and so I don't see that happening. And it would
be better if we had passed I mean, I don't
(13:19):
know if you if you had just said we were
going to adopt the same policy toward birthright citizenship as
the country of origin does. So if you come from
Mexico or you come from I don't know, China, do
you have birthright? No, So we will not give accord
you that. And I think that would make a stunning
(13:42):
That would have been a smarter campaign to publicize. If
Trump had said, I'm going to issue an executive order
that says anyone who comes here from a country that
does not afford birthright citizens shall not enjoy it in.
Speaker 3 (13:55):
The United States.
Speaker 2 (13:57):
And I think that he would have won a lot
more public support that reciprocity. But as far as the
immigration goes, it will make it more difficult because what's
happening is people are coming across the border and having
children and then going back to China or going back
(14:17):
other places, and then when they grow up or they
want to come to college, or they want they come
back as US citizens. So it you know, you can
see somebody who who might not speak the language at all,
who might not have any appearance or any of being foreign,
who has no English facility, no knowledge of Americana, but
(14:39):
gets off a plane from China because he was born
here eighteen years ago, and what's iced to do. And
as soon as they arrest the person for being a foreigner,
perhaps without ID when they come here for the first
few weeks, then they're going to be libeled as a
native is arrested a US citizen. And so that's why
I think a lot of the concern is that people
who are born here, not in the majority of cases,
(15:02):
but in many cases go back to their home country
enjoy that kind of.
Speaker 3 (15:06):
Life raft or safety valve.
Speaker 2 (15:10):
So if their country gets in trouble or they want
to come to school, here or they want to become
later in life. They can come here, but they have
none of the characteristics of American because they've never been here.
Speaker 1 (15:20):
Professor, it would seem there's a confluence in this ruling
of border and people. So President Reagan famously quit that
you can go to live in Germany or Turkey or Japan,
but you can never become a German or a Turk
or Japanese. But anyone at present Reagan can of course
come from any corner of the earth, and you can
in fact come to live in America and become an American.
But at the same time there is this, i would say,
(15:40):
bizarre resurgence in our movement, the conservative movement of what's
called heritage American, the idea that the greater your American
lineage can be traced, the greater legitimacy you have to
claim to be an American. So in this clash of
American creed, which is I would say defined nationhood by
shared democratic values and then the heritage Americans, what would
(16:02):
you say does it mean to be an American today?
Speaker 2 (16:05):
Well, I'm a sixth generation Californian and I just talked
yesterday to a person who was working on the gutters
that I know, and he's a first generation Mexican American
legal and he doesn't have the knowledge of America that
I do because I lived here, but he has enough
(16:25):
knowledge that he should be considered equal to me as
a citizen. I have no problem with that. Where I
do have a problem is that people who come here
in the first or second generation, who make no effort
to assimilate, make no effort to master the language, make
no effort to be acquainted with our hallmarks of our civilization,
(16:45):
the Gettysburg Address, the Battle of the Ajima, anything like that,
no attempt, what is the Bill of Rights? And then
they start lecturing us on what's wrong with our country
the moment they set foot here and money who's been
here three or four generation, who is acquainted I think
(17:06):
as a legitimate right to be angry at that. But
so it has to be a case to case base.
But you want to avoid people who say that my
you know, my grandparents came over in the Mayflower and
are more American than you are. To take an extreme case,
and then you want to really identify people who just
got here and may or may not even be citizens,
(17:29):
or they may be anchor babies, and then they start
lecturing people with all the wrongs of America without knowing
anything about it. And we've been very lucky with the
World Cup, as people have remarked, because as all of
this socialist democratic extremism has come and we've seen these
immigrant people come here and without gratitude and damn our country,
(17:51):
and they're mostly in these coastal bicoastal elite places, then
we have this whoever dreamed up the idea of having
World Cup game in Middle America was a genius because
that's the best publicity for traditionalism in the Republican Party,
you can imagine, because these people are seeing actual Americans,
not the whiny, no nasal, NPR voiced elite whom they
(18:15):
see all the time and don't like. And so the deplorables,
the irredeemables, the chumps, the garbage that clingers turn out
to be nice people after all, and that's good. And
so that's been a wonderful thing to see.
Speaker 3 (18:27):
Professor.
Speaker 1 (18:28):
Right now, I said, we're at a time, but really,
last question then I'll shut up. What is your message
of hope or optimism to our audience at PRAGER you
and really to the American people probably speaking who are
about to be celebrating America two fifty.
Speaker 2 (18:41):
I actually believe we're in a period of renaissance. I
really do, and I think by all the historical metrics
of a successful civilization, we're getting very close. We are
now the largest producer of oil and gas in the
history of civilization. We're going to get up to sixteen
or seventeen million. We're going to be the largest exporter
(19:02):
as well. We're the largest producer of food in the
world's China imports thirty percent of its food. Our fertility
rate has gone back up to about one point seventy five.
We're getting back to the millennium at two point zero.
For all my criticism of the social sciences and the
humanities and the studies courses, when you look at professional
(19:25):
schools like medicine or business, or computer engineering or regular engineering,
and the times educational supplement, for example, takes fifty universe,
about forty five of them are American. So all the
things that people said that we're going to happen by now,
if you go back and look twenty years ago, China
(19:45):
is going to crush you in GDP, the EU is
going to crush that didn't happen, or we have thirty
one trillion dollars China has four times, the population has
twenty eight trillion, Europe has four hundred and fifty million
people twenty All the problems that were existential are known
now that they are existential or or we're dealing with them.
(20:09):
An open border was national suicide. Before Trump leaves office.
We'll either have a wall from San Diego to the
Gulf of America, or we'll have some electronic surveillance and canyons,
but it will be secure, and I think we will
have legal only immigration. We will have a renewed defense.
We have the most powerful defense industry in the world,
(20:32):
but it's now pivoting in the right direction to quantity
as well as quality. The main things that we're worried
about are I think twofold one is debt. We're thirty
trillion dollars in debt and the interest is three billion
dollars a day, which is in an annual terms is
about equivalent to the defense budget. Are not large and
(20:54):
nobody's talking about that.
Speaker 3 (20:55):
Seriously.
Speaker 2 (20:56):
Trump tried with doge and it called hysteria. But something's
going to have to go back to the Clinton years
gain rate within two of them figured out something to
stop the wild spending. And then second, we have a
requescence of tribalism where people's like being Chicano or black,
or Asian or gay, Our trans is not incidental to
(21:19):
your American identity. Now it's becoming essential. Tribalism doesn't work.
It's a pre civilizational idea. When you look at multi
racial tribal democracies that are large, like ours, Brazil, India, Indonesia,
they don't.
Speaker 3 (21:33):
Work very well.
Speaker 2 (21:35):
So we've got to go back to the melting pot.
And the only way I can see to do that
is to suspend all illegal immigration, curtailed legal immigration to
memocratic diverse limited in numbers maybe one hundred or two
hundred thousand, and then some skills that evidence self support
(21:56):
and knowledge of English, et cetera, and then assimilation of
culture integration. So we have some suppressing problems, but the
historical basis of a society, defense, economic productivity, food fuel,
constitutional stability. We have that all and the other countries don't.
Speaker 1 (22:18):
So Professor, it seems like you are suggesting that we
have in fact made America great again. That is a
perfect way to end it, I want to wish you
a happy July fourth and that we can celebrate all
the accomplishments of the past two hundred and fifty years,
and here's to the next two hundred and fifty years.
On a personal note, I certainly was a liberal on
my college campus, so I know quite intimately what you're describing,
(22:39):
and people like you, people like Dennis Praeger, were very
much instrumental in my political evolution. So thank you for
everything you do. Professor Victor Davis Hansen is an American classicist,
military historian, and pre eminent conservative political commentator. Thanks again, Professor,
Thank you same here.
Speaker 3 (22:54):
People. If you like Michael.
Speaker 4 (22:57):
Berry Show in podcast, please tell one friend and if
you're so inclined, write a nice review of our podcast. Comments, suggestions, questions,
and interest in being a corporate sponsor and partner can
be communicated directly to the show at our email address,
Michael at Michael Berryshow dot com, or simply by clicking
(23:20):
on our website Michael Berryshow dot com. The Michael Berry
Show and Podcast is produced by Ramon Roeblis, The King
of Ding. Executive producer is Chad Knakanishi. Jim Mudd is
the creative director. Voices Jingles, Tomfoolery, and Shenanigans are provided
(23:46):
by Chance McLean. Director of Research is Sandy Peterson. Emily
Bull is our assistant listener and superfan. Contributions are appreciated
and often incorporated into our production. Where possible, we give credit,
where not, we take all the credit for ourselves. God
(24:07):
bless the memory of Rush Limbaugh. Long live Elvis, be
a simple man like Leonard Skinnard told you, and God
bless America. Finally, if you know a veteran suffering from PTSD,
call Camp Hope at eight seven seven seven one seven
(24:28):
PTSD and a combat veteran will answer the phone to
provide free counseling.
Popular 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
Betrayal Weekly
Betrayal Weekly is back for a new season. Every Thursday, Betrayal Weekly shares first-hand accounts of broken trust, shocking deceptions, and the trail of destruction they leave behind. Hosted by Andrea Gunning, this weekly ongoing series digs into real-life stories of betrayal and the aftermath. From stories of double lives to dark discoveries, these are cautionary tales and accounts of resilience against all odds. From the producers of the critically acclaimed Betrayal series, Betrayal Weekly drops new episodes every Thursday. If you would like to share your story, you can reach out to the Betrayal Team by emailing them at betrayalpod@gmail.com and follow us on Instagram at @betrayalpod and @glasspodcasts. Please join our Substack for additional exclusive content, curated book recommendations, and community discussions. Sign up FREE by clicking this link Beyond Betrayal Substack. Join our community dedicated to truth, resilience, and healing. Your voice matters! Be a part of our Betrayal journey on Substack.