The Conservative Case for Single Moms w/ Auron MacIntyre (NHRN): Ep. 551

0:00Shop vans and Albertsons for fresh savings every time you shop! This week at vans and Albertsons, get fresh boneless, skinless chicken breasts for 1.99 per pound limit 10 pounds, and locally grown grape-ary cotton candy grapes are 2.99 per pound with digital coupon. Plus, 24 packs of Canada Dry or 7-up 12-ounce cans are 4.99 limit 1 with digital coupon. Enjoy fresh and delicious savings for every meal! Hurry in! These deals won't last! Visit vans or Albertsons.com for more deals and ways to save! At QVC, fall shopping is more than just checking out. It's discovering the brands you love across beauty, fashion, home, and culinary, all in one place. Whether you're getting ready for crisp mornings, cozy nights, or everyday moments, QVC has what you need for the season ahead, with brands like Laura Geller, Philosophy, Ninja, and so many more. Shop now at QVC.com.

1:26JD Vance has begun pushing a drafted, health and human services rule that would let married stay-at-home parents collect existing federal child care money currently being paid to daycars, about $9,000 per year. This is sort of a mirror image of programs we've seen in states like Florida, which would allow families to either homeschool or take their kids to private school using money that had been earmarked for those kids to go to public school. The dollars follow the kid. And you might say, well that seems to make a lot of sense, we should allow married, stay-at-home moms to receive federal funding. What they're already earmarked to receive, they would be getting that money if they set their kids to daycare and got a job. That seems to make sense, that's good politics, rewarding your friends, and not taking anything

2:31extra. Right, it's already there, it's already in the budget. But the conservative movement exploded. Freaking out about how this is socialist, this is far left, this is illegitimate, in some way, needs to be gotten rid of. Now a big part of that is because well it's JD Vance. Again, I'm not a Vance guy, but you can see that there are people, particularly in the kind of neo-con class, that hate him and hate everything yes to say. Doesn't matter, they'll use it as a stick to be. But also this disagreement exposes several of the deep flaws within the conservative movement, something that Aaron and I get into in exacting detail. Before I turn you over to the great Aaron McIntyre, this show is sponsored. Of course by Axios Remote Fitness and Coaching, Fox and Suns Coffee, two businesses that I use all the time. A little under the weather, you can probably hear, so I haven't been in the gym. I think I might try and hit it today or tomorrow, depending on how I'm feeling. But I'm a regular user.

3:31I use JD's workout programs, I have used them forever. And you know, even sick, not too bad, I could probably be even bigger if I actually did what JD or told me to do and said of just what I felt like. But that's user error, right? Also, these episodes are available early and add free on Patreon, Substack or Gumroad. You get tired of the auto insert ads, you get tired of the mid rolls on YouTube. Well, you can get out of it. You get the content early too, but you'll have to throw me a few bucks. Not a bad deal. We're talking 30-ish hours of content a month for six bucks. I don't know, I feel like that's a pretty good deal. Anyway, here's our end-back entire. All right. Got another great guest, great stream. Really think you guys are going to enjoy it. Our end-back entire. Welcome to the J-Virt and show how you doing, man. Thanks for having me, sir. Yeah, I'm glad to have you on. It's funny. You and I talk a lot, but somewhat rarely on my platform at least. And so I'm glad to have you on.

4:32And specifically today, we're talking about sort of a recent fracas in conservative politics over a proposal from Vice President J.D. Vance. So basically, just to summarize what he's suggesting. He's pushing a draft from House and Human Services that would allow married, stay at home parents to collect the same federal child care money now given to daycares, around $9,000 per year from an existing, massive pot of money. This isn't new, it's just redirecting funds. So you know, it is income gated. It's normally at about 85% of state median income. And well, it's only for married couples with a stay at home parent. All right, designed for, well, stay at home moms. And you might naively assume, well, that sounds like a slam dunk.

5:33Taking government resources that are already given out to, well, the daycares system, something that we've all learned exactly how corrupt it is. But that would make too much sense. And we have been assured by all the best minds in conservative media that this is socialist. It's communists. It's morally wrong. So that summary out of the way, Aaron, I'm curious to get your initial thoughts before we get into the pearls of wisdom offered to us by conservative incorporated. Well, there's, of course, two things happening here. And I'm sure we'll get to the, the deeper one here at the end, but take on the, the arguments as they are at the beginning. The real answer is this is about JD Vance and control the Republican Party in MAGA. That's actually why this is getting blown up as a real issue. But we'll, again, we'll put the cloak and dagger stuff till, till we discuss the nuts and bolts at least. So the initial reaction should, as you say, be obviously celebration, right?

6:37JD Vance has spent the last several months investigating fraud across our system, specifically in the childcare arena. We all saw the leering centers of quality that were being set up and the funds that are being funneled that direction and unsurprisingly, along with ending the fraud, the Trump administration and probably thought to themselves, well, here's a giant pot of money that only goes to our enemies. What if it didn't go to our enemies? And of course, this is the worst thing that one human being could ever utter on the conservative side of the ball because we're worried about the big government and the socialism. And so if you give any money to anyone who's on your side, you are guilty of heresy. That's only something that Democrats do. And so again, there's a far more nuanced and coordinated reaction as to like why this is going out. But the broad strokes are that we are getting a bunch of people who are just regurgitating the ideological stance that they've been taught that any distribution of money to anyone

7:38on our side is a violation of our principles. And so even though this is a $12 billion program that has already got money set aside, that is going to distribute that money no matter what, we should not take any actions to reform the way in which that money was distributed to benefit ourselves, our side, people who agree with us, this type of thing. So a lot of people ran out there and lied about the program immediately. He's expanding the program. There's going to be so much more money, so much more spending. I was not true. It's all just existing funds. And then I'm sure we'll get into all the dumber arguments we got from there. But that was the initial kind of bruhaha was that the JD Vance was creating magosocialism and he was going to create a whole new program with billions and billions of dollars to hand out to moms at home. And that's what people were reacting to even though that was entirely false. Well, this is sort of interesting because this is something that the left in America has understood for quite a long time, which is that certain things are illegal, like it's

8:41illegal technically to give a bunch of money to people who vote for you because they voted for you. But with a fairly rudimentary understanding of statistics, you can start to cut out segments of the population that, well, you're pretty sure vote for you. You see this in the defund of the police thing. Functionally what's happening there? Well, they are pulling the, you know, the reins off a certain population and then giving money to wealth, their fists and social workers. So one, two punch rewarding one group of clients and rewarding another at the same time. They get this. Now to be fair, they've gotten a little less subtle and in my state, they've just flat out said, if you are one of a certain number of minority groups, you get free stuff. Because of that. So I'm not going to say that they're, you know, always that subtle, but clearly that works. They've won a lot over the last 60 years.

9:41And so you might be naive enough or stupid enough to say, hey, look, that's a winning strategy. I wonder if we can do that. But that's wrong. You can't do that. Winning is wrong. And of course, you know, I'm being a little bit tongue in cheek there, but fundamentally, on the nuts and bolts level, this is good politics. This is what you should be doing. This is what successful political coalitions do. They take resources and push them to, well, people who support them. And in this case, if you are a family at, let's just say, 85% of state median income and you have a parent at home, why are you doing that? Are you doing that for fun? No, that's a difficult thing to do. Look, I've done dozens of episodes on affordability. We all get that. You are making a sacrifice to take care of your children, the children you have in a married relationship. Who is this? It's basically conservative working class Americans, a core demographic group, which supports

10:46the right in America. So from that perspective, again, it's not quite, you know, reparations for whity, whatever your ideal version of a government program, you typing a comment, it's not that. But functionally, this is a way to shuffle resources to your supporters. So as you said, Aaron, we're going to go through a couple of sort of threads on this. It's actually funny. I somehow saw almost this entire thread and did not notice until I was prepping for the show. You were included in it. It was not deliberate, but of course, you know, as Mr. Twitter, man. So the initial post is from Megan Basham, a fairly prominent figure in the conservative movement. And she says, everyone thinks stay at home mom is a real job until you suggest that stay at home moms should be eligible to compete for the same funding that moms who put their kids in daycare have access to. This feels a little bit more like Chamber of Commerce thinking to me and just wanting

11:47to make sure you have as many bodies in the workforce as possible. Fair. It's somewhat reasonable. You know, we're assured that this is a job. The moment you bring in, well, maybe they should be eligible. Obviously, people freak out. Understandable. Okay. Aaron, I'll let you read your own tweet instead of me boashing it. Very kind of you. Yes, I replied. I feel like I'm narrating my own book here now, but yeah, I replied. This is literally why conservatives have encouraged the expulsion of mothers from the home. Others provided absolutely critical social capital, but not GDP. They didn't make the line go up. The modern conservative movement is designed to separate children from their mothers. And you know, the funny thing is that early on, a lot of kind of the conservatives who were attacking this program said, well, that's, you know, that's not what we're doing. That's not what that's not what's happening here. But slowly and surely we've had more and more of them admit what's going on here. We had one woman from the Manhattan Institute, a theoretically right wing think tank talking

12:53about how staying at home mothers were a lifestyle choice. And it was a punch in the gut for working mothers to have to pay for those stupid women who think that they should stay home with their children instead of going and arranging spreadsheets like a real woman. And then we had a Fox News host saying, well, of course, those funds are for working single mothers because they need the funds. You know, stay home mothers, mothers don't need the funds. So obviously we're going to give money to the women who need the funds, even if they're single, you know, single mothers out working outside the home. And so it's just become very clear that once again, conservatism is only conserving the last 15 years of liberalism. And we see that the majority of conservative pundits in the mainstream back I think they really do think that the two income working mom model is now just the only reality available to anyone. The idea that someone would actually forego some kind of financial benefit to see their own

13:54children every day to raise them to inform the way they think about the world to guide them in their moral choices and make them know make it known that they are loved and cared for and prioritized before anything else. That is just, you know, I guess socialist nonsense. And what real Christian conservators believe is that mothers should be driven from the home and into the marketplace where they are actually valuable and worth being, you know, subsidized in any way, shape or form. Shop vans and Albertsons for fresh savings every time you shop. This week at vans and Albertsons get fresh, boneless, skinless chicken breast for one 99 per pound limit 10 pounds. And locally grown grape ory cotton candy grapes are 299 per pound with digital coupon. Plus 24 packs of canada dry or 7-up 12 ounce cans are 499 limit 1 with digital coupon. Enjoy fresh and delicious savings for every meal. Hurry in, these deals won't last. Visit vans or Albertsons.com for more deals and ways to save.

14:56Stop wasting your nights on a mattress that doesn't get you. It's the most comfortable mattress in the world. The sleep number smart bed at the touch of a button. You can personalize your comfort. Choose firmer or softer. Adjust cooler to warmer. And right now save up to $2,500 during our massive Labor Day event. Hurry into your local sleep number store today because we have your number. So Aaron, I'm not, I'm not a historian. But I do know a little bit about, well, I don't know, Marxism, Socialism. And for my memory, and I might be just grasping around in the dark here, when the Bolsheviks took power, wasn't the first thing they did to literally force women into the workforce? I was pretty close to the, you know, like the top line issue to sort of abolish any sort of distinction between man and woman. For instance, if you've seen, I don't know, Socialist or Communist art, you've seen

15:58men and women both in overalls, working side by side. Okay, you know, I realize calling everything we don't like communism is sort of an intellectual dead end here. But hey, look, if we're making the complaint about specifically should women be first forced into the workplace, that sort of a losing battle for you guys, right? Your own bogeyman made that a primary issue. Well, and of course, let's not forget that Ingles literally called for the abolition of the family. What, like, wasn't Koi, wasn't, you know, hiding these words and some kind of more temperate rhetoric called for it outright. Classic doctrine from Marxist is that the family is a capitalist institution that enforces these patriarchal structures that actually generate the capitalist environment. You can read lots of Marxist feminism, which explicitly says we support feminism for no other reason than because it destroys the family, it eventually destroys the nation,

16:58and because it destroys the nation, eventually this will create borderless communism. So it's not even some version of speculation. We don't have to read into, you know, the, you know, kind of dependent facts historically when it comes to the Soviet Union. We can just look at the independent Marxist doctrine and ideology itself, and it clearly says that, you know, the family is something we are seeking to destroy. So yes, the idea that we are subsidizing families and therefore we are communist is literally an inversion of everything communists believe both ideologically and historically. So I've brought up, and it's funny, Aaron, when I was going through the different kind of takes to feature, you already mentioned a couple of the ones that we'll be seeing later in this episode. And you could draw some interesting demographic conclusions about the type of people reacting negatively to this. It tends to be, well, I profile women in conservative media, draw what conclusions you will from

18:01that, but Brittany Hughes, conservatives used to understand that supporting a thing did not mean volunteering to pay for that thing. We have now entered the part of the discourse where if you don't want to pay low income mothers to stay home with their kids, while middle-class mothers have to go to work to pay the bills, you must actively want to rip mothers out of the home. 2026 is wild. So a couple things, yeah, sure, in aggregate, it would be nice if this government program did not exist. But that's a difficult thing to do. It's already there. It's been there for longer than I've been alive. Plus or minus 35 years. And so, well, yeah, it would be ideally awesome if that didn't exist. We just didn't have any sort of government programs redistributing wealth, but we do. And so are we going to let it continue to exist, drain money from our coalition and funnel it to another one? Or are we going to say, hey, look, while it's here, let's push it to our people, right?

19:05That seems reasonable. So that idea that conservatives used to understand that supporting a thing did not mean volunteering to pay for that thing. In abstract, true, I get that. But also, this is not how government works. This is what the government does. It shuffles resources around. And given that, well, you have two choices. Either let your enemies shuffle those resources around to build up power, to build up a political machine, or do it yourself. Those are functionally your two choices. And so when we talk about conservatives as beautiful losers, why they will hold onto their principles to despite any sort of attempt to win. This is exactly what it is. The refusal to grasp power, even in a very minor way. All right. Like, this is not a crazy change. This is not something drastic. But do you see what I'm getting at there?

20:07Yeah, I mean, it's the commitment to arguing everything in some kind of ideological abstraction instead of in the presence of political realities, right? Like, yes, it would be great if we were not collecting $12 billion for childcare to be distributed. I totally support the idea that this fund should not exist, that I should not be taxed for it. This has been the majority of the arguments that people have come with. But then you say, okay, but that how do we make that happen? And they never have an answer. We can't pass the save act right now. We have control of the entire government and we cannot pass a bill that just gives us voter ID. We will not do it. So the idea that the Republican Congress that will not pass the save act is going to strip $12 billion away from working mothers right before a midterm election is insane. Like, obviously, if they can't do the most basic popular thing that would benefit them in legislation, they are not going to do the thing that would be wildly unpopular right

21:09before the midterm election. They're also not going to get a tax cut that would give us back that $12 billion. These are all things that are politically not going to happen. So while I think it would be really cool to like be able to jump off the roof of my house and glide over to, you know, wherever I want to go by flapping my arms, that it's a nice idea. It's a good principle to pursue if it was possible, but I can't do that. So I have to actually plan for the reality of driving to the grocery store in a car with a gas. I have to fill a gas tank. I have to fill up like that's just the actual live reality day to day of getting around. And so while it would be wonderful to like magically wave a wand and eliminate this program, it's not going anywhere. Everybody knows it's not going everywhere. Everybody arguing against the redirection of these funds knows that they will continue to flow to single mothers who are not voting Republican. And so the question there is what do we actually do in this scenario? And because of the abstract principle that we never ever do anything that benefits people

22:13who vote for us, it doesn't matter what the political reality is. We just keep saying that we need to get rid of things. We know we're not going to get rid of it. It's just libertarianism all over again. Well, the state causes all these problems. And if we just got rid of the state, it would solve all these problems. But we're not going to get rid of the state. So we're not allowed to do anything. There are no intermediate wins. There is no understanding the political reality. We just lose all the time because if we can't do the one thing that solves all the problems, we won't do anything to solve the problems. There's this sort of tactical neutrality you see in the conservative mind. And you mentioned an aspect of it earlier, which is constantly defending the liberal status quo of a previous generation. But it's this idea that the system as it is now for the sake of this argument is perfectly balanced. And if you are to make any sort of power play, that would be unfair. You're balancing this neutral system. You're weighing the scales. Don't you know that's dishonest?

23:13And look, I don't pretend to be an expert on this. But I do have a feeling that if you really did dig into it and you wait on one side, the amount of support our government gives to stay at home mothers, to you know, married intact families versus single moms, subsidizing familial decay, subsidizing more and more entrance of caregivers into the workforce. I can't give you an exact number, but I have a pretty good feeling. That's bigger. There's a lot more weight on that side of the scale. Our government is subsidizing that behavior. This program is a great example. There are many others. And so this frame where the status quo anti yesterday is perfectly neutral. The system exactly is designed by the founding fathers. And the moment you say, well, how about we get something out of it? Then it becomes oh, you're trying to turn this into a smashing grab. You're trying to turn this into a social assistance.

24:14And I think that that framing, that sort of tactical immediate neutrality is part of that mechanism where effectively all the conservatives are conserving is left wing winds from 20 years ago, left wing winds from 30 years ago. It's why they end up reinforcing exactly this sort of total state or. Yeah, there is again, just built into the seeds of this conservative ideology is its own destruction that ultimately, you know, there is no use of power that is justified. There is no understanding that, you know, wherever we are in the political climate, we have to deal with that as it is and not the way that we wish it would be if we were approaching it from the outside. All of government is a top down thought experiment. And it's about us, you know, agreeing to these abstract principles before we settle in

25:15on anything. I don't know if this is kind of all connected to the enlightenment myth of the state of nature and kind of this contractual a priori government structure or if this is really just honestly a long con by the liberals to, you know, paint conservatives into a corner by telling them all of their principles are the things that lose them the game. But either way, the, you know, the result is the same. But I think there's a deeper, darker underlying thing here, right? Like we, we, we, we understand the loser mentality of Republicans when it comes to arguing abstract principles over real applied wins and power. We've talked about that quite a bit and it's correct. But, you know, everyone's familiar with that argument. The thing that this really reveals is that conservatives want what liberals want. They want the same world, but just with like less trans kids or something conservatives want dual income households. They want women to work outside the home. They want children to be raised by immigrants who can barely speak English.

26:18They want to encourage single motherhood and women to exist away from their husbands. And of course, we see this in like the Dave Ramsey girl dad phenomenon, right? Where he's telling women to go dump their boyfriend of, you know, seven years who makes a ton of money because he doesn't want to pay off all of their frivolous student loan debt before they get married. You know, this is the kind of stuff that is regularly pushed by mainstream conservatives. They're pretty okay with the feminist lifestyle. They're pretty okay with the idea that mothers don't actually raise their children. They're pretty okay with the idea that women don't need to get married. They don't need to have families. That's all fine. Actually, they're really pretty, you know, supportive of a system that is entirely warped around promoting female autonomy from men. Obviously, we could talk about the dozens and dozens if not hundreds of government programs designed to do exactly that to facilitate a single mother lifestyle that otherwise would not be able to exist in nature.

27:19But we can also talk about all of these people in the GOP, like Ken Paxton, who's running for governor of Texas and trying to lose as hard as possible by going out there and saying that, well, I saw that 98% of all jobs are going to women last month. And so that's a win. It's women who are leading the way to economic recovery. Trump did the same thing. Went out there and talked about how women love him because 98% of them got the jobs. In no way thinking about the actual social ramifications of that statistic, what that really means is that men are not getting jobs, which means men are not dateable, which means men are not getting married and forming families. So it's just clear that yes, on top of all the beautiful loser, there's also a dark thread under here that actually conservatives totally support modernity and the destruction of the family as long as it shows up in GDP numbers, like they really don't care. And to that point, you hear a lot from many of these same people about the danger of

28:24political indoctrination in education. I go these places or factories producing communists and homo supporters. And that way that may well be true. But here's an option where you can take someone, take a child who is entirely within that system of political indoctrination. They go from daycare to school, scarcely any chance for their parents to make a difference. They don't see them. And to say no, no, no, we'll make it easier for you to be in a situation where you're not constantly being indoctrinated, where you're not being made into a foot soldier of the regime. And look, there are plenty of people who had stayed at home moms who became insane communists, but I have a feeling if you crunch the numbers, it would be lower. And again, this is a fundamental misunderstanding about both the immediate state of play. See how money moves around our system, but also to your point, Aaron, the long term, the next couple iterations of the game generations down the line.

29:24And so if you're wondering why do conservatives always lose, yes, they're immediate assumptions about power wrong and incorrect, but also their ability to project one or two generations into the future to say what do these trends right now mean for us are woefully inadequate. Pull up another response. And look, as I'm sure you guys have become aware, I am horrible at mispronouncing names. Look, this is not in the King James Bible, so I'm just going to go with it. At QVC, fall shopping is more than just checking out. It's discovering the brands you love across beauty, fashion, home, and culinary, all in one place. Whether you're getting ready for crisp mornings. Thosey nights or everyday moments, QVC has what you need for the season ahead, with brands like Laura Geller, Philosophy, Ninja, and so many more. Shop now at QVC.com.

30:28Stop wasting your nights on a mattress that doesn't get you. Experience the most comfortable mattress in the world. The sleep number smart bed at the touch of a button. You can personalize your comfort. Use firmer or softer. Adjust cooler to warmer. And right now, save up to $2500 during our massive Labor Day event. Hurry into your local sleep number store today, because we have your number. Angela Morabito. I'm a new mom. My husband and I both work. Taxing moms to fund someone else's stay-at-home lifestyle is a gut punch. Couple things. One, again, this isn't a new tax. Two, describing a stay-at-home mom as a lifestyle. It's sort of bizarre framing. This sort of default for human history. And of course, we understand there's a difference between, you know, the 50s lifestyle of the woman in pearls and the vacuum cleaner and the historical way humans lived.

31:31But painting in broad brushes. Making that as a lifestyle, or the default, the normal thing, is both parents work. I mean, that is a very revealing way of looking at this. Again, I think that the broader point are, and you made about this, basically being a post-hoc justification for attacking JD Vance is accurate, but at the same time, it is revealing. It does sort of let us know what, ostensible conservatives think about the correct way society should be ordered. Well, and once again, if you check the bio, this woman is a, works in the Manhattan Institute, a theoretical conservative think tank. And so you really get an idea of what the think tank set really thinks about conservatives and the way that they should live their lives. Funny enough, I responded to her, quote, tweeted her, and she showed up in my mentions to say, well, when I said, stay at home lifestyle, I wasn't trying to indicate anything that

32:35by that. She like posted the Marion Webster's dictionary definition of lifestyle to show that she was using it correctly and that she had not had an indication. I said, yeah, that probably would have worked if you hadn't said it was directly a gut punch right after showing us exactly what you really meant by this. But this is, so there's two things happening here. Like one, obviously like this is what the think tank set beliefs. Yeah, they believe that working mothers are the real standard. That's what they should be out there. Of course, we are a neocon think tank. So our job is to, you know, generate as much money as possible at all times. Economic activity is the only good that's ever existed. So we're going to push that. But there's another thing that this woman's telling on herself with. And a lot of women are torn because they know they should be staying home with their children, but they don't want to. They don't want to. And so they need to justify what they're doing.

33:35Angela is a new mom. She should be home with her kid. There's literally nothing else she should be doing except taking care of her child, which is going to make a lot of people angry and I do not care. Because that's what you actually, that's the moral thing to do when you are a new mom is to raise your child and not to hand that child off to a stranger as soon as possible. So you can get back to the very, very important work of getting to the Manhattan Institute so you can tell mothers that they are, you know, entitled slabs if they actually decide to take care of their own children. There's a real war inside of you know, enter, enter gender conflict for women between women who stay home and women who work. Just need to justify themselves to each other. And so stay at home moms. Don't really like working moms and working moms don't really like to say a home mom something that women will not tell you, but is absolutely a very real dynamic inside, you know, inside a modernity. And so, you know, obviously there are many mothers who just have to work economically is not

34:38viable for them to work. They have to make that sacrifice and that's terrible. And we should be fixing that problem as soon as possible. It should be the main focus of our society. So it's not like every working mother is just doing it because she wants to and doesn't want to say home with a kid's many of them really do want to. But for those who have chosen as Angela obviously has to for go that ability and instead run right back to work out of her own volition, well, there has to be some way to justify that and the way to justify that is to say, well, work a home, you know, working mothers are the real mothers and stay home moms that they're a luxury. And if I have to pay for the luxury of some women saying at home, well, that's terrible. And so actually I am the more or least superior person for working and not raising my own child. That's really what's being said there. And that's what a lot of conservative women believe. And as of course, the conservative movement is taken over more and more by lady girl bosses, you know, promoting as many women as possible into its ranks just like every

35:39other movement because conservatism is just no different than any other liberal movement. Well, then the shift inside conservatism has to change. It's the same reason every establishment conservative person was pro gay marriage until five minutes ago because all their friends in the conservative movement were gay, right? Like that's that's who actually ends up in it. So no surprise that gays and, you know, working moms are the ones who dominate, you know, Fox News and all these other organizations. So yeah, their ideology continues to be that of a radical feminist, even though they are technically working at a conservative news channel or outlet or think tank. Well, and to that point, Aaron, look, you know, there are a number of situations where, you know, it makes sense, unfortunately. I've had conversations with people where they're basically running down the balance sheet and they're like, look, like we cannot afford to live. And look, you know, I'm not calling that person into question. We've got to do what you've got to do. But hypothetically, imagine if there were, I don't know, an additional $9,000, where you

36:42could sort of, you know, look at the balance sheet and say, well, you know, child care is costing me this much. The wife brings in this much. We're netting out. I don't know. A couple thousand dollars. I guess that's what we have to do. Will you throw $9,000 into the mix and all of a sudden? Well, there are more people who could be stay at home. That is a choice that is now available to them. That is an option that was not previously available. And again, I think that you're point about that trend within the conservative movement where you're seeing this sort of explosion of girl boss feminism. I've noticed it as well. There are a number of, you know, prominent figures, some of whom we've mentioned. But again, every time these, this sort of more traditional side of right wing politics comes up in America, you get attacks. Of course you get attacks from the progressive left on the tradwives, whatever that terms means. But you also see it from this sort of pant suit class.

37:44They are just as much an enemy of, well, the old way we did things than the progressive left is. Again, it is a conservative movement really in name only, at least in that way. So I couldn't go through this conversation without breaking up James Lindsay. You know what? The friend of the show James Lindsay. Yeah, color in your square on the bingo sheet. Take a shot. We're here. But he brought up, and I mean this genuinely, a better argument than many other people did. Rare for me to give Old Jimbo the benefit of the doubt. But this is at least better than several of the other objections, which is perhaps damage by the grades. It's at least unargument. Yeah. It is an argument, which I'll give him is rare. Regarding JD Vance's stay at home subsidy, I'll just say a couple of general things. One to your point are on about this largely being a conversation about JD Vance.

38:50Look at the first line. There's another point. If you're perhaps interested in drawing conclusions, connecting red bits of thread, look up James Lindsay, the Manhattan Institute on your own time. Anyway, all government subsidy programs are prone to fraud, all government subsidy programs eventually expand. Most gobsumant subsidy programs end up being hussled by leftist NGOs. Okay. That's all true. Again. That is correct. However, this program already exists. This isn't a new government program. These are great arguments against the existence of social welfare spending. It's honestly a great argument against subsidizing daycares. One might even say. But this is an apples to oranges comparison. Of course, it would be nice if there were radically fewer social programs. But in the grand scheme of things, this isn't that big of a social program.

39:53You'll notice none of these figures ever come out against, I don't know, social security, the millstone around the neck of this country. But also, again, going back to that intermediate win, the idea of sure it is not the end goal what we would like. But a directional change in that direct and that towards that goal, so to speak, well, that's when the principled arguments come out. Again, we never see them when it is the actual top line issues, something like, you know, Medicaid, Medicare, these huge massive spending programs. It's only when, oh, wait, a guy we don't like is suggesting we run a program for the benefit of our voters. Then it's time to retreat to these high handed moral principles. So funny enough, since 2022, we have sent roughly $195 billion to fight the war in Ukraine.

40:55The Republican House is currently trying to get another $8 billion out there to really clear that $200 billion mark. Inside of that insane number of funding, we have sent to the Ukraine war, is funding specifically that exists to pay the retirement funds for Ukrainian bureaucrats to pay their pensions. Some lyrics do not just live in a song, they live in conversations, memories and moments. That's what makes the sprite live in track list so interesting. Of course, limited edition collectible sprite at sprite zero, sugar bottles and cans, you'll see lyrics entitled from songs that shape hip-hop culture, including me, myself and I, California love, big papa, at Bodeck Yellow. Then when you go to the living track list, you can dig into the stories and impact behind those tracks. Check it out through the link in our show notes. Play it, debate it, collect it. Some lyrics do not just live in a song, they live in conversations, memories and moments.

42:00That's what makes the sprite live in track list so interesting. Of course, limited edition collectible sprite at sprite zero, sugar bottles and cans, you'll see lyrics entitled from songs that shape hip-hop culture, including me, myself and I, California love, big papa and Bodeck Yellow. Then when you go to the living track list, you can dig into the stories and impact behind those tracks. Check it out through the link in our show. Play it, debate it, collect it. Meet the Red Bull Dragonberry Emergizer. It's one of the many new drinks out now. Who knew ice cold drinks could be so fire? Try them all only at McDonald's. So we have $195 billion for socialism in Ukraine. Down to the point of paying their pension funds for their bureaucrats. James Lindsay is not attacking that. He does not have time for that.

43:01No interest, no attention, right? And of course, it's not just James. It's the vast majority of these people have never mentioned that in the slightest and they do not care. They do not care about government spending. They do not care about socialism. We have plenty of money for socialism in Ukraine. By the way, we also spend roughly $4 billion every year on Israel. It's just the contractually required socialism that we give Israel. Obviously, we also go to war on their behalf as we are doing right now to the tune of tens of billions of dollars. And that tens of billions of dollars allows Israel to then not as invest as much money in their own defense, which means they can do the things that they do like paying for a large amount of socialism for, guess what? Their own mothers, the mothers that are having children in Israel, they bribe the families. They pay large sums of money to promote socialism in Israel. So we have, and by the way, this is all money we're borrowing. We don't have any of this money. This is money we borrow from China or other places. And so we have plenty of money for socialism in Ukraine and plenty of money for socialism

44:04in Israel. But for some reason, here, this is where it matters. Now the other thing that no one ever addresses when I brought it up is that in Florida, we have a program where we passed, we passed a bill and the money for school funding follows the child. The government collects the money. We knew we couldn't get rid of school taxes as much as we'd want to do that. So instead of getting rid of school taxes, which was impossible and dismantling the entire public school system, what we did is we said, if a child wants to go to a private school or wants to be homeschooled, that money instead goes to the parents so they could pay for the private school or supplement the cost of homeschooling offset it. And that program has been very successful. Nobody called it socialism. Everybody understood what it was doing is redirecting funding that only went to our enemies and instead started sending you to homeschool parents in Christian private schools. It's a massive success. Everybody cheered it on. Multiple states are trying to replicate it.

45:06And the only reason that anyone seems to care about this program when it does literally the same thing, redirect to funding that's already there and won't be gotten rid of, is that JD Vance proposed it and it makes some working conservative women feel bad about the fact that they're still going to be going to work even though their child desperately needs their care at home. That seems to be the only justification for why we're calling this socialism. So I mean, James, like I said, at least James tried to make an argument. Most of the people who are just running around screaming socialism can't even be bothered to make a few points. But all of those points are very easily refuted with yes, it would be nice if I could remove school funding, but I can't. So better that that funding go to a Christian private school and not my enemies and the teachers union in public schools. That argument applies just the same when it comes to single mothers, daycares and women staying at home and raising their children. But again, JD Vance bad. So we have to pretend it's different for some reason.

46:09So look, I gave Mr. Lindsay a bit of credit and that could only last so long. A few hours later, followed up with this, I'm really amused by this discourse. The government giving or offering an entitlement it mostly can't pay is not that anymore. It's incentives, not government incentives, just incentives. LOL politics is the most retarded sphere of human existence it makes people dumb. Growing up, I would go almost, I would almost go so far as to say that the main industry of politics is misusing words on purpose so nobody can understand anything so that people can use the deception to achieve political power to arrange the affairs of others' lives. That second one might be the most ironic thing ever said by a man ever, the creator of the woke right slogan. But nonetheless, the idea is of course. No, you're being dishonest.

47:10You're trying to present this socialist program as if it is just incentives, just something innocuous. And look, this is government dollars. Again, you and I have both talked about our generalized opinions about government dollars. But what does the state do? It reallocates resources. That's how it does everything. It takes money, uses some of it to enforce its will politically through violence, it uses others to set up. I don't know. Incentives, one might say. And here's the thing. The direction of those incentives matter quite a lot. We've talked about how much, really, the government has greased the skits when it comes to promoting broken homes, working single mothers, the disillusion of the family unit. And, ironically enough, this is an old school conservative critique, going back to the 70s and 80s. Thomas Sol made a career talking about exactly this.

48:14And look, he's not a radical thinker. This isn't some lunatic on the fringes. Thomas Sol is about as normal as you can get as we're talking about the main thrust of conservative thought over the last 50 years. And he noticed, hey, look, the government is incentivizing certain bad behavior that is eroding the family. We know that's how it works. We understand that. And so if you say, well, you know what, let's create incentives to reverse that or to subsidize the opposite of that. Then of course, the tactical socialism comes out. Then of course, it becomes sinister, becomes some sort of government overreach. Unless you doubt, by the way, that the moral language around this has been completely and totally insane. Here's a comment from Dana Lash. Again, talking about the sort of pantset crew, we're hitting the top figures in it. We tried welfare and it failed. Victor Orban tried it and it failed. Welcome to the new socialist right.

49:16So look, I'm no expert on Hungarian politics. I am aware that Victor Orban was concerned about birth rates. He's trying to subsidize them. That's not what's happening here. We're not paying a $9,000 bounty per baby. This is an apples to oranges comparison. Again, we are simply reallocating funds that already exist. You already paid the taxes for them. We already borrowed them money. Again, I shouldn't be baffled by this iron because I know what's going on. But when you see someone freaking out, you're using this sort of moral language to talk about what's basically an accounting issue at best. It sort of shows a certain amount of dishonesty if you see what I'm saying. Yeah, I had not interacted with Dana too often previously. Like I knew she existed. I had seen her talk about gun rights at some point. I know she was like, I used to be a big, you know, in R.A. spokesman a few years ago.

50:20She is dumb, like really dumb, like powerfully stupid. I don't like she couldn't make an argument the entire time when I was responding to her. Like again, yeah, James did not equit himself well, but at least he attempted to put some points out there. Dana just kept saying socialism. Socialism, socialism, socialism, woke right socialism. As if that was in any way, shape or form meeting any of the arguments. We also deceived people repeatedly about the program pretending that it was cutting new checks that new spending was being proposed, completely trying to deceive her audience and to believing the program is something other than it is. It's kind of amazing that she has gotten as far as she has in the conservative movement while being completely incapable of putting together a reasoned argument. I guess that's not that unique in the conservative, you know, commentary sphere. So good on her, I suppose.

51:23But of course, as you say, the motivations here are actually obvious. Dana is on the cover of that national review, NeverTrump magazine, right? Like she's one of the voices who was NeverTrump did not support Trump actively argued against Trump. Came up with the Tea Party. These are self as that set and Ted Cruz is of course one of their shining stars from that era that failed entirely by the way. We spent way more money than we ever have. The Tea Party was a complete disaster that did nothing. It's a bunch of losers. And so the motivation here is very clear. Dana Lauch is there to clear the way for Ted Cruz's presidential run. That's by the way, like the worst held secret in DC that a lot of the conservative infighting you're seeing right now. I mean, some of it is real issues. Don't get me wrong. But a lot of the pundits who are pushing it are being funded by Ted Cruz or being coordinated by Ted Cruz. And let's say donors from afar who might be interested in America's willingness to

52:30obey certain foreign policy dictates from Middle Eastern countries. And so this incredibly clumsy attempt to take a run at JD Vance is, yeah, I think as you say motivated by a lot of bad ideology, bad instincts on the right, you know, women who feel guilty about not staying with their children, all kinds of things. But a good portion of this is also just a proxy war by Neocons for control of the conservative movement. They will take any and every opportunity to attack JD Vance. They will lie and smear. They will deceive people about the nature of the program and the hopes that they can build some kind of narrative on top of it. These are the people, however you feel about Tucker Carlson who are clipping every third word from his show, hoping to convince you that he's planning some kind of Muslim revolution inside the United States. You know, this is this is the same crowd. This is also by the way, the same crowd that pushed Ron DeSantis to replace Donald

53:31Trump. So the good news is that these are the most annoying and dumb people in the world. And they will probably have the same effect trying to sink JD Vance as they did trying to sink Trump, which is to say to become as toxic as possible to the actual candidate that they're trying to promote. So I guess in the end, we should probably thank Dana for making Ted Cruz an unpalatable challenger to JD Vance at the end of the day. So what you're saying, Aaron, is that this whole line of attack is being funded by the Cataris. Yes. Once again, the Atari government is directly involved in manipulating our government and our elections. We've seen the actions play themselves out once again in our politics. That is entirely a conversation for another day. But that might be my favorite line of reasoning and all of politics currently because it's basically just like, not you are, but with the most random conclusion possible. Like look, I don't have any special effects on the guitar.

54:33I'm sorry, I'm very sorry. Quattar, occupied government. Anyway, we get ourselves into trouble at that point, but it is absolutely incredible how dumb you can be and still continue to get high level jobs within the conservative movement. I naturally assumed, I don't know, maybe naively that, yeah, sure, there'd be someone who is dumb, but just through a kind of natural market selection, there's got to be someone there. It turns out the answer is no, for vast segments, it is just, it could short must kids all the way up. Like that's really all there is to it. It's particularly, oh, sorry, particularly terrifying because we don't have, I was just saying that the, it's particularly embarrassing because at least the left has the university. In conservatism, we really seem to think our media figures are great philosophers. They are the term thought leader gets thrown around and I need to take a shower every time

55:35it gets applied to me. But the idea that everybody who gets in front of a microphone is going to pontificate an extremely high level and they're going to be the ones that are going to bring you the thought that should define what's going on there. I mean, leftists, slogans are dumb, but there's at least a large amount of scholarship sitting somewhere in a library that leftists work through. It might be drivel, but at least they are, you know, there, there is an intellectual framework there. Conservatism, you can't even pretend, right? And so yes, there are unfortunately many, many people who have been elevated to a level where they truly inform the world view of others and they actually shape the way that human beings in the real world think about politics. And they could not absolutely like, you know, get their way, work their way out of a web paper bag like just intellectually have no hope. And so yeah, it is, it is a stunning thing to see displayed over and over again. Well speaking of intellectual no-hopers, Joel Berry, ladies and gentlemen, if you're wondering

56:37by the way at home, why I haven't done a longer response to Joel Berry, it's one, I say I feel bad at a certain point, but also he shares his name with a prominent up and coming college basketball star. So it's actually very difficult to find anything he's put out on the internet just for that reason. Sidebar does not matter. But here's his take on it. Toyota's easy choice sales event is on. Whether you're looking for the performance of a camera, the versatility of Arat 4, the efficiency of a Corolla or all electric driving in the BZ. There's a Toyota that's just right for you. And with great deals across the lineup, now's the time to find yours. But hurry, these deals won't last long. Toyota's easy choice sales event ends soon. We make it easy. Toyota, let's go places. Book a Love by Guest Property with Virbo and you get a top rated vacation rental that's love for all the right reasons.

57:39I love my Virbo for the location. Regardless of how you feel about JD Vance's home child care proposal, again we see common branding on that, you have to admire the middle class Christian families responding with, quote, screw you and your government money. Quote, that's pure America right there. Yeah. Sure. America was more pure when there were not these government programs. But if you are literally leaving money on the table, money which I might add is already written into the budget, you've already spent it. This is borrowing that is already going to occur. I don't know if that's the own you think it is. Look, I don't want to be the person to break this to you, but money is fake. Like we've so thoroughly debased the currency. The government doesn't make sense anymore. And so at this point, you're really only hurting yourself.

58:39Is there a moral hazard? Is there a cognitohazard to being on the government payroll? Yes, 100%. But if you are saying I'm not going to take nearly $10,000 because that would be violating some sort of sacred principle and therefore your kids have to go to daycare, that's not a good trait. You're stupid for doing that. If this is the break point, what will change your life over time? What will change your kids life? Having a mom at home? Or having the ability to spend time with their parents, a time where you can pass on your culture, pass on your values to them. So they're not being watched over by a lesbian with a nose ring. Or you getting to feel like you are morally superior. Again, morals matter, principles matter. But we're in a situation where really the horse is left the bar. This is not the tipping point of debasing our currency, of turning our system into some sort of bastardized command economy.

59:42Dog that happened 100 years ago. Slowly, but at this point, like what's done is done. I'm sorry. I wish that that was enough to send us back to some sort of fiscal sense, but it's not. And so once you are in that situation, we are really only spiting yourself. Yeah, I mean, I'm sure that this will not happen, but I would love to see Joel actually answer the question, what does he think is more morally corrosive being on the government dime, which I agree is morally corrosive at some level or a child being raised without their mother by, as you say, like a radical blue haired feminist that's going to try to convince them to cut off their junk when they turn 12. Oh, and they also need to do that by the way. I'm sorry, they would still get the money to do that too. So it's not even like it's an A, B, you know, sorry, right. But, but, but you know, the question is, you know, it just as your own, when you're making your own personal decision as a Christian family, you know, is it, is it, if I take this $9,000,

1:00:46I will have occurred accrued some moral hazard for being dependent on the government. If I don't take this $9,000, my wife works outside the home all day. My children do not have her presence. Our children are raised by someone else who hates our way of life. What do we do? Because having actually worked in a public school system, having worked in a title one school that was in no way should perform different from a prison for children, I'm aware what actually happens when you leave these people in charge of your kids. Like, I know who these people are. I see what they're exposed to. If you're doing this, then yeah, it's way more dangerous to your kid. So like, I hear Joel's message at some level, I even respect like, yeah, you know, there is a real moral hazard to being dependent on the government. I won't deny that. But ultimately, as you say, like which one is actually more dangerous. Also, as you point out, conservatives are always debating this as if this has not already happened. As if we are, once again, in the state of nature, a priori deciding what a government

1:01:47should be. And when we are building that perfect constitution, we will then have all the, you know, erasients flow from that. That's not where we are. We are deep into the history of the country. All of these things are well out and done. And ultimately, what they don't want to do is acknowledge that fact. They don't want to live in the political reality and operate politically inside of it. They want to exist in a world where none of this has taken place. And therefore, they get to dictate where it goes from here by simply stating a principle in thinking that all of the governance will flow from that. It's delusional and it's destructive. But really, ultimately, it also robs all conservatives of any given agency because they can't live in the now. They can't recognize political realities. They can only exist in, you know, some alternative realm where history has not taken place. We've not arrived where we are. We are constantly from conservatives that ideas have consequences. But, you know, as you go on, if you keep making certain decisions, you might reach a place

1:02:49where there is no going back, where there is no point of return. But then when we follow that logic to its conclusion, say, well, we've been doing this for a hundred years, maybe we are at the point of no return and now we have to make decisions based on where we are now. It's like, well, no, no, no, of course, no ideas have never had consequences. We can go back and erase all of those things. We can start from a blank slate. We can completely redesign the country right here and now in our, you know, political debates on Twitter. Instead of, you know, embracing and understanding the environment we're actually around and dealing with it as it is. So it is just this pathological obsession with ideology over reality, which is exactly opposite of what conservatism is supposed to be. Russell Kirk said conservatism should conserve the way of being of a people, not an ideology. It should never be ideological. And that's all these people have. Well said, one more. I know I'm torturing you guys with this kind of low IQ slot, but one more just to round it out and then I'll get or on your way.

1:03:51Federal dollars for stay at home moms sounds great. Sounds like tax dollars finally incentivizing good things instead of bad things for once. Well, yes, but we should know better. Know how this ends. Everything the government touches turns to crap. Every good intention ends up being the opposite. The people the government tries to help end up being destroyed. Middle-class Christian families are the only thing holding this country together. They're the last line of defense against tyranny and entitlement addiction will weaken their resolve to fight. So there's parts of that I agree with. I do think that middle-class Christian families are the lone bullwark in this nation. If you look at what is so different between America and other parts of the Anglosphere, it's largely that. For more religious, that specific demo has more kids. They are socially conserved. And that's to their credit. Those are the best people in America. But again, to your point, this sort of blank slatism viewing this sort of current situation

1:04:54is a perfect neutral balance. It's not real. It's not true. And so if you could subsidize those people, if you could give those people something, you should. Because let's take a trip back through ancient history. 2015, if you will. What was, essentially, the message being offered to right-wing America? Put us in power so we'll leave you alone. The exact same thing we've been hearing for decades. And Donald Trump was largely catapulted to power. Based on the assumption that here's a guy who's actually going to do something for me, I'm going to get something out of politics. I'm going to receive something in exchange for my support. Past these sort of moral plateaus. And regardless of your opinion on the man, regardless of your opinion on his decision, you can see that political formula was exceptionally powerful. The idea of getting something out of politics. And does getting something mean that you want to turn American white middle class families

1:05:58into welfare queens, the worst excesses of the great society programs. No, not at all. But you can see that that turned into a groundswell of support. Because that was something that most normal Americans, the bullwork in this nation, had never been offered before, a chance to actually get something, to get anything. Because for every other group, they are offered a lot. And to be honest, I think it is to their credit that many people in that sort of bullwork demographic haven't signed up for. They've said, no, I want to do it myself, even when it's hard, even when it's difficult. No, I'm going to keep my wife home, even though I'm going to earn less money, even though that's going to require sacrifices. That is to their credit, not trying to take that away. But the idea that the moment that we do anything for our people at all, the moral rot begins, that they just instantly turn into the kind of stereotypical obese welfare queen with an EBT card.

1:07:01It's nonsense, man. It's not true. It doesn't make sense at all. And so, look, if we're examining this process of politics in a non-ideological way, with the goal of preserving the people, you have to look at how have other people done politics? What wins? And this attitude, this sort of tactical conservatism, not only is it not winning now, it is never won. This is a pure losing strategy. And so, it's entirely rational to look at one strategy, which isn't working. And say, well, what are our options? That isn't radical. That isn't socialist. That is basic problem-solving. And again, I've been assured for my entire life that that's what conservatives have. Common sense, critical thinking. I'm sure you saw are on the same mugs and hats talking about the real national deficit is critical thinking. Ten years ago, right? But again, that's only applied to a certain extent.

1:08:03So you make a lot of good arguments about why practically this does not work, and every one of them is true. But I think we should stop and focus on the fact that also this is not even principle, because Jolbury does not believe this. And we can tell by simply attempting to apply this principle to other things that Jolbury supports. We send $4 billion to Israel. Resectionate housing of the Middle East. Does the government money we send corrupt them? Does it make them dependent on us? Actually, many Israelis believe that it does. But you know what? Jol is not arguing for ending that funding. You know what is not a moral liability to Jol? That funding. You know what the exception to the rule is when it comes to the highly principled, conservative understanding of subsidizing people and therefore corrupting them? It turns out to be Israel. The same thing that's the exception every single time for Jolbury. Because it's not a principle. He does not believe it. He wants subsidies for his friends and bootstraps for his enemies.

1:09:07That's the actual reality here. Right? He does not believe what he is saying, as with most of these people. They are totally fine with subsidizing the things they care about, because conquest first law. Everyone is conservative about the things they care about most. And so the most basic law of economics is that if you incentivize something, you get more of it. The reason we got more single mothers is we incentivized single motherhood. The problem with the incentive from the government, I mean, I generally prefer the government spend less, but that's not the actual ultimate problem. The ultimate problem is what we were incentivizing. We were incentivizing strong black families staying together. I still don't know if that would have worked, but at the very least, that would have been a much better goal for the money. What we incentivized was single motherhood. That's what destroyed the black family. That's what destroyed the black sector of society. Was that we incentivize women to leave their husbands and survive without them, or incentivize

1:10:11men to be able to leave their wives because they knew they'd have some way to support themselves with the government. That's the problem with the incentive. Is what we incentivize? Not just that the incentive existed, though, again, I'd prefer smaller government win possible, but because we are pretending that it's the government money in and of itself that actually created the scenario and not what the government money was spent on, we then have a terrible principle being applied to domestic issues that again, Joel would never apply to foreign policy. Orren, that is very well set. In the meantime, of course, for our next conversation, whenever that is, where can people find you? Well, thank you for having me. And yes, they can often find Jay Burton on the Orren Macintyre show. It's over on YouTube, Spotify, Apple, you know, Rumble, streaming on Twitch now, pretty much anywhere you'd look, you can find the Orren Macintyre show. Well, again, thank you so much for coming on, man. This was a ton of fun. It's somewhat frustrating because you feel like with the American Conservative Movement,

1:11:16it's the same argument over and over and over again. But yet it's worth having. For exactly the reason, ironically enough, Joel Barry mentioned that Conservative America is the best part of this country, the people. And that's why I keep doing it because I care about these people. I want them to do well. And again, ironically enough, I learned from the conservative movement that ideas have consequences. What you think shapes what happens. And so if you see a group led by the sort of pant suit collective, these, you know, awful tactical libertarians, well, if you care for that group, you have to go after them. So it's not just, you know, baby seal clubbing going after the, you know, the short bus kids, although it is a little bit of that. There's something to it. There's sort of a moral end goal there. Anyway, Orren was great to have you, to everyone at home. Keep your head up. Like I can't last forever. Good night.