orld is a persuader. The only thing that can save the world is persuasion. And that's exactly where we're at. So not bad.

Now you can't buy that book because I got cancelled, but it will be reissued in the coming months. Look for that notice.

Well, Libs of TikTok tells us that a court in Canada has ordered that the Canadian government has to pay for it. And it's a, uh, well Libs of TikTok calls it a mentally ill person, but you be the decider. It's somebody who wants to get both a penis and a vagina because this person feels not fully female or fully male. Wants to have a penis and a vagina at the same time.

Now I'm no doctor, but I have some advice. If you don't make the penis and the vagina so that they can reach each other, that's a design flaw. That's a design flaw. Because imagine how frustrating you would be if you were really, really horny and you had a penis and a vagina and you couldn't fit them together. Like, what was I thinking? If I just put one on my thigh and the other one on the other thigh I could just hump myself silly. Now if you're going to go through all the trouble of having a vagina and a penis, just make sure they fit together. That's just an engineering sort of a design recommendation.

Well, meanwhile over in the US Senate where everybody's honest, um, Bob Menendez, Senator, is reportedly going to blame his wife for his bribery trial. Now Bloomberg's reporting that. So he's going to blame his wife. Now this is the trial where he was allegedly taking gold bars and payments from Egyptians. From Egyptians, because I'm going to tell a joke in a moment and it's important that you hear that they took bribes allegedly from Egyptians. And that he's blaming his wife, and I think the defense will be that she was on her period. Yeah, I said it. I said it. She's on her period. I didn't make that joke up, but it's still pretty funny.

Well, meanwhile the CEO of NPR continues to entertain us by being a stereotype and a parody of herself. Have you noticed that the NPR CEO is like if you were going to do a joke parody of somebody who is overly woke, it's exactly who she is. And now watching Christopher Rufo surface her past tweets and statements is pretty hilarious. Anyway, so Christopher Rufo using the CEO of NPR as a speed bag is just about one of the best shows you could watch. So if you're not watching his ongoing assault on NPR, you really need to. Now he's literally trying to get her fired.

Do you think that the CEO of NPR needs to be fired for being an overtly, obviously biased person who couldn't possibly be the right person to be in charge of a news organization? Do you think that's good enough to be fired? I don't think so. But you know that one white guy who complained about all the bias there got suspended. Yeah, one white guy managed to speak up and everybody's like, well you're out of here, white guy. We got women and people of color who need to be talking.

All right, so NPR, the longer this goes on where that CEO keeps her job, the funnier it gets because they're really digging in on this. And the thing is that NPR becomes a standard by which you're going to judge all of the corporate mainstream traditional media. So as long as this one's just sticking out there like a thorn, it's going to make everybody look bad.

Well, Governor Newsom continues his destruction of everything we care about. They passed a law called the California Journalism Preservation Act. Now what do you all know about the names of laws? Has Thomas Massie taught you this yet? That the name of the law will always be the opposite of what it does. That if you do a law about peace in Ukraine, it's to buy weapons, right? If you make a peacekeeper missile, it's to kill people. It's to kill people.

So here they have the California Journalism Preservation Act. How do you think this worked? Well, what it was is something that would make the big platforms pay a journalism usage fee for surfacing the local journalism on, let's say, Google. Do you know what Google did when they were asked to pay a fee for the local journalism? They said some version of we don't need any local journalism, so we'll just not carry any news from California. So they just got kicked off of Google.

So that's how you preserve journalism. You make sure nobody can see it. That's you know sort of like with those insects who are encased in amber. Same thing. Yeah, they're very well protected but they're dead and you can't see them. But very well protected by the Journalism Preservation Act, just like amber.

Well, there's a new study that says that artificial intelligence can predict political beliefs by looking at your face, an expressionless face. So you're not even smiling or doing anything goofy. You're just looking at the camera and AI can determine your political preferences. Now turns out people can do it too. That people can do it just as easily. Yeah, if anybody's having problems with the feed, just close it and reopen it.

So are you surprised that AI and even people can figure out what your political leaning is by looking at you? Yeah, it doesn't surprise me. You could tell by the haircut. Is there anybody here who can't identify a Republican haircut? Have you ever seen Steve Cortes? There is such a thing as a Republican haircut, I'm pretty sure. Anyway, Bernie Sanders doesn't have it, but yeah, I'm pretty sure I can tell a Republican from a Democrat. Not every time, but a lot of the times.

And do you know why this is not surprising? It's not surprising because there have been prior experiments in which we know people can identify mental illness in other people. Do you think you could identify somebody with mental illness by looking at their picture? Yes, you do, because you've seen mug shots, haven't you? If you look at enough mug shots you could pretty much pick out the people with mental illness.

Now apparently it's been, as Zuby recently pointed out on X, Zuby pointed out that it's been nine years that some people have had Trump derangement syndrome. Nine years. Can you imagine the level of mental illness that nine years you would be just like all wound up about Trump? And I feel like I can spot mental illness because the earlier studies said that people can. And when I look at the Democrats, I see mental illness.

Now it's not a joke. It's not a political statement. It's something you have to take seriously. One part of the country has confused political philosophy with mental illness. They actually can't tell the difference. And if you allow their frame to overcome you, you're going to think you're talking about a political difference and nothing like that's happening. It's just mental illness and in some cases inability to analyze things well.

Here's a little some news from Rasmussen. Rasmussen did a poll on abortion. And by the way I didn't know this, so let me ask you before I give the number. The number is not 25%, so you don't have to do the thing where you're guessing 25%. There's no 25% in this.

But what percentage of the country do you think, of America, what percentage of likely voters I think believe abortion should not be legal past the first three months of pregnancy? So in other words, how many people think you know it's all right if it's in the first three months but not after? Sixty-six percent. So two-thirds of the public seems to be flexible if it's in the first three months and way less flexible after the first three months. Does that surprise you?

This is one of those topics where I feel like you have a responsibility to know what the real numbers are. And I feel like I was not being responsible because I've tried to stay out of it, you know, the abortion thing, except that I think it should be in the states to decide and women should decide. But I'm not giving you my opinion because I don't think you want it. It doesn't help. Nobody cares. So my opinion shouldn't matter to anybody.

But two-thirds want something like the option. How many people do you think want to ban all abortions and make them all illegal? What percentage of US voters do you think want to ban all abortions, so even if the health of the mother is involved, etc.? What percentage? What do you think? It's 14%. Fourteen percent. Now I would have guessed a little bit higher than that. A lot of you are in the neighborhood. I think 15% is a good guess. Yeah, yeah, we're not doing the 25% thing today. Fourteen percent think all abortion should be illegal. And 12% say abortion should be legal up to the first six months of pregnancy. So there really aren't that many people, 12%, who would be okay with it beyond six months or even up to six months.

Well, 15% believe it should be legal at any time before the moment of birth. Fifteen percent. So basically the same number of people who say it should be completely illegal under all conditions is roughly the same percentage who think that it should be completely legal under every circumstance. So the two extremes are equal. It's about 15% on both sides of never and always.

What do you think is the right answer when you have 15% roughly on each side, never and then always, and two-thirds are somewhat in that middle ground where well maybe if it's early in the pregnancy but otherwise not? What do you think about that?

Let me give you a decision-making technique that I learned from the police. So correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this is the way you set speed limits on roads, at least where I am in California. So I might have this wrong. So give me a fact check on this. But I was told once by a police officer that the way they determine the speed limit for local stuff, I think the freeways are just the standard speed, but for the more local roads they put little senso