Up Next
Charlie Kirk Challenges Student on Pro-Life Policies, Government Welfare, and the Role of Churches in America
4:55
Charlie Kirk's Billion View TikTok Compilation Reveals Campus Conversations That Shaped the Election
25:10
Charlie Kirk Debates College Student on When Human Life Begins and Abortion Morality
10:14
Charlie Kirk is the Founder and President of Turning Point USA, the largest and fastest growing conservative youth activist organization in the country with over 250,000 student members, over 150 full-time staff, and a presence on over 2,000 high school and college campuses nationwide. Charlie is also the Chairman of Students for Trump, which aims to activate one million new college voters on campuses in battleground states in the lead up to the 2020 presidential election. His social media reaches over 100 million people per month and according to Axios, he is one of the "top 10 most engaged" Twitter handles in the world. He is also the host of “The Charlie Kirk Show,” which regularly ranks among the top news shows on Apple podcast charts.
Subscribe on YouTubeCharlie Kirk Faces Boise State Students on Abortion, Socialism, and the Battle for Human Rights
Charlie Kirk delivers a high-energy campus event at Boise State University, taking on students across heated debates about abortion, socialist economics, religious governance, and DEI policies. From confronting pro-choice arguments with questions about when life begins to challenging Bernie Sanders supporters on the failures of government healthcare, Kirk defends conservative principles on human dignity, free markets, and the Constitution. The exchanges reveal sharp cultural divides on campus as students question everything from Trump's tariffs to Christian obligations toward feeding the poor, with Kirk arguing that private charity and the church—not big government—offer the path to truly helping those in need.
Campus Energy and Opening Confrontations
Charlie Kirk arrives at Boise State University to a packed venue, immediately establishing the format: disagree, come to the front of the line. The energy is palpable as Kirk catches his breath, joking about the elevation before diving into what becomes a contentious series of exchanges with students.
The event opens with provocative and vulgar questions from students that set an adversarial tone. Kirk handles the disruptions with humor, pointing out that such behavior exemplifies why conservative messages resonate with voters. He invites critics to speak their minds openly, creating an atmosphere where disagreement is not just tolerated but encouraged.
The Abortion Debate: When Does Life Begin?
A passionate exchange on abortion takes center stage when a student challenges Kirk for "affecting other people's rights" and "taking away people's choices." Kirk immediately reframes the debate, asking what rights he is supposedly taking away.
The student claims Kirk is trying to eliminate gender-affirming care and abortion rights. Kirk redirects to a fundamental question: "What is a woman?" The student responds that gender is what people identify as, separate from biological sex. Kirk presses further, asking if anyone can be a woman, to which the student answers yes.
Kirk then pivots to abortion, establishing that human development objectively begins at conception. The student initially claims life begins in the second trimester but struggles to maintain consistency. Kirk challenges the "clump of cells" argument by asking what species those cells belong to—homo sapien, crocodile, or raccoon.
When the student argues abortion should be available because raising children is expensive or difficult, Kirk asks pointedly: "So it's acceptable to murder your young if you don't have the money to support them?" He emphasizes that development does not equal dignity, and that a human being is a human being regardless of their stage of development.
Kirk highlights that there are 2 million people on adoption waiting lists while 1.5 million abortions occur annually for reasons other than rape, incest, or life of the mother. He asks how the woman became pregnant outside of rape, forcing the student to acknowledge personal responsibility for sexual activity. Kirk argues that sex is a choice, not a necessity like food or shelter, and those who choose to engage should accept the possibility of creating human life.
Socialist Economics and Bernie Sanders
A Catholic, Hispanic student from rural Idaho presents a thoughtful challenge about economics, expressing agreement with Bernie Sanders on healthcare and working-class issues while opposing his social policies. The student points to countries like Poland, Hungary, and Croatia as examples of socially conservative nations that provide universal healthcare.
Kirk responds by asking about healthcare quality on Native American reservations and at VA hospitals—both examples of government-run, taxpayer-funded universal healthcare in America. He notes these systems are widely regarded as failures with long wait times and poor quality care. Kirk asks why America should expand systems that already demonstrate such problems.
The student struggles to defend the VA model, admitting it should be reformed. Kirk presses the point: Bernie Sanders wants VA-style healthcare for everyone, and the existing evidence shows it doesn't work well. Kirk advocates instead for competition, price transparency, medical freedom, and the ability to choose your own doctor.
Kirk then pivots to economic policy, asking if the student attended Bernie Sanders' recent rally and whether Bernie mentioned Trump's "no tax on tips" or "no tax on overtime" proposals. The student admits Bernie never mentioned these policies. Kirk argues this reveals Bernie's true priorities: not helping workers, but attacking the wealthy out of envy.
When the student questions whether Trump and Elon Musk are just enriching themselves, Kirk asks a pointed question: "Have you ever met a billionaire?" The student admits he hasn't. Kirk explains it's easy to hate what you don't know, then points to examples like Albertsons, which employs tens of thousands in Idaho. He argues entrepreneurs take risks, create jobs, and generate wealth for communities, and they deserve to profit from their success.
Kirk emphasizes that socialism fundamentally violates two of the Ten Commandments: "Thou shalt not covet" and "Thou shalt not steal." He warns that socialist countries become mediocre, lacking innovation and global leadership. While acknowledging some appeal in certain Hungarian or Polish policies, Kirk maintains that America's strength comes from market principles that reward risk and entrepreneurship.
Christian Governance and Feeding the Needy
Another student challenges Kirk on religious consistency, questioning why he supports religious governance on issues like abortion and gay marriage but opposes government programs to feed hungry children. The student cites the Bible's 2,000+ references to helping the needy, arguing it's a Christian obligation for government to provide free school lunches.
Kirk counters by asking for a specific Bible verse commanding taxes to the government to help the needy. He argues the biblical model is church-based charity, not government welfare. Kirk explains he personally gives substantial tithes to local churches specifically for helping those in need.
The student insists the government has unique scale and reach that churches lack. Kirk responds by asking whether there are more churches or government buildings in America, and whether churches or government can more effectively collect and deploy resources. He argues churches can do this work far more efficiently than the federal government.
Kirk describes the problem with government welfare: it creates distance between giver and receiver, subsidizes poor choices like unhealthy eating, and removes the relational element of charity. In contrast, when churches run food banks, they can provide healthy meals, build relationships, and share the gospel. The person in need connects directly with those helping them.
Kirk points to Europe as a cautionary tale: big government, small church, with the state handling charity and the church playing a minimal role. He advocates for the opposite: small government, big church, where faith communities actively serve their neighbors. He notes that America already spends over a trillion dollars annually on food stamps, SNAP, and Medicaid, yet still faces significant obesity rather than starvation among the poor.
Trump's Tariffs and Economic Strategy
A student expresses concern about Trump's tariffs being imposed all at once rather than gradually building domestic production capacity over several years. Kirk clarifies that the administration is in a 90-day pause period and that tariff energy should ultimately focus on China, from which America is dangerously over-reliant for everything from rare earth minerals to vitamin C.
Kirk explains that trade deficits become problematic when trading partners can shut off access, making you a vassal state. He emphasizes the Chinese tariffs are not paused and remain in effect. Other tariffs serve as leverage tools to bring countries to the negotiating table, showing nations like Vietnam, Japan, and South Korea that America means business.
Kirk outlines three purposes for tariffs: generating tax revenue, protecting industry for national security, and Trump's innovation—using them as negotiating leverage. He points to massive investment announcements from Toyota, Hyundai, and Nvidia totaling over $2 trillion in American investment, largely attributable to Trump's tariff strategy. The student appears satisfied with Kirk's explanation and receives applause.
DEI Programs and Merit-Based Systems
A student asks about Idaho's recent bill banning DEI programs at state colleges and universities, questioning why such programs should be eliminated altogether rather than simply defunded. Kirk explains that DEI emerged from the 1960s-70s post-civil rights era with the goal of hyper-racializing hiring and admissions based on race rather than merit.
Kirk argues that when you prioritize equity, you compromise excellence. Institutions should be merit-based, not race-based. The student suggests only minorities and LGBTQ students lose from eliminating DEI. Kirk responds that DEI programs exist to elevate unqualified people based on skin color into positions they shouldn't hold.
He emphasizes that truly qualified Black or Hispanic individuals should not need DEI because they can be judged, as Martin Luther King Jr. said, by the content of their character rather than the color of their skin. Merit-based systems honor individual achievement and maintain institutional excellence without racial preferences.
The Question of When Life Begins
Multiple students attempt variations of abortion arguments throughout the event. One student proposes that the "right to life" should begin after birth rather than at conception, suggesting this would solve abortion debates. Kirk asks the student to clarify, struggling to understand the position.
When the student argues abortion should be legal because it costs less than raising a child or putting them through the adoption system, Kirk responds bluntly: "What you're saying is it's okay to murder a human being just because you might save some money."
Kirk repeatedly brings the debate back to the central question: when does human life begin? When one student finally states "after birth," Kirk calls this an insane position, pointing out that a baby at 34 weeks responds to its mother's voice, has a heartbeat, brain waves, unique DNA, and can empty its own bladder. This is self-evidently a human life.
The student quickly backtracks, willing to compromise on earlier weeks. Kirk pounces on this, noting how quickly people acknowledge uncertainty about when life begins, which supports the pro-life argument that human dignity exists from conception. If there's any doubt about when personhood begins, the moral position is to err on the side of protecting potential human life.
Trump's First Impeachment
A nervous student brings up Trump's 2019 impeachment related to the Ukraine phone call, expressing concern about Trump's "fundamental disrespect for liberal democratic values." The student argues Trump suspended congressionally approved aid to coerce Ukraine into investigating a political opponent, then covered it up and refused House subpoenas.
Kirk responds that Trump was acquitted and that presidents frequently freeze foreign aid. He notes that when Joe Biden was vice president, he was caught on camera saying he would freeze Ukrainian funds unless a specific energy project involving Hunter Biden was approved. The student attempts to dismiss this as "whataboutism."
Kirk acknowledges being "dusty" on the details from six years ago but recalls it involved a single phone call with Zelensky, likely illegally monitored by whistleblower Eric Ciaramella and leaked to House Democrats. He sees no evidence Trump held up aid for political purposes, noting Trump actually provided substantial aid to Ukraine in 2019. The exchange ends respectfully but without resolution.
Campus Culture and Free Speech
Throughout the event, Kirk faces various disruptive students, including some asking vulgar questions and others attempting comedy routines. One student claiming to be an English major for four and a half years cannot name a favorite Charles Dickens novel or identify Jane Austen, one of the most important writers in Western civilization. Kirk uses this as evidence that college is often a scam, with students studying things that don't matter for jobs that don't exist.
Despite the disruptions, Kirk maintains his composure and humor, using the exchanges to illustrate broader points about campus culture and the state of higher education. He encourages genuine disagreement and dialogue while calling out bad-faith actors who wait in line merely to heckle or insult rather than engage substantively.
The event showcases the intense cultural and political divisions on American campuses, with Kirk serving as a lightning rod for student activists while also attracting supporters who appreciate his willingness to defend conservative principles in hostile territory. The format allows for raw, unfiltered exchanges that reveal how young people are thinking about fundamental questions of life, economics, faith, and governance.
Video Transcript
Imagine this banana is a burn a less lethal launcher capable of shooting rock-hard kinetic and tear gas mixed with pepper chemical irritants. The ammo can incapacitate an attacker from 60 ft away without causing death. This BurnA lessle lethal launcher is legal in all 50 states. No permits required. Over 600,000 Burna pistol launchers have been sold to government agencies, law enforcement agencies, and to private citizens. Do you want to know what the BurnA lesslethal launcher looks like? Visit burna.com. How we doing, Boise State? A lot of energy today. Great to see you guys. You know how it works. I'm out of breath after that. If you disagree, go to the front of the line. Are we at elevation or something? My goodness. Um, you disagree, go to the front of the line. We'll have a great chat. And, uh, great to be here at Boise State University. Go Broncos, everybody. First question coming up. Charlie. Charlie. If you were 5 inches in Elon Musk and Trump was 5 inches in you, which way are you moving? Which way are you moving? Charlie is that your question? That is my question. If you were 5 in in Elon Musk and Trump was 5 in you, which way are you moving? Thank Thank you for your question. Which way? These are the pressing matters we want to know answers to. Charlie, you you waited in line to ask that question. All right. Charlie [Applause] and they wonder why they lost the popular vote in November, right? They they have these looking things coming up on skateboards. What is it, Charlie? You see, I got another super fan right there. You want to come up here? No, you're too afraid. Got it. Okay, next question. Is that Wait, we got another. That's a sign of endearment in most cultures. Come on up. You got something to say? Say it. Oh, come on up. Can I get you? So, why do you care so much about other individuals living their lives? What is affecting you? Do you have something up your ass or something? Well, I could throw that right back at you. Why do you care so much about what I have to say? Because you're affecting other people's rights. You're taking away people's choices. You are hurting people. Read the Constitution. Um, what what what rights am I taking away exactly? You're trying to take away gender affirming care for individuals. You are affecting abortion rights. You are hurting people. Got it. So, what is a woman? What is a woman? It's what people identify as is a gender. Sex is different. Sex is different from gender. So, uh, can anyone be a woman? Yes. Um, at at at what point do you know you're looking at a woman? Doesn't matter. When you are looking at a woman, you don't have to look at a woman and immediately tell. Can you tell looking at a baby what gender they are without looking at their privates? Tell me that. Sometimes. Sometimes. What about that baby is different? But, but hold on. By by the time they're six months old, you can actually tell a young boy tends to gravitate more towards balls and remotes. That's because a gender affirming that is convincing individuals at a young age. You are socializing, putting them in situations where they want certain different things. Let's look at [Applause] So, let's say you were a little kid and your parents taught you to like pink. Let's actually look back in time. Peak actually used to be a male color instead of blue. [Music] What world? Actually, in the 1920s. Um, so, so you say that I'm here to take people's rights away. That is your main contention. Yes. Because you are affecting the LGBT. You are affecting women's rights. If I was pregnant. Oh, wait. Let's go back to this. Abortion is anything. If I had a cyst on my uterus, that would be considered an abortion. No, it's not. Yes, it is. No. No, it's not. Yes, it is. Look at Okay. Anything that is evolving the uterus. Well, no. Uh, in order for it to be an abortion, it must be a human life. No. Anything that is evolving the uterus and you have to get rid of it, it is considered abortion. No. No. No. That's not how that's not how it works. So, so again, you say, "I'm here to take rights away." Do you agree life is a right? I feel like if it's a clump of cells, then it's not like No, no, no. But let's go back. Do you think Do you think every human being has a right to life? Depending on how many weeks. But let's So wait, hold on. Who's trying to take rights away? I want to protect the rights of all human beings. You call them a clump of cells. Who's trying to take rights away? Example. Exactly. So when is it a human being in your mind? When is it a human being in your mind? Well, it's not even on my mind. it. Human development objectively begins at conception. At conception. So even if I had a miscarriage, what are you going to say about that? It's a tragedy. It's a tragedy. Okay. Then let's talk about like what if it's affecting the woman or anybody who is pregnant in this situation? What if they're going to die and they have to get an abortion? That's the only way they're going to live. Are they going to be over? Well, hold on. Just so we're clear. That's only a couple thou That's only a couple thousand cases a year. And so yes, it Have you seen how many individuals have already died because they haven't been able to get abortion? Abortion in the life of the mother can be put aside as something that needs to be considered. However, it's not always necessary. But let's talk about the main thing because there's over 1.5 million abortions every single year that don't involve rape, incest, or life of the mother. 1.5 million. But let's let's just ask you a very simple question. When when does human life begin? When does human life, in my personal opinion, is going to start around the second trimester, a little more farther along. But let's get to this. Most individuals that are having abortions are going to be mothers that cannot afford it. They usually have already two to three kids and a lot of time. So So it's acceptable to be able to murder your young if all of a sudden you don't have the money to support them. That you can you can murder your offspring if you're poor. So in the first couple weeks, even though it's still not fully developed, doesn't even have a heartbeat, does it even have development does not equal dignity. A human being is a human being regardless of the process of development that it is in. Period. And so who's trying to take rights away? I actually want more human beings to Why are you affecting the LGBT? Well, hold on. We're talk. Let's Let me finish on abortion. I want more human lives, which by the way, hilariously, would be more women would actually would be born cuz the right to life is paramount. You're trying to take rights away because you're okay with the massacring of little humans. Back to LGBT. It's been going throughout history though. Abortion has been a big thing for a long time and it affects people and it hurts people. So has murder and slavery and child sacrifice. There's been that's completely different. No, it is murder. Say slavery to abortion. Okay. So let me ask you a question then. Define what is murder. What is murder? Are you going to be talking about first-degree murder like homicide? Like going and having the intent to kill a person, having the intent to kill somebody, but I'm just saying a clump of human. Yeah, but a clump of cells is different. Hold on. Time out. If it's a clump of cells, what species is it? What species is it? What species? It depends. One's going to be pregnant. Whatever you're trying to Is it a homo sapien, a crocodile, or a raccoon? Which one is it? What species? So if it's a human clump of cells, then it's a human life deserving of human rights. And the first right is life. And so you could call it a clump of cells, which is dehumanizing language. But I'll go back to this. Ironically, you're the one that is actually intruding on human rights. We're the one protecting human rights. You're trying to get rid of the option so people can have rights to their own body. If someone does not want to have a child, they should not be forced to. If the Oh, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. If we're going to be doing this, what are you going to do about the children in the um the systems that have been being assaulted, that are being hurted? Put more money into the system so people can actually get adopted or actually other things like that. Okay. Again, none of that is relevant. No, because you want more babies to be born. What about people that can't afford them? They have to go into systems. How h how many people are on the adoption waiting list? Yeah. Want to know how many kids actually get adopted? million people that go into systems or are being adopted that get hurt. Are you going to be helping those children that get over by this system? So there are there are 2 million people on the adoption waiting list. There are a million abortions every year. There are twice as many people that want to adopt than discarded children every single year. Now I have to go back to a fundamental question though which I think is very important. Human development objectively begins at conception. You say it's around two trimesters. Can we agree that every human being once your DNA is formed, you should have the right to life, the right to live the life the way you want to live it. Can we agree on that? How many weeks are we saying? No. I say again once once it be once once the sperm is inside the egg. Correct. Yeah. No. No. Once the sperm inside the egg in the first like couple of days. No. Well, okay. But let's go through that. Isn't that when your DNA was formed? Yeah, but then aren't you fundamentally at its c at its core, you are the DNA is your blueprint for your life. That's who you are. It's a unique marker. It's my DNA. Yeah. Yes. So, if it's not your DNA, why is it your choice? Why is it my choice? Yes. If it's not your DNA, why do you have a choice to eliminate it? I don't It's up to the individual that is having them inside of it is their body. I don't care if it is like a few weeks because that is not a human life yet because of rape that individual cannot survive without the mother or who is ever pregnant. Therefore, again, so let's get down to this cuz I think it's very important and a good way to end this question which is outside of rape, how did the woman get pregnant outside of rape? So, we're not going to be talking about incest or other individuals like that because incest is not only just rape or other situations. If I How about if I say let's talk about how things that get mixed up in How about if I say how about if I say I'm okay with abortion for rape, incest, and life of the mother. Let's make it illegal in the other circumstances. Would you agree? How are we going to be able to term that all the time though? Because what if it wasn't consensual? What if that individual was drunk, but they're married and they got raped? You can get a rape. Again, you keep on interrupting me, but you can report rape as a crime. You can also do a blood test to find out if it's incest. But 99.9% of all abortions are not rape and not incest and not life not life of the mother. How did that woman get pregnant in those c situations? Did she just walk through campus and it just appeared and all of a sudden a baby is in her uterus or did she do something to decide to potentially have a child? Sex. But also contraceptives sometimes don't always work. So but but hold on a second. Shouldn't you take responsibility for your orgasms? I don't think most men can make me come. Am I going to be honest? Oh, okay. Well, again, out outside of that statement, um, I'm not even sure how to take that, to be honest. You brought up orgasms. Okay. Shouldn't you take responsibility for the sex that you have? I mean, if I was wanting to have a child and my contraceptives, I didn't use any contraceptives and I wanted to get pregnant, sure, I'm taking responsibility for that life because I wanted that life. But let's say I was use having sex and my contraceptives didn't work and I got the chance of getting pregnant. I am not having that child. So, but you still decided to have sex. You and again our our opinion when you go and decide having sex is not something you need to survive. It's not like showering or eating or shelter. You can live without having sex. You can have a little bit of self-control. If you decide to go have sex, you should understand you play certain games, you win certain prizes, which might be another human life. And it is the most up another child, though. Hold on a second. Then don't go have sex. No. Oh, so you understand how narcissistic that is that I want to keep on having fun and if I have a human being and oopsy daisy, I'm going to eliminate that other human being cuz I don't want to have the human being, but I want to keep on having free sex. How is that not the most narcissistic worldview that one can possibly espouse? It's narcissistic that I want to have sex with another consenting individual just because I don't want to have children. I feel like a lot of people in the world have sex. I think a lot of people make money off of having sex and they don't want to have children. I feel like it is something that everybody do. A lot of people have sex just for pleasure. Again, just because a lot of people do it does not make it right. Number one. Number two, again, fundamentally your view is I'm going to do whatever I want to do and if it if it creates other human beings, so be it. Sure. Do you have sex just to have a baby every single time then? Or are you doing it for pleasure? I I am married and we have two kids, too. So, I'm pretty good at having I'm assuming that you have had sex more than twice in your life, not just give you an inside look into my sex life. But, but you're doing it for pleasure, not just to have kids. Well, again, we we actually always do it with God's trust that if we get kids, it's a blessing. Okay? And we do it in the marital context. Again, you also are in a position where you can afford to have children. You are in a position where you are not the lower class. How about this? How about we have the maturity and the sophistication again? You keep on using words children and baby. Let me ask you ask you a question. When someone is celebrating a pregnancy, do they call it a clump of cell shower or a baby shower? That's also when it's already been past those weeks. Oh, so it magically gets pixie dust. You're a human being now. No, cuz it develops. Oh, exactly. Cuz it's all around the spectrum of human development. And human development starts at conception. Yeah. Is it going to be completely developed at the first week? No. You're not completely developed right now. A lot of people are going to be You're never going to be completely developed. It's like you are not completely developed at age 30 or 40. The spectrum of human development keeps on going when you go deep and deep into your life. The question is the most important question. When does that journey begin? That journey begin like when did your process of development begin? My process of development? Yes. Yeah. At conception. Every person in this audience, your life started at conception. and your own DNA from your eye color to your hair color to your height from your likes and your dislikes whether you're an introvert or an extrovert all of that was coded into your deoxyorbo nucleic acid at the moment that you were a zygote and so that human deserves constitutional and human rights and again you came up here with the accusation saying I am here taking away people's rights you are again so I you are affecting LGBT rights and abortion rights who are affecting individual v individuals that can't always speak for themselves. Got it. So again, we we I think we have gone through this plenty of times. I want to get to the next question. Okay. But I may may maybe maybe we can get maybe we can get to some burn it. You'll burn it. Okay. Maybe we can get to some approximation of an agreement. Can we agree? No. Oh, okay. Bye. Can we agree on I I I will pray for you this Holy Week. Thank you for your time. Please don't ever pray for me. [Applause] All right. Um very lively campus here at Boise State, right? I got to love it. Good stuff. Uh disagreements can go to the front of the line or whomever wants. Yeah. Anyone? We got some other Hi, Charlie. Nice to meet you. I'm Tyler Phely. Um, I got the most anticipated question of the evening today. Do you think Ashton Genty was robbed of the Heisman? Yes. Yes. Travis Hunter did not deserve the Heisman. It's true. I just speak the truth. I just speak the truth. Hey, love you, Charlie. Can I get a mag? Yes, absolutely. [Applause] [Music] All right. Who's up? How's it going, Chuck? Good to see you. Uh, long time fan. Really huge fan. Massive fan. You want to say it one more time? Big fan of you, Chuck. Uh, I know we all are. Uh, I had one question for you. I was wondering if you would stack donuts on it and how many you could do. Scared of the mic. Thank you for your time. Thank you for yours. They they they wait in line for just the vulgarity. Again, exhibit C of why uh of why we won. Okay. Again, this is why no one should give money to Boise State. They're just producing this these garbage social leftwing activists. Just ridiculous. How you doing, Charlie? I'm Dylan. Nice to meet you. Um I'm a proud Catholic, Hispanic American, and former turning point US member at Utah Tech. I agree with you on a lot of topics like the Second Amendment, traditional values, and standing up to stuff like white liberal ideology and their agenda. But you're going to disagree on Israel. No, economics specifically. I recently went to the Bernie Sanders rally even I know you guys don't like him. I didn't f I didn't fit into the crowd, but I agree with him when it comes to economics. I don't support any of his social stuff, but what he said about the rural working class hit home. In rural Idaho and other parts of America I've lived in, people are drowning in medical debt, working two jobs, falling behind when billionaires keep winning. You say universal healthcare is socialism, but countries like Poland, Hungary, Croatia are socially conservative, pro- family, pro border, and still manage to support their people with healthcare and better wages. So how do you defend American economic system that leaves behind workingclass conserved people for this movement you claim to fight for? Fine. Fine. Great question. So in Idaho, would you say that you guys have some native reservations in Idaho, right? Yes. Would you say that they have great healthare? No. They have universal healthare paid for by the taxpayer. Do you think the VA is a good model for how healthare should work? No. That is universal. Think about it. The VA is government doctors paid for by taxpayers. Any VA can any veteran can go. The VA is the least favorable health care in in the entire country. And it is universal healthcare. So you need to tell me why you think we should have more of Native American reservation healthcare and more VA healthcare because that's what Bernie Sanders wants. So make your case. Uh I basically just want universal healthare for the VA. So don't interrupt him, please. Like you want more health care like the VA. It doesn't work. There are waiting lines. The quality of care is very low. The complaints are through the roof. Bernie Sanders wants our entire health care system look like the VA. Defend it. I'm just saying that I'm not I'm not asking for like I know UK and Canada have super long lines in their healthare system universal. No, no. It's not even abstract. I'm talking about the V the VA is a real American example. It's not about the Canada. It's not about the UK. I think it should be reformed. No, no, forget the reform. The VA has hundreds of billions of dollars of funding. It's taxpayer funded. The veteran pays nothing. They go there and it's all paid for. That's what Bernie Sanders wants and it's largely a catastrophe. So, show me and tell the American people why we should do more of that. I think we should have a new system though. Okay. But it's not a new system. Bernie Sanders wants the VA for everybody. But I want you to know what you're advocating for when you say that you want Bernie Sanders healthcare. You want the VA. Okay, here's what we want. We want, of course, more competition, price vouchers, want the hospital opt, but honestly, we want to be able for you guys to choose the doctor of your choosing to be able to say, you know what, I don't want to have to take six vaccines when I walk into this doctor. I want medical freedom where in the VA or in a government run hospital, you must take those vaccines. There are no exceptions. I do believe in some type of privatized healthcare. But I think Well, then you don't believe what Bernie believes. The government should support that. But the more people by the government you mean the taxpayer. So then therefore you mean higher taxes for working people because every time socialism is is tried every time it is taxes on more working people. He might say it's more taxes on billionaires. He might say it's more tax on the rich. It's every day carpenters welders police officers and people that work their hands that end up paying more. I'm starting to be a CNC manufacturer. Great. And Bernie Sanders will raise your taxes. That's the fact. And you know what Donald Trump is fighting for right now? And Bernie Sanders doesn't have the courage to vote for it. No tax on tips. No tax on overtime. So let let's talk about you. No tax on overtime. What would that mean for your specific industry? A big big big income boost for your family. Massive, in fact. Yet Bernie Sanders won't even vote for the Trump tax bill that will have no no tax on over no tax on tips does sound good because I do also work as a bartender at a restaurant. So let me ask you a question. Hold. I got to put you on defense here. Last night at the Bernie Sanders rally, 12,000 people, did Bernie Sanders say once that we should have no tax on tips? No, I haven't heard that. Well, because he doesn't care for the working men. He cares about hating the rich. It's not about helping the poor. It's about smashing successful people, which is against everything we as Americans stand for. It is about, oh, we're going to fight the oligarchy by two people that have never built a business or signed the front of a paycheck in their entire life. AOC and Bernie Sanders. It's so easy to say, we're going to tax the rich. We're going to hate the rich person. Yet, who are the people that have the businesses, deploy the capital? Both can be equally true where the middle class grows and we respect capital flows. What Bernie Sanders wants and what he exhibits is a philosophy built on greed and envy and forced wealth redistribution. Yep. And the la other last question I was asked about is abortion. I have my own unique stance on it. I personally think only biological women should vote on abortion ballots. Yes, biological woman. Yeah, we would still get crushed. But no, I don't. If a majority vote for a complete total abortion ban, even if it's against rape, incest, the life of the mother, I would allow that. I'll be fine with that. Okay. I I I disagree. I mean, first of all, um the baby is half the man's as well. Let's let's remember that that fathers have rights that are forgotten in the abortion argument. Secondly, it's a public involved makes us look like we are the stuff that they say about toxic masculinity. That is to make us look like that. Who cares how it looks? We care about how things are and how it is. And to have like sex segregated ballot measures, I think is honestly really repulsive and offensive to what it means to live in a democratic constitutional republic. Small D democratic. Saying like only women can vote on abortion matters. That's like saying only men can vote on whether or not we should bring back the male only draft. Like no, that doesn't make any sense. Okay. Yeah. But that that's just how I feel as as someone who as abortion and I'm pro-life and a Catholic. That's just how I feel. But I want you and you came here in good faith. I want you to understand and study deeper how sinister Bernie Sanders economic philosophy is. He panders to people that quite honestly are suffering economically and promises them free stuff and that we're going to take away all the wealth from the rich people. It's not that simple and it's not that easy. And every time his philosophy is tried, it results in the degradation of a society, the downfall of innovation, the entrance into the second or the third world, and sometimes even outright murder in concentration camps and over 100 million people dead. Again, I have to get back to this. Who would you rather trust to design a prosperous economy? How do you know Donald Trump and Elon Musk are not just keeping money for themselves? They're both billionaires, too. But like, I'm just saying. See, but hold on. This is Let me ask you a very blunt question. Have you ever met a billionaire? No, I haven't. But hold on. How do you know how they think them? No. You've never met a billionaire. How do you know what they do? You don't history of Donald Trump. Hold on. No, forgot the history. Hold on. This is an important thing. It's easy to hate that which you don't know. It's easy to crap on those that you actually not talked to because that billionaire, let's take Albert sits for example that named your stadium. Albertson's employs tens of thousands of people in the state and good on them for doing it to make sure that you guys can get the groceries you need to feed your family. But guess what? He became a billionaire because of it. But you know what? He should become a billionaire for the people he employs and the risk that he took and also the good that that has done for this city and the charity that's been back to the community here. Let me talk to Donald Trump personally to see if you're not. You said billionaires. Again, I could go through Trump or Elon Musk, but how about the other? You You have Melanuca that's also that named the stadium. You go after billionaire after billionaire. You know what? You find someone that had a really good idea that was able to risk it all that probably employed over a 100,000 people and made a lot of other people rich. The question should never be, how do we take money away from people? That's easy. That's theft. You do that when you're 3 years old. The question that society has to answer instead is how do you create wealth? That is a much harder question. When you go visit subsaharan Africa, they're trying to figure that out. They wonder why we're able to have buildings as beautiful as this and why we're able to have, you know, the standard of living that we enjoy in America. And the answer is because we have market principles where entrepreneurs can take risks and are able to get a reward at the end of it. Now, should we ever get to a place where the middle class is shrinking to such a great degree? No. That's why Donald Trump's agenda is to first and foremost rebuild the American middle class, not necessarily pander to the elite interest. And let me close with this just as a point. The wealthiest counties in America almost all vote for Democrats and vote for Joe Biden. The Democrat party is a party of the permanent wealthy class where the Republican party I agree. I think both parties are but hold on but let me just it's you Bernie Sanders is a fraud and a fake because as he is talking about like fighting the oligarchy everything that he would do would crush innovation, crunch crush entrepreneurship and not actually help the American middle class. And this is why he refuses to stand with Donald Trump every time he does something good that would actually help middle class workers. Final thought. But that was true about Donald Trump. Rule towns wouldn't be dying. Donald Trump gave CAC touch the corporations that hired Goldman Sachs elites and didn't touch the wage system. The working class got slogans and sweets while the billionaires he called out got richer. That's not draining the swamp. That's filling it. When Trump was there for four years, rural America actually saw more wage gains than urban America for four years from Obama's economy from Okay, that's Hold on. That that you know that's rubbish man. And that's president inherits the commonly based on on on what president first of all that that's that's such an oversimplification sloppy and shallow analysis of how economics works. But most importantly and I think you can acknowledge this is that Donald Trump what he did in the first term we saw a bluecollar miracle a bluecollar boom. The people that worked in manufacturer saw their wages actually go up higher than the top 1%. And that is why bluecollar workers voted for Donald Trump so significantly this last election. That's why Trump is doing tariffs on China. Again, no tax on tips, no tax on overtime. And finally, you guys know that gas Democrats are super socially progressive and don't relate to the working class anymore. Gas prices won gas prices are going down dramatically. And you guys are going to see $310. I thought it would be $2 by now. There again, it depends on where you are in the country. But as far as Wex West Texas oil crude, it was at 75 bucks a barrel almost a week and a half ago. Now it's near $55 a barrel. Not sure where it is today, but let me just kind of close with this. It's easy and tempting. And I want to just caution you because you're a Catholic and a man of faith. I want you to pray about this and I want you to think about this. It's tempting to want to believe in socialism. It is a fact that socialism before you get to the second sentence, socialism violates two out of the ten commandments. Thou shalt not covet and thou shalt not steal. So what about the Eastern European countries that have this kind of socialist like Hungary, Poland? Yes, Hungary is very socially conservative and they have some socialist, you know, ideas. Let me ask you a question. Can you name a single Hungarian company? I don't know. Can you name a single Hungarian entrepreneur? Not heard of any. Can you name a single Polish entrepreneur? No, cuz I don't live in Poland though. this. No, no, hold on. But you can name Chinese companies and Japanese companies and Korean companies. The point being is this. Be careful when you indulge in the cheap money of socialism because all of a sudden you don't become very innovative. You don't lead the world in AI or tech or in the top companies. And so, yes, okay, yeah, we could redistribute the wealth and become a mediocre country where wages kind of stagnate. We're no longer a free society where people flock here to start businesses. I think that's radically dangerous. I think it's radically dangerous for us to compromise on a on a on a bedrock of mediocrity. There's some things Hungary likes that I do. There's something Poland likes that I do. But socialism at its core is this belief that the state will take care of you. We as conservatives believe first and foremost the family takes care of you and then the church and last case necessary than the state. Have a great Holy Week. Thank you for your time. Appreciate it. Hi, Charlie and Aiden. Um, just want to start by prefacing a couple things. I'm sorry about those first couple people, especially the second one. That's like that's absurd. You don't have to apologize to me, but yeah. Well, I don't want that to be how we represent Boise State cuz that's not how I feel like we represent Boise State. So, um, and then just a couple other things. I'm just kind of getting into politics, but, um, I do have a disagreeing point and I wonder if you can fill fill me in on some things. So um as you know we get a lot of our imports from Canada like semiconductors, microchips, oil, Mexico, fruits and vegetables and you know pharmaceuticals from China. Avocados from Mexico. Avocados. There you go. Um I'm wondering if you think it's a good idea what Trump's doing in imposing all these tariffs at once. um rather than maybe taking a couple years to build factories and train workers to gradually uh improve domestic production. Um yeah, I just wondering your thoughts on that. First of all, we're in the midst of a 90-day pause. I think that was prudent. All of the tariff energy, in my opinion, should be focused on China. We are far too reliant on China. From lithium ion to rare earth minerals to vitamin C to vitamin D. We make no vitamin C in our own body. You need vitamin C literally to live. China has cornered the asorbic acid market which is vitamin C. All of the tariffs should eventually be focused on China. That I completely support. Canada, Mexico, we need better deals. We should not be relying on importing electricity from Canada. At any time they can shut you off. Now I fully acknowledge that a trade deficit in of itself is not necessarily a bad thing. Do you know what a trade deficit is bad? When that other country can shut you off from trading. That's really bad. And that's what the Chinese can do. You become a vassal state apparent. That's what they are doing right now. Right. Exactly. And so that proves the point actually that proves that we are too reliant on them. Rare Earth Minerals. We need to mine them again. We need to bring industrial manufacturing jobs back to this country which I'm very hopeful that we'll do. Just today we saw Toyota and Hyundai announce multi-billions of investment. Nvidia yesterday announced a $500 billion investment in the United States of America. Donald Trump has brought over $2 trillion of investments already back to this country and tariffs as a leverage tool are largely to thank for that. Yeah. Um, so then why have they kept getting paused and paused and paused and rethought over? What's the deal behind that? Why can't we just go through? Well, the Chinese ones are not paused. That's important. Understand that. So, the Chinese ones are not paused. The other ones are paused because the strategy, as we are now learning, was a shock and a strategy to get people to the table to show Vietnam, Japan, and South Korea, those are the three big ones in particular, that we mean business. Now, why does Vietnam matter? Vietnam matters because so many thousands of jobs millions of jobs left China and then went to Vietnam as a way to try to weaken China. And so in my opinion, I like tariffs tariffs the forcing function to bring people to the table. Yeah. Um I I see your point, but um when tariffs were uh created, the whole point of them was not just to make money and conduct business. It was to promote domestic production. Well, there's three that You're right. Sorry to interrupt. So there are two stated goals of tariffs. Trump has invented a third. So the first stated goal of a tariff is to create tax revenue so that the government can be funded. The the second of which is also kind of national security to protect industry. Yeah. Trump has invented a third. It's used as a negotiating tool. Unfortunately, well, I think it's actually fortunately. Look at how great these deals are that are going to be brokered. You'll see these countries would not be coming to the table nearly as fast or as focused if it wasn't for Trump slapping tariffs on them. So, thank you for your question. Do you want a hat? Uh, yeah, sure. Okay. Thank you, man. Appreciate it. Thank you. [Applause] Hello. Hi. All right. No problem. Hello, Charlie. I am Miles Humphre from Venice Beach, California. Yes, I am Satan incarnate of Idaho. But personally for me, I don't really identify based on state lines. I identify myself as an American. And that shows just how uh personally for me how we are very inclusive in nature based beyond dividing lines of states but rather the dividing lines of a nation. I believe in strong borders. I believe in borders and the natural right of their such tribes have established it in the nature of social organization. But I personally believe that due to Trump's policies and due to his language and the character that he has personified, it is making America look indifferent to the rest of the world to go against American values of treating everybody neighborly and equally based on the Christian values that we were founded by. So I just wanted to ask you, is that only just one side of the perspective or is it a coin where there's another face to it? Okay. So you say neighborly, let me ask you a question. Okay. Has Mexico slashed the drug cartels, have they been neighborly to us? No, they have not. Yeah. And so when you have a 100,000 people dying of drug overdoses in your country, a lot in Idaho, by the way. A lot of drug overdoses in Idaho. Way too many. I I think that calling them out for what they are as a foreign terrorist organization is appropriate. Okay. All right. So, but to me calling them out as a foreign terrorist organization, is that just the whole of Mexico or is it just the individual of those participating in those you have to use examples of what you are criticizing Trump of? But okay. All right. Uh personally for me, I am criticizing his policies with tariffs. I believe it is important to bring back uh the economic capabilities of the United States and bringing back manufacturing. But I believe that due to his very blunt mafia tactics of just come to the table immediately that it creates an unfair persona of American diplomacy. Got it. Okay. So what persona? Let me ask you a question. I have a good question for you. Okay. Were you more comfortable with Joe Biden's persona? No, I was not. What? How about Obama's Obama? I don't know the man. I was too young. What What persona would are you comfortable with the president having? Uh, personally for me, I just feel uh that a cult of personality is what a president needs. And definitely Trump has that, but it rubs people off the wrong way about the personality that he possesses of being a strong man, uh, something like Theodore Roosevelt and sorts. So, yeah, I don't even I won't say we have disagreement. Let me just tell you my opinion then we'll get to the next question. Okay. I think it's time that we actually have a strong man as an American president, not whatever Joe Biden was. And we we need someone that acts with energy and spirit and vitality. I mean, we had Joe Biden that wasn't even a functioning human being the last two years as president. Correct. And I think a president that is willing to push the boundaries for the United States of America is exactly what we voted for in major numbers in November. Thank you for your time. Appreciate it. Thank you. Okay. Hey, disagreements, guys. Yeah, got your own camera guy. I do. This is my friend Sam. Um, you say college is a scam, so I drove four hours here just so I could debate you on this. Um, I've been in school for four years majoring in English. And it my education means a lot to me. I put in a lot of work to be here. What school? Um, University of Utah. Okay, cool. And so I find it extremely disrespectful for you to say that college is a scam, not just to me, but everyone here that's also going to school. What's your favorite Charles Dickens book? Um, that was like push for like I for like that's like all around. No, no, tell me which one. The six. I can't hear what you saying. Just like the one like with Bushmir. Oh, okay. Yeah. Um, so how about your favorite Jane Austin novel? Oh, I don't know who that is. Jane Jane Austin. You're an You're an English major. Yeah. was like come for like what's your favorite I'm going to ask give you another chance. What's your favorite Jane Austin novel? Harry Potter. You've been there for four years. Four and a half. Well, I I I have one more question. You are proving that college is indeed a scam. Okay. Well, my my my dad paid a lot of money so I could go to college. And I just think how how what qualifies you to say that college is a scam just to get views on TikTok. You you almost had me for a while, but uh no, obviously you're being a troll and that's fine. Um yeah, look, college is a scam. Half the people in this audience, if they get a job, they'll get a job that doesn't require a college degree. For half the people in this audience, going to college is completely unnecessary. Um the vast majority of the jobs that these that you're going to enter into are going to be replaced by robotics or AI, unfortunately, in the next 5 years. And so you go to college a lot of the time to study things that don't matter to find jobs that don't exist. Do you find it's like push that is like come for like with pushmir? I can't I can't I can't to push mirror. Yeah. Not not sure what you're saying. Um is that is that come for like for like with the education system? Yes. Why? Because again I I can't I I can't tell if you're being a comedian or not. So I'm trying to sense but if you are actually I guess though it's I'm serious. So you are an English major. You don't know who Jane Austin is. Correct. Yeah. Exactly. That's a I mean like she's one of the most important writers in the history of Western civilization and like without a doubt just cuz I go to school doesn't mean like you're getting an English degree if that is like push like what is like right here. No no if you're getting I can't All right. Thank you for your time. Sorry I'm just mumbling. Yeah, I know. Will you will you sign my shirt? I'm good. Thank you. Thanks, Charlie. [Applause] Thank you for being here. Hey Charlie. Okay. I have a real quick question. Just a little bit of preface. I'm going to get straight to the point, but I need to start with the first question. You love the Bible, correct? It's the word of God. Exactly. Okay. Perfect. Perfect. Yes. Exactly. So, I just want to I'm just here not necessarily to debate, but more to understand your line of reasoning. I want to understand how when you practice the pre and like preach religious governance and issues like that as with your abortion and status on gay marriage. Why don't you also support things like free lunches for kids? The Bible over 2,000 times mentions it helping the needy at every instance and that if you don't help the needy, you are not doing the word of God and he will not help you. Yeah, great. Did I mention the Bible once in my abortion argument earlier? Okay. I don't know. I'm just No, you didn't. I just want to be clear though because I'm just thinking of what I've heard before. Sorry. No, but I I I I do believe it's the word of God. Of course, we should help the needy. Can you show me a specific verse where it says, "Make sure you pay a bunch of money to the government and taxes to help the needy." I would say specifically that I think as Christians, it should be the number one priority to find a system that works to make sure that every single person is fed. And I think it truly if we're looking at the word of God, you have to look at the fact that you should go through every cost to yourself. As the Bible specifically says, I can pull up a verse on my phone right now that says specifically in the Bible that you should feed the needy at the cost to yourself. You should help those in needy at cost yourself. If it's a couple pennies out of my tax dollars to feed those don't don't want food. I think that's a Christian obligation of the government to fulfill. No, that again it's never biblically obligated to use the state to do that. The church should do that. Okay. And that's so I personally give a fair amount of my tithes and my donations to local churches to help do these things and I hope everybody else does that as well. And in fact I believe the meat of my question but I could get more to the meat of the question then. So why do you think there should be some policies that should be governed at the state level but then not other policies when it's sort of governed like this when it's specifically over 200 times in the Bible? Right. So we go back to the constitution because that's our core governance. So is it if it's in the constitution it should be there such as border security, national security, printing of money, the treasury, enforcing of interstate commerce, department of justice, those tariffs, collecting of duties. However, the government providing food to its citizenry is not in the constitution and it should be a last st last gap effort. And I suppose the question is I I don't know if you're a Christian or not. And if you are, wouldn't wouldn't you say it's better for churches to feed people than the government to feed people? Yeah. Okay. So I am a Christian and I do think that by any means necessary the number one priority of every single citizen in society under Christian values as you like to preach should be to help their fellow man to help them feed help them get clothes and help the needy and I think that out here preaching if you think that the government the government is a means of at the end of the day it's inevitable the government is inevitable and I think that we have to have that means that has such a mass scale of outreach to help feed people and to help give them their needs. I think that churches they lack a lot of central organization that they could that they the government has to help reach out with them to help feed them. Let me ask you a hypothetical. If all the money we spend on the government to feed people went away, do you think the church would step up and make sure there's not a single hungry person in America? Um I think that they would try but again I think that the government is a unique position that as Christians we should be using to fulfill the will of God. How is the government in a better position than the church? Build that out for me. Are are there more churches or more government buildings in America? Yeah. So let me actually get to that. Can the church make laws? Well, no, but the church actually collect money and actually deploy it much more effectively than the federal government can. In fact, Okay. Okay. Perfect. Okay. A question that I got on taxes. I would love if my tax dollars went to helping people who needed food. That's my argument here. I think it does over over a trillion dollars a year goes to food stamps and SNAP and Medicaid. And I'm glad that but actually it doesn't help them nearly as much as you think. Let me tell you why. Because then we subsidize bad eating habits of the poor so that the working poor is very obese. So they go buy Coca-Cola, Pepsi, and Fredolays and the church is not involved where the church would then be say, "Hey, instead of going to the local grocery store with a bunch of food stamps and SNAP benefits, why don't you come by our church and we'll feed all of you and a much more healthy meal made by our own members and then you can hear the gospel afterwards." That's the church in practice. What the government does, and I want you to respond. What the government does is it creates distance and it creates separation and it creates murkiness between the person issuing the help and the person receiving the help. What private charity and philan philanthropy does as the church designed it is it's much more relational. So there is a single mom coming into the church saying, "I can't feed my kids. I need help." I would believe that every church in America would not say, "Sorry, we're closed here." They would say, "How here's our food bank. here's how we can help you. We will we will cook you a meal. We will give you what you want. Where the faceless government, we've seen this in Europe, and I don't mean to go on too long about this. In Europe, the state is huge. The government is huge, and the church is small. The church does not do charity. It does not do food banks. Does very little that because the government takes care of it. I actually think that's deeply unhealthy. I want a small government and a big church where Europe has a big government and a small church. Okay. Okay. I have a few key arguments against that. Just one quickly, I think that people despite like their uh monetary status and like where they stand in society like monetarily, I think that they should be able to choose what food they get to some extent at the grocery store, but also too on that like unhealthy food is substantially cheaper than good food. So that's also kind of that situation that you're pointing out. But but it is cheaper at the end of the day. If they're pinching pennies, then ultimately they're going to weigh a cost. We do not just I have to interrupt you just so we're clear. We do not have a starvation crisis in America. I I would say that we I think that issues with it. I think that the thing is we don't have necessarily starvation crisis, but we have a mismanagement of resources to the point where kids are going hungry. I'm not sure the exact rate, but they are going hungry. There 10% of kids claim food insecurity. That's 10% of kids. They don't know where the next meal is coming from. We don't know what that term means. Half of our kids are clinically obese by the age of 15. That's a much bigger problem than food insecurity. We have too much bad food being fed to our kids. Okay, perfect. On that argument again of food insecurity, that just means they don't know where their next meal is going to come from. That's what that means. But also more on to this specifically, I think that again, obesity can be a problem to solve. But when there are kids that are going hungry, I do think it is a responsibility of the government because like I said, churches can't make laws. I think that they are important, but they cannot have the outreach and the standard of providing free lunches to school kids at every single day because they can't afford food. They don't know if they're going to go home and have dinner on their table. So all I'm arguing here today again my final question before I get off is just do you think that you are upholding your Christian values by not holding the government accountable when the government is the easiest way to get food to people? No, I actually don't think it's the easiest way. I think that private charity individuals helping individuals is the best way to offer. Is that working enough right now or should we have a system to give free lunches to kids? We do. That problem is you're actually living in the big government era and it's not working. We spend hundreds of billions of dollars on your desired objective. We have food stamps. We have school supported lunches. We have t How widespread are the school supported lunch? Incredible. Can you can you give me the statistics because the most of cuz I know that growing up in the state of Idaho, I never once had a free school lunch unless No, neither did anybody I know. Unless it was during and I I will say something controversial and it's I actually don't think it's the role of the state to feed a kid at school. It's the role of the parents to feed those kids. Okay. And I I I and you might say, "Oh, if the parents don't have money, the parents, I think, have to get more and more involved to taking care of your kids." And the more the state grows into that realm, the smaller it actually makes the American family. Final point. Okay. One quick followup on that. I think that specifically parents are often struggling. They often give up their own meals to give to their kids. But hang on, let's move. It is. Okay. Exactly. Now, let's move. But they shouldn't have to. They should also be able to get food themselves. I think that the key argument here is that they need to be able because the government has so many resources to provide food for people and I think that if you are up here and that your religious values I know that you're against gay marriage and often that's by your religious values. So I would say that specifically when we look towards issues like that if we're going to have some religious governance you have to do what the Bible says over 2,000 times and provide food to the needy and help heal the needy. And yes and we do. And what I'm saying though is that it has been proven to really not work very well. the best way to help the needy. Then do you not think it's the Christian duty then to find everything we absolutely can do to help them? Yes, and we know how to do it and that is the local church helping them. Okay, perfect. So then do you think that also then comes from government ordinances and government support and tax cuts for the churches? No, see that well first of all tax churches don't pay taxes. Well, that's what I meant like not no longer adding taxes cuz I've seen that things that people want to add taxes. We shouldn't. No, they're tax exempt organizations. But again, our view as Christians and conservatives is the government doesn't do it well. the government operates by force and the local Christian nonprofit, the local Christian church or whatever will it does a much better job of delivering help to those in need than a big government. Thank you for your time though. Appreciate it. You are contradictory yourself currently right there because the government it's what if it's one religious way you have to have all religious governance but it doesn't mean the state has to do it. Thank you. I think it's the best means to make sure that everybody has food. They're welcome to come up if they want. Yeah. Come on up. Come on up. Hi. Am I good here? Cool. Um, yeah. Thanks for coming out. Uh, I'm really nervous, so sorry if I stutter at all. Uh, yeah. Thanks for coming out. Uh, my question is about, uh, the events surrounding the first impeachment trial of Donald Trump. I think the thing that makes America really special is, yeah, the phone call event surrounding that. Yeah. I think the thing that makes America really special is that we were founded on liberal democratic values and that we have a model for liberal democracy better than any other country in the world. I didn't vote for Donald Trump in 2024 because I think he has a fundamental disrespect for liberal democratic values and I think that was reflected really well in uh the uh Trump Ukraine scandal in 2019. Would you be willing to talk about that? Yeah, briefly. People don't even remember that impeachment. I mean there's usually much more pressing matters than the 2019 impeachment. Okay. uh hoax. But yeah, I mean, well, first of all, I I I don't want to spend too much time on this, but America was actually not funded on liberal democratic values, so we can debate that. It was actually far more of a small C conservative classical view of government. Just just to clarify, I don't mean liberal as in like the liberals. No, I understand you mean enlightenment. You mean reason. I got it. It's actually it's a blend. There's some elements of that. There's also some more elements of smallc conservative classical doctrine in there, but we could put that aside. Yeah. I mean, we separation. Fine. Why don't you as quickly as you can. I know you said you're nervous. State your case of what you think why you think Trump's 2019 phone call was a disqualifier. Um, yeah. So, I think not just the phone call, but the events surrounding the phone call that he suspended congressionally approved aid in an attempt explicitly in an attempt uh to coersse a foreign government to investigate a political opponent and the DNC servers. I thought that was uh contemptable. I also thought that the cover up um afterwards uh was really bad. And then I thought the refusal to comply with House Judiciary Committee subpoenas uh was really condemnable. I think all of those things reflect bad on our democracy. Okay. Well, we're not a democracy. Republic poorly on a constitutional republic. That that's the reason you didn't vote for Trump. I mean like that's Yeah. Okay. I mean was he was he convicted of the impeachment? No. So he was acquitted. Yeah. I mean the the Government Accountability Office found that what he did was illegal, right? Freezing funds. Uh again, presidents freeze fund all the time. Funds all the time. under under that statute, when Joe Biden was vice president, he was on camera saying that we're going to freeze Ukrainian funds unless you approve a very specific energy project that Hunter Biden was on the border. Okay. I'm going to I'm going to just respectfully I don't mean this in a rude way, but I don't want to really get into a what aboutism what what what you're saying about the standard of whether we hold leaders. You're completely right. You're completely right and and that's a that's a huge discussion to have. It's an important discussion to have. I specifically want to get your thoughts on this impeachment. I completely disagree. It was a sing again I'm it's it's very admittedly like I'm dusty on this topic because it's from 2019 and that's six years ago. From what I remember it was a singular phone call that Trump had with Zilinski that was probably illegally listened to by Eric Chimarella the the whistleblower from the intelligence community that then probably illegally leaked it to the House Jud the House Democrats and the contention was that Trump was holding up aid for political purposes. Yeah, I see no such evidence of that whatsoever. Trump actually gave a lot of aid to Ukraine back in 2019. Right. Again, and let's just make this the final point because the audience isn't tracking this. Okay. Could I could I could I just make one more point? Is that the the uh Mick Mulaney actually said explicitly that the reason Trump instructed him to block the aid Ukraine was so that uh they would investigate the DNC uh server uh conspiracy and Hunter Biden's business dealings in Ukraine. Okay. I'll have to I'll have to go back into my memory more to think about that. All right. Thank you so much. Thank you for your time. I exit this way. Whichever other way. Okay. Got you. Thank you. Thank you for the respect. Thank you. Hey, am I is uh my voice well in the mic? Oh, all right. So, before I ask my question, I want to say I want to say that it's disrespectful disrespectful for you to come on our campus and say we shouldn't get any money. Uh after those two guys, it was a ticket to be here. Well, hold on. I mean, I didn't I'm a student. I said that donors shouldn't give money to the school. How that's disrespectful. Like, well, like if you're coming on our campus, I think that's the first two questions I get are people that come with a awful image making fun of me. Someone that you know is screaming and yelling and doing swear words. Like that's a bad first example of what your campus is producing, right? Yeah. So maybe they're the ones disrespectful, not me. Thank you for your time. We got to next question. Thank you. You guys got to be on your guard. You guys have been getting a little sleep. Yes, ma'am. Hi, Charlie. First of all, thank you for being here and it's an honor to get to talk to you today. Um, my biggest question is about the DEI bill that was just passed through the Idaho Senate. So, Idaho Senate Bill, what can you educate me on it? I don't know about it. Yeah, of course. So the DEI bill, it was passed about two weeks ago through the Idaho Senate. It is basically not allowing any Idaho like college or university to have DEI programs like diversity, equity, and inclusivity. My main question for you today is how does that affect like what is the reason for doing that for like non- minorities? So like I just like why is it even like why is it even a thing basically? So DEI came out of like the 1960s and 70s with this idea in the post- civil rights movement that we need to hyperracialize how we hire and how we configure our corporations and our campuses based on race and not based on merit. Um so when you prioritize equity, you then will compromise excellence. And so we should strive to have institutions like Boise State or University of Idaho that are merit-based and not race-based in its admissions, its hiring, and how it actually conducts itself. Oh yeah, I I totally understand. Um but it the only people that really like lose anything from this would be like people of color or LGBTQ plus students. However, um which I that's I like that guy. [Applause] [Music] [Applause] Um, but like how I obviously understand merit, but um, and I obviously can even understand like defunding these programs, but what is the point of getting rid of them altogether? Well, because they exist to actually elevate unqualified people that might be of that skin color persuasion into certain positions. Um, and so we should not, you are right, it might hurt certain people of color that were hired for reasons that they shouldn't have been. And so, however, a very qualified black individual or a very qualified Hispanic should not be faced by DEI because they will be able to be judged on what Martin Luther King said, we should be the content of one's character, not the color of your skin. Yeah, I I can totally understand that for sure. You got to go all the way around. All right. Thank you for your time. Appreciate it. Thank you. All right. Any disagreements, guys? Come to the front. Boomer soon or you got here. What? That's good. You got to show us your hands, though. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Sorry, we have had weird people, as you can imagine. Of course. Yeah. Get a couple different. So, yeah. My name is Dre. Nice to finally see you after seeing you countless times on my TikTok. Um, basically, you were talking about abortion and the rights of life earlier with this one girl. And basically, why would it be such a problem to change? Why would it be such a problem to change the uh right to life after birth? Sorry, I was interrupted slightly. Can you repeat that though? Yeah, just go. What? No need to touch the mic. Just repeat the question. Yeah. Why would it be uh such a problem to change the right to life after birth? What do you mean by that? Well, like because if you're saying if right to life is before birth, then why don't we why can't we change the right to life after birth? It would cause all the problems of legalization of abortion and the arguments between then. And then also it plays into many factors. I'm not tracking. Can you Yeah. So, so change the right to life till after birth. Yeah. That that's our current laws right now. Then why would it be a right to life for an abortion? How could you make an argument against that if it's after birth? No, no one is no one's contesting that. Yeah. Our perspective is that it's a human being all the way through the cycle of development as a human being all the way through cycle. But you said right to life after birth like after birth. So why would it be? You're a human being before and after birth. That's our contention. What? Right. Well, you're a human being regardless if you're born or not. If you are in utero at two months, you are still a human being. Okay. And then also I think that legalization of abortion would be like highly beneficial because you think about the cost of raising a child, bringing that child throughout adoption, all of that like that. And then hold on guys, and then however the cost of abortion will be a lot less. And then even in this crowd, there are people like before where they're saying like hypocritical comments about keep it in your pants, do all that, which you should. Yeah. Yeah. Still yeah like you should you should but like you can't control just like you said it's nature you can't control millions of people who have lived like 50 years of life who are voting on these topics highly hypocritically yeah I'm not tracking totally what you're saying but um you said abortion is beneficial I mean we've had abortion legalized in this country for 60 years about has it brought down crime has it been beneficial I mean if you're comparing it to the cost of raising a kid and seeing people that are lives that I mean I I got to be blunt, man. What you're saying is it's okay to murder a human being just because you might save some money. That that is the argument you're making. Well, I also said that right to life after birth. Like people are okay to make their own choices, but like you're you are I'm not tracking what you mean by right to life after birth. I I have no idea what you're talking about. Well, why not? Because you're not I'm just not I'm just not understanding what you're saying. Like well I'm saying that abortion like should be legalized and that it will cause these right. Abortion is legal in almost every state in the country. Yeah. And because of these benefits like it should be legalized like you shouldn't try to legalize it. Okay. I have a different position obviously. So when when do you think human life begins? Uh well I said after birth. So after birth. Okay. Got it. I mean that's you know that's an insane position. I mean, when a baby's at 34 weeks and responds to its mother's voice, has a heartbeat, has brain waves, its own DNA, and can empty its own bladder, of course, that's a human life. I mean, self-evidently a human life. Okay, I would be I'd be able to compromise before that. And if it's You see how quickly though, I have to point you out though. See how quickly you can compromise like, oh, actually, maybe it is a human at this level and then at this level. Why is compromising such a problem? Well, because you're admitting and acknowledging that maybe it is a human being, which goes to our entire argument. Human dignity goes al
Related Books
Browse Conservative Books
