Baby Richard
Beginning in April 1995, Dennis devoted every hour of his radio show for six weeks to the Baby Richard controversy. Why? Because the story exemplified Prager's belief that blood means nothing and values mean everything.
In his March 25, 2002 column, Dennis wrote:
I took the news of the forced resignation of Chicago Tribune columnist Bob Greene — for having had sexual contact with an 18- or 19-year-old woman 11 years earlier — very hard.Said Dennis Sept. 17, 2010: “I spoke at a rally [for Baby Richard] in Chicago. And I cried in the middle of my own talk, it was so painful, that whole issue, in part because my child [Aaron] was the same age and also adopted at birth and the thought of his being taken away was nightmarish.”
You see, in 1995, Greene and I were the two most vocal voices in America in defense of a 4-year-old boy taken away from his family and given over to a birth father whom the boy had never seen. The boy, Danny Warburton, was known as “Baby Richard,” though at the age of four, he was hardly a baby.
The Illinois Supreme Court, in a vote of 5 to 2, overturned a lower-court ruling to leave Danny with his parents and his brother, and to hand him over forever to a birth father who soon after abandoned the boy again. The justices did not even provide a way for Danny to communicate with his family, the only family he had ever known.
At Danny’s birth, the birth mother had legally given adoption rights over to the Warburtons, a fireman and homemaker — his parents virtually from birth.
Bob Greene in the Chicago Tribune and I, through my radio talk show and writings, poured our hearts out for this boy. I devoted half a year to writing an analysis of that horrific decision and the blood-is-more-important-than-love thinking that made it possible.
How could these Illinois Supreme Court justices use their power to hurt, rather than protect, a child? As the case involved Chicago residents, Bob’s voice was uniquely powerful. Against the judgment of those in the media who believe that the public easily gets bored with any issue, he devoted column after column to making readers like me weep for Danny Warburton and for his mother, father and brother.
Were it not for Bob Greene, I would have known much less about the situation and not obtained the information I desperately needed to make my daily case against Illinois Supreme Court. Also, knowing that I had a major ally in the media enabled me to do something I have never done in 20 years on the radio — devote more than a month to the same subject, every day, for three hours.
According to Wikipedia: "Karen Moriarty, a therapist for the biological parents, told the Chicago Sun-Times in 2003 that Danny has adjusted well to life after the custody battle. She documented the case in the book Baby Richard -- A Four-Year-Old Comes Home. Moriarty decried the media's treatment of the Kirchners, claiming that Bob Greene never spoke to Kirchner or Janikova in spite of writing so frequently on the case."
Susan Brandenburg reported July 4, 2007:
Moriarty's dramatic account of the four-year battle by Czechoslovakian immigrant Otto Kirchner to regain custody of his son from the couple who had adopted him at birth is in direct contrast to the condemnation of him that defined the case back in the mid-1990's. It ultimately changed adoption laws in several states.In Think A Second Time, Dennis wrote:Although it appeared to the public that the biological father of the boy had suddenly appeared on the scene to rip his 4-year-old son from the loving arms of his adoptive parents, the father's court battle for custody actually began before his child was three months old.
One aspect of Moriarty's "rest of the story" is that the adoptive parents, Kim and Jay Warburton, and their attorney had actually coerced Daniela Kirchner, a young, vulnerable, then-single immigrant mother, into signing away rights to her baby without the knowledge or permission of the birth father. For years, beginning when the child was a tiny infant, the conflict between the adoptive parents and the biological parents raged through courts and state legislatures, fueled by intense media coverage of a highly toxic nature against the biological parents.
Nothing in the history of the human race has caused more evil than the belief in the importance of blood.Around 1995, in his first lecture on the Book of Exodus, Dennis said: "The Jewish dream is that the world not be based on blood ties. It is the only dream ultimately that will save humanity given the horrors of blood historically. Blood beliefs are the greatest source of cruelty in history because if you are not my blood, you are not valuable. That's how people have lived."
Many of the greatest evils in history -- from the universal practice of slavery to the caste system that has permeated the Hindu world -- have emanated from the blood-based belief that I owe allegiance only to my group.
But it is in the twentieth century that blood-based beliefs have caused the most cruelty and destruction:
* The Turkish slaughter of the Armenians.
* The German near-extermination of the Jews of Europe (the Holocaust).
* The Japanese mass slaughter and enslavement of other Asians.
* The Chinese slaughter of the Tibetans.
* The mutual mass slaughter of Hutus and Tutsis in Rwanda.
* Apartheid in South Africa and racist laws against blacks in America.
* The enslavement and mass slaughter of blacks in the Sudan.
* The "ethnic cleansing" by Serbians in Bosnia.
Every one of these evils was a result of blood-based beliefs.
The only great twentieth-century evil that did not result from blood-based beliefs was communism, which dehumanized people by defining them according to class or Party affiliation rather than race.
As regards children, blood-based thinking has been at the root of the belief in parental ownership of children -- "you are my blood, I own you." A feeling of ownership over children has led to or justified the enormous amount of abuse and humiliation of children and to such practices as male relatives murdering a daughter/sister for losing her virginity before marrying.
Of course, blood-based values aren't entirely destructive... They have led to one positive development: the fostering of love and responsibility toward family members. Yet even these two positive results have often had negative consequences...
Obligations toward blood relations have frequently led to believing that one has no obligations to non-blood. The more people have based love for people on blood, the more they have tended to diminish the value of people who are not blood related. Hence, the great amount of inter-tribal, inter-clan, inter-racial, inter-ethnic, and inter-national hatreds.
Another negative consequence of blood-based values has been described...as "familism", not trusting anyone outside of one's family... [A] major explanation for the development of North America and the relative non-development of South America has been the prevalence of familism in South America.
...[F]eelings of responsibility and even love toward family members are created; they are not the "natural" result of blood relationships...
When people do care for family members it is because they are family members, not because they are blood (even though most people believe that it is blood that is the source of that caring). We think that blood love is natural, almost instinctive. It isn't.
The desire to eat or to engage in sexual relations is natural, but caring for blood relations has been culturally cultivated...
If blood were a factor of any significance in determining family love, biological parents would be considerably more likely than adoptive parents to love their children. However, by any measurement we are capable of making, parents of both adopted and biological children love them identically...
Adoption also provides proof that obligation toward family members emanates more from cultural values than from blood ties. Members of adoptive families feel just as obligated toward (and close to) family members as do members of blood families...
Husbands and wives are family -- indeed, they are often the individual to whom one feels closest in life -- yet they are not blood related...
Throughout the world the family of one's spouse is considered one's family -- yet, like our spouse, none of this family is blood related...
Friends provide the most obvious example of non-blood love...
If parents loved their children because they are blood related, why do they continue to love their child even if they come to loathe the child's other blood parent?
"The reason that Hitler so hated the Jews was a belief in blood. The Jews are the world's polluters of blood purity. If you are into the purity of blood, the Jews are your quintessential enemy because wherever the Jews are, they assimilate in part and stay Jewish in part. They are part of you but not fully part of you because of their blood. If they fully assimilate, they are still dangerous... The assimilated Jew was the ultimate polluter of German purity. If you believe in the purity of the nation, the Jews are the quintessence of opposition to you."
"The only nation to keep its identity and still be all over was the Jews."
"He [Pharoah] doesn't like that the Jews are all over Egypt, maintaining their identity but also a part of Egyptian life. He was interested in blood purity."
All of the evils Prager ascribes to the belief in blood are the flip side of genetic altruism. When parents prefer their own children to other people's children, they're preferring their own blood. When people love, they simultaneously hate whatever threatens their love.
In his commentary on the Book of Genesis, Dennis Prager notes: "Every nation has a derogatory way of referring to other nations."
Does genetic similarity predict closer ties than less genetic similarity? The evidence is clear. Anthropologist Peter Frost wrote:
As late as 1923, only 2% of children without parental care ended up in adoptive homes, the others going to foster homes or orphanages (Adoption, 2014). And a large chunk of that 2% involved adoptions between related families. These statistics are mirrored by my family tree: whenever children were left with no provider, they would be adopted by an aunt or an uncle or placed in a foster home. In those days, changing your family identity was as unthinkable as changing your religion or nationality.To deal with the surge of illegitimacy, progressive-minded people now turned toward a seemingly great idea. On the one hand, there were babies abandoned by deadbeat dads. On the other, there were middle-class families with loving homes. Why not transfer these babies from the dads who don’t love them to the ones who can?
The 20th century is littered with great ideas that proved to be not so great. Adoption is no exception. One negative outcome, which could have been foreseen, is that adopted children tend to replicate the psychological profile of their biological fathers. In one study, Gibson (2009) notes:
Adoptees were more likely than genetic offspring to have ever received public assistance, been divorced or been arrested. They also completed fewer years of schooling and were more likely to have ever required professional treatment for mental health, alcohol and drug issues.This supports other research showing that, compared to genetic children, American adoptees have a higher overall risk of contact with mental health professionals, specifically for eating disorders, learning disabilities, personality disorders and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder... They also have lower achievement and more problems in school, abuse drugs and alcohol more, and fight with or lie to parents more than genetic children...
Dennis Prager advocates the "proposition nation" (a country united by shared beliefs) as well as the "proposition family" (parents and children united by shared beliefs). He wrote: "As a father, my purpose is not to pass on my seed, but to pass on my values."
Prager doesn't believe the family is a big deal when compared to the importance of the individual. In a 2005 lecture on Deut. 24:5, Dennis said: “Traditional life in Europe became you are defined by your family but that’s not the way it ought to be. You are defined by you, not by your family. People think family is a big deal. It’s not. It’s a big deal, who are you?”
Prager's view that we are primarily individuals rather than members of families is a modern liberal perspective. In his 2018 book, The Great Delusion: Liberal Dreams and International Realities, John J. Mearsheimer wrote:
My view is that we are profoundly social beings from the start to the finish of our lives and that individualism is of secondary importance... Liberalism downplays the social nature of human beings to the point of almost ignoring it, instead treating people largely as atomistic actors... Political liberalism... is an ideology that is individualistic at its core and assigns great importance to the concept of inalienable rights. This concern for rights is the basis of its universalism—everyone on the planet has the same inherent set of rights—and this is what motivates liberal states to pursue ambitious foreign policies. The public and scholarly discourse about liberalism since World War II has placed enormous emphasis on what are commonly called human rights. This is true all around the world, not just in the West. “Human rights,” Samuel Moyn notes, “have come to define the most elevated aspirations of both social movements and political entities—state and interstate. They evoke hope and provoke action.”If Mearsheimer is right, and I believe he is, then Dennis Prager is just another guru spouting pseudo-profound nonsense.[Humans] do not operate as lone wolves but are born into social groups or societies that shape their identities well before they can assert their individualism. Moreover, individuals usually develop strong attachments to their group and are sometimes willing to make great sacrifices for their fellow members. Humans are often said to be tribal at their core. The main reason for our social nature is that the best way for a person to survive is to be embedded in a society and to cooperate with fellow members rather than act alone... Despite its elevated ranking, reason is the least important of the three ways we determine our preferences. It certainly is less important than socialization. The main reason socialization matters so much is that humans have a long childhood in which they are protected and nurtured by their families and the surrounding society, and meanwhile exposed to intense socialization. At the same time, they are only beginning to develop their critical faculties, so they are not equipped to think for themselves. By the time an individual reaches the point where his reasoning skills are well developed, his family and society have already imposed an enormous value infusion on him. Moreover, that individual is born with innate sentiments that also strongly influence how he thinks about the world around him. All of this means that people have limited choice in formulating a moral code, because so much of their thinking about right and wrong comes from inborn attitudes and socialization.
James Kirkpatrick argued: "Nor can any real family hold together on the ground of ideology. We love our parents and our children because they are ours—not because we agree with their view of the Constitution."
So what best predicts a child's education attainment (and with it future income and family stability)? Blood or home? As the Times of London reported: "NATURE not nurture is the main determinant of how well children perform at school and university..."
"Russell W." wrote to Lawrence Auster about Prager:He also has a sometimes bizarre anti-biology approach to all ethical matters. For instance, he considers racism as the most grievous human sin throughout history, and so anything at all that even acknowledges race as a reality is offensive. He was (completely rightly, in my opinion) appalled at the “Baby Richard” episode during the 90s, where an adopted child who had lived with his new parents from near-infancy to around age four or five was removed and given back to the formerly absentee biological father. He described the danger in ascribing so much importance to blood (and again, this seems like a perfectly valid point), but he takes this view to the extreme and says blood is completely meaningless. For instance, he has said many times that if the hospital mistakenly gave him another person’s baby and he kept that child for a day, he would not want to bring it back to switch it for his biological child. Of course, for every sane and decent person there’s a threshold of time after which the emotional connection overrides biology, but one day?
Auster replied:
I was just talking with a Jewish friend the last couple of days who has the same absolute opposition to the slightest hint that “blood,” i.e., descent, matters in the definition of a people, particularly the Jewish people. He said this rejection of any racial or ethnic component is central to Judaism, since what makes a Jew is the covenant with God. To non-Jews, of course, this staunch Jewish rejection of ethnic tribalism seems risible, as Jews are the oldest and most famous tribal people on earth.Economist Gregory Clark wrote in the New York Times Feb. 21, 2014:
To a striking extent, your overall life chances can be predicted not just from your parents’ status but also from your great-great-great-grandparents’. The recent study suggests that 10 percent of variation in income can be predicted based on your parents’ earnings. In contrast, my colleagues and I estimate that 50 to 60 percent of variation in overall status is determined by your lineage...Does this imply that individuals have no control over their life outcomes? No. In modern meritocratic societies, success still depends on individual effort. Our findings suggest, however, that the compulsion to strive, the talent to prosper and the ability to overcome failure are strongly inherited. We can’t know for certain what the mechanism of that inheritance is, though we know that genetics plays a surprisingly strong role. Alternative explanations that are in vogue — cultural traits, family economic resources, social networks — don’t hold up to scrutiny.
Family names tell you, for better or worse, a lot: The average life span of an American with the typically Jewish surname Katz is 80.2 years, compared with 64.6 years for those with the surname Begay (or Begaye), which is strongly associated with Native Americans. Heberts, whites of New France descent, live on average three years less than Dohertys, whites of Irish descent...
The notion of genetic transmission of “social competence” — some mysterious mix of drive and ability — may unsettle us. But studies of adoption, in some ways the most dramatic of social interventions, support this view. A number of studies of adopted children in the United States and Nordic countries show convincingly that their life chances are more strongly predicted from their biological parents than their adoptive families. In America, for example, the I.Q. of adopted children correlates with their adoptive parents’ when they are young, but the correlation is close to zero by adulthood. There is a low correlation between the incomes and educational attainment of adopted children and those of their adoptive parents.
These studies, along with studies of correlations across various types of siblings (identical twins, fraternal twins, half siblings) suggest that genetics is the main carrier of social status.
In the second edition of Ultimate Issues, Prager wrote that the Jews' greatest problem is that "fewer Jews know that they have a message." The solution? "Jews must be taught why to be Jewish." In other words, Jews must be taught that they are a proposition nation.
In the Spring/Summer 1986 issue, Prager wrote:
I would say that the Jewish identity of Jews, including Jewish leaders, let us say, fifty-five and older, is overwhelmingly ethnic. They were born and raised in a Jewish world and they are Jewish only for this reason. Few have gone through the soul searching of asking "Why am I a Jew?"
If I am Jewish, I said, I want to be Jewish because I chose to, not because I was raised in it. That's why I studied all these other religions. I wanted to come to Judaism on my own.
It seems literally racist to object to [intermarriage]... And the truth is, for irreligious Jews, it is racist because their argument against intermarriage is purely ethnic and racial, not religious and ethical. The only reason that I am ultimately opposed to intermarriage is because I want to see somebody carry on Judaism, not ethnicity.Few people with IQs under 130 are going to spend much time thinking, "Why am I a religious?" This exquisite feeling is the luxury of intellectuals. Liberal thinker T.A. Frank wrote in Vanity Fair, Feb. 6, 2017:
For the past two decades, prevailing opinion has embraced the idea of the United States as an “experiment,” a “propositional nation” or “creedal nation,” as Irving Kristol described it in 1995. In contrast to older nations, America is bound together by people “dedicated to the proposition” of constitutional democracy as laid out by Lincoln. It’s an appealing idea for a great number of reasons. It helps bridge our ethnic divisions, and it gives newcomers a fast track to assimilation. That citizenship is an act of will, a buy-in rather than something more organic, helps remove nationhood from the realm of “blood and soil,” a conception of nationhood that predated the Nazis but won’t soon recover from their embrace.Still, while stressing the creedal nature of the United States is effective up to a point, it resonates more among intellectuals than among ordinary people. Ideas can help create a community, but they cannot alone sustain it. Ask most people why they join armies, and they’re likely to speak of home and country more than propositions. Similarly, while ideas can strengthen bonds in a family—shared Catholic faith, for instance—most families aren’t based on ideas. They’re formed instead by proximity, affection, habit, and, more often than not, blood ties. Adherents of Trumpism therefore see in creeds only a limited panacea for our societal rifts, and in high levels of migration or workplace turnover an increase in existing pressures.
Americans have never achieved the social cohesion of, say, 1940s England, where an unconscious patriotism and a sense of family offered what George Orwell called a “substitute for a world-view.” But we know that the sense of community in the United States used to be stronger. Many Americans have felt a way of life slipping quickly away—the “rug pulled out from under your feet,” as Gessen and Navratilova put it—often at the hands of trade and immigration. And not all are conservatives. A few years back, liberal humorist Joel Stein wrote a funny but edgy article about seeing his hometown of Edison, New Jersey, transformed by Indian immigration and trying “to figure out why it bothered me so much.” All of us feel the influences of ancestry and sense of place.
In the Winter 1986 edition of Ultimate Issues, Dennis wrote that the Mormons should be allowed to build a study center in Jerusalem:
The opposition to the building of a non-Jewish center in the Jewish state is very instructive of the moral and psychological state of many Jews today. Most obviously, it reveals a strong strain of intolerance. Just imagine, for example, if another country forbade the construction of a Jewish center. Wouldn't these very same Jews cry -- correctly -- "bigotry" and "anti-semitism"? Apparently, to many Jews the tolerance that is demanded of non-Jews is not be demanded of Jews...
Israel and Jewry would appear [if they back out of the deal] -- not without reason -- to non-Jews as religious bigots and as a people that demands rights for itself that it is unwilling to extend to others...
Between the illusory assurances of a non-democratic, hermetically sealed Jewish state and the risks of an open and democratic one, I choose the latter...
Finally, as far as this religious Jew is concerned, let every religion on earth set up a center in Jerusalem and thereby become acquainted with Jews and Judaism...
There is...an unfortunate movement among some Jews toward the elevation of nation and land to a value coequal with God and above ethical monotheism.
Another reason that Dennis supported the Mormons building a center in Jerusalem corresponds with his desire for more immigration to America: "I want members of other religions exposed to Judaism. I believe that Judaism is so impressive..."
Author Jared Taylor wrote in 2012:
Any American or European who wants an ethnostate of his own is a frothing bigot, whereas Israelis who want the same thing are heroes in their own country and respectable statesmen here. It is entirely understandable that American patriots should be angry about the double standard, but it is more useful to laud the Israeli example than to complain about it. The Israeli government is doing exactly what we would like our government to do. We should point to Israel as a model and encourage our rulers to copy it rather than grouse about others getting away with things we can’t do. We should celebrate this Israeli policy just as we would a similar outbreak of sanity in Canada or Australia.
Mar. 25, 2014, Dennis said: "Good values are not permanent. Good values have to be reinforced every generation. Nothing lasts unless it is restated for every generation. Every child is a blank slate."
The evidence against Prager's blank slate theory is overwhelming. Wikipedia notes: "The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature is a best-selling 2002 book by the cognitive psychologist Steven Pinker, in which the author makes a case against tabula rasa models in the social sciences, arguing that human behavior is substantially shaped by evolutionary psychological adaptations."
Social Psychologist Carol Tavris wrote in the New York Times, Sept. 13, 1998:
[R]esearchers have been unable to find any child-rearing practice that predicts children's personalities, achievements or problems outside the home. Parents don't have a single child-rearing style anyway, because how they treat their children depends largely on what the children are like. They are more permissive with easy children and more punitive with defiant ones.Second, even when parents do treat their children the same way, the children turn out differently. The majority of children of troubled and even abusive parents are resilient and do not suffer lasting psychological damage. Conversely, many children of the kindest and most nurturing parents succumb to drugs, mental illness or gangs.
Third, there is no correlation -- zero -- between the personality traits of adopted children and their adoptive parents or other children in the home, as there should be if ''home environment'' had a strong influence.
Fourth, how children are raised -- in day care or at home, with one parent or two, with gay parents or straight ones, with an employed mom or one who stays home -- has little or no influence on children's personalities.
Finally, what parents do with and for their children affects children mainly when they are with their parents. For instance, mothers influence their children's play only while the children are playing with them; when the child is playing alone or with a playmate, it makes no difference what games were played with mom...
The first problem with the nurture assumption is nature. The findings of behavior genetics show, incontrovertibly, that many personality traits and abilities have a genetic component.
John Derbyshire wrote about people like Dennis: "The bloodless, deracinated, group-indifferent, 'blank slate,' omnisympathetic creature promoted by the merchants of Political Correctness is one I do not recognize as human... Their lofty pretensions to have risen high above us grubby group-identifying lesser beings strike me as just another form, a particularly obnoxious form, of in-group status-striving."
In the Fall 1986 edition of Ultimate Issues, Dennis wrote:
ImmigrationI, for one, had always tended to side with the nurture crowd... Moreover, I wanted to believe that people, not uncontrollable forces such as genes, determine their own and others' personalities.
My thinking all changed in one day -- the day my son was born. He came out with a personality! Without parental influence, without watching a single television show, and without a single word of wisdom from me, he already had a personality. And, my God, so did all the other kids born that day at that hospital....
When it comes to Israel, Dennis wants to keep it a Jewish state. Mar. 24, 2014, Dennis said to his guest Caroline Glick:
* "Everybody thinks one-state is the end of the Jewish state."
* "On what do you base that? Why have we been fed the wrong [demographic] figures all these years?"
* "If the [demographic] numbers had not been false, you would not be advocating the one-state solution?"
* "[Her book] is primarily based on what she contends are the real numbers of Jews and Palestinians in the area west of the Jordan river, west of the state of Jordan, and if everybody was in one state, there would still be a two-thirds Jewish majority."
* "What do you say to having millions of people in your population who want to annihilate your state?"
Caroline: "We're talking about three million people and a lot of them do but what can you do? You have to prevent them doing that... I don't understand why we should have sympathy for aspirations of people whose aspirations are based upon negating us and destroying us."
Dennis: "Having within your population millions of people who loathe you and feel they were cheated out of their own national expression, you don't worry about that?"
When it comes to America, Dennis has long supported mass immigration and he has expressed no interest in maintaining a majority white population. Echoing Bill Bennett, Dennis Prager has often said he is "more afraid of what America will do to immigrants than what immigrants will do to America."Jan. 9, 2014, Dennis said: "It's a nation of immigrants. The difference is us, not them. We tried to Americanize them then."
Au contraire, wrote Steve Sailer in 2004:
But look at Europe. Its experience proves that the different immigrant approaches of the host countries matters less than what the immigrants bring with them...What Mexicans in particular and Latin Americans (outside of Cubans) have done in general in America mirrors their achievement in their native lands. Edward S. Rubinstein wrote in 2004:Finally, the French have traditionally tried to do with their immigrants almost exactly what the neocons recommend here: cultural assimilation, education in civics theories, monolingualism, meritocracy, separation of church and state, and all the rest...
Officially, France is what the neocons say America is: a "Proposition Nation" defined by adherence to ideological concepts rather than by descent. Indeed, the American and French "propositions" are basically identical...
But they've failed miserably with their huge North African Muslim population, which now makes up somewhere between 5 and 10 percent of the population. (The French are so neocon that they refuse to count by ethnicity.)
Indeed, this French neocon philosophy probably can't survive the impact of the Muslims. France's Muslims are now so poor and hostile that the most dynamic political figure, the center-right Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy (himself the son of aristocratic Hungarian immigrants), has called for France to junk its tradition of equality under the law and institute affirmative action for Muslims.
Similarly, Brazil, despite its endless boasting about having no race problem, recently imposed racial preferences.
A new study by the United Way of Los Angeles finds that 53 percent of the city's adult population—3.8 million people—are functionally illiterate. [United Way, Literacy@Work: The L.A. Workforce Literacy Project, September 2004.]According to the National Center for Education Statistics, about half of hispanics in America are basically illiterate in English, and the problem is getting worse. "Among Hispanics, the percentage with Below Basic prose literacy increased 9 percentage points between 1992 and 2003..." By contrast, only 7% of whites and 24% of blacks are illiterate.The percentage soars to 84 percent in heavily Hispanic south L.A., dropping to 44 percent in the greater San Fernando Valley.
When we last checked, only 41 percent of Los Angeles' population was foreign-born. Thus the illiteracy problem in that city is not limited to immigrants. Many of their U.S.-born children must also be functionally illiterate.
Prager's pro-immigration position is closer to the neoconservatives (William Kristol, John Podhoretz, Charles Krauthammer, etc) than to conservatives such as Steve Sailer, who wrote:
The neocons argue that immigrants should be admitted based on their current—or eventual —assent to the propositions underlying the United States government, such as “All men are created equal.” But the neocons have failed to answer numerous questions about how their philosophy would work...Internet poster Stephen T. wrote about Prager to Lawrence Auster Nov. 24, 2006: "If his wife needed some chores done while he was out of town and told him she intended to go to a street corner and randomly hire a Mestizo Mexican day laborer in the country illegally to work around the house with her in his absence, he would feel completely relaxed and have no worry whatsoever about her safety. However, if she said she was going to hire an American man to do the same thing, Prager said he would greatly fear for her well-being."President Bush has asserted that most Iraqis share our fundamental political values. If that’s true of the furious Iraqis, who are notorious even among other Arabs for self-destructive lunacy, then how many billions of other foreigners qualify to move to America?
And exactly whom would the propositionists keep out, other than the most fanatical Muslim fundamentalists? With the exception of a handful of refugee dissidents, the vast majority of immigrants to America are in it for the money and are willing to mouth whatever platitudes would be required to get in.
Finally, there’s an insidiously Jacobin implication to propositionism. If believing in neoconservative theories should make anyone in the world eligible for immigration, what should disbelieving in them make thought criminals like you and me?
Ultimately, propositionism seems less like a well thought-through philosophy and more like ethnocentric nostalgia, an intellectualized exercise in ancestor-worship. Emotionally, the neocons abhor asking tough questions about today’s immigrants because they see that as the equivalent of asking tough questions about their own Ellis Island immigrant forebears and, thus, about themselves.
Another poster replied:
Dennis Prager...has a deeply heartfelt, emotional investment in believing that, while Americans are turning their backs on “conservative values,” there is somewhere else on the face of this earth a superior “other” culture—a simple, pious, goodhearted folk, who will work as servants for his family for practically nothing and who embody the old-time values he reveres... When reminded of the rampant corruption, immorality, violence, and cruelty which these same Mexicans have created in abundance in their failed, backwards country of origin, Prager typically excuses it all as entirely the accidental quirks and flukes of a broken political system—having nothing to do with any sort of cultural or societal ills of Mexicans at large. I live in Los Angeles and I also know where Dennis Prager lives: it’s an outlying, heavily private security-guarded community nowhere NEAR any of these “other” people whose values he supposedly admires so much. His kids have all attended exclusive private schools (not the LAUSD, with its Mexican-style 60% dropout rate) and I doubt Mr Prager socializes with many of the working Americans he delights in seeing downgraded from middle-class status to the level of third world peasants.
Internet poster "Gary M." wrote to Lawrence Auster in 2008:
Prager interviewed Michelle Malkin a number of years ago on his radio show about her book, Invasion. At one point, Malkin became so distressed by what she was hearing from him, that she stopped and asked, “Mr. Prager, do you even believe we should have a southern border?”On Nov. 12, 2013, Dennis said: "Why is the [American] latino population so left of center? Because they left countries whose culture is big government. We have not taught them. We haven't taught anglos, or the people who have been here the longest -- blacks. We haven't taught anybody what American values are, so why would we expect a latino to be in favor of a small government United States?Prager seldom, if ever, has anything but gushing praise for immigrants of the Mexican variety. He says he favors a border fence, but... he is one of these people who also supports a huge increase in legal immigration to go along with any reductions a fence might provide in illegal immigration.
"They have not asked the question -- why is America prosperous and Mexico not? And El Salvador not? Guatemala not? Nicaragua not? Colombia not? Why?"
To Dennis, the answer is simple -- values. Jan. 3, 2014, Dennis said: "Latin America is the greatest enigma in the world. The most exhilarating people as a rule. You can't go to Latin America and not fall in love with the people. The sum is worse than its parts. They produce terrible governments and terrible ideas and an inordinate number of terrific people."
Latin America does not produce ideas. Steve Sailer wrote:
For his encyclopedic Modern Mind: An Intellectual History of the 20th Century, Peter Watson interviewed 150 scholars from around the world about who was responsible for the great innovations. Watson recounted that "…all of them—there were no exceptions—said the same thing. In the 20th century, in the modern world, there were no non-western ideas of note."Latin Americans tend to under-achieve their IQs. Venezuela's average IQ is 84, Mexico's 87, Brazil's 87, Colombia's 89, Chile's 90, Argentina's 96. The U.S. is 98.
Sailer wrote in 2006: "Latin Americans do the worst on school achievement tests relative to their IQs than any other large group of people. Some of that is cultural -- Mexicans, especially, don't like to read and don't like to go to school..."
Gene Expression wrote:
In World on Fire Amy Chua describes the relationship between economic status and "Indian-blood" throughout Latin America: "Latin American society is fundamentally pigmentocratic: characterized by a social spectrum with taller, lighter-skinned, European-blooded elites at one end; shorter, darker, Indian-blooded masses at the other end..." (p 57).As an example she describes her experience in Mexico: "Almost without exception the Mexican officials, lawyers, and business executives we dealt with were light-skinned and foreign educated, with elegant European names. Meanwhile, the people doing the photocopying and cleaning the floors were all shorter, darker, and plainly more "Indian- blooded." While considerable social fluidity exists in Mexico, it is also true that lightness of skin correlates directly and glaringly with increasing wealth and social status." (p 59)
The trends Chua observes within Latin American countries also appear to operate between these countries, with countries with mostly European populations, like Chile and Uruguay, being the most economically developed and countries with largely Amerindian populations, such as Bolivia and Ecuador being the least economically developed.
On Nov. 14, 2013, Dennis Prager said: "Importing people, large numbers of whom don't share your values, is not a good answer for these [European] countries."
If the values of big government are the problem, how come big government societies like the Scandinavian countries Sweden and Norway are prosperous? And when Scandinavians move to the United States, how come they prosper while fourth-generation Mexican-Americans do not? How come 65% of American Jewish adults over 25 graduate from college and 50% of Asians, 30% of non-Hispanic whites, 18% of blacks and only six percent of fourth-generation Mexican-Americans?
Dennis has historically spent more time on his radio show talking about adultery than about immigration (the index to his books Think A Second Time and Still the Best Hope contain no entry for "immigration" nor is the topic ever tackled in Prager's 16 years of publishing a personal journal Ultimate Issues) even though the human capital of a country will have more effect on its welfare than its legislation. You won't find many prosperous countries, for instance, where the average IQ is under 90.
In 2013 and 2014, Dennis opposed immigration reform aka amnesty because it would predominantly legalize immigrants from Latin America "with left-wing values." (Feb. 4, 2014)
A major reason Dennis supports a big increase in legal immigration to the United States is demography. "We're not reproducing and we'll increasingly have an older population and that has tremendous economic implications, all of which are negative." (Feb. 4, 2014)
Here are the world's youngest countries (as of 2015):
 Liberia |
18.4 | 18.3 | 18.4 | 2010 est. |
 Tanzania |
18.3 | 18.0 | 18.5 | 2010 est. |
 Madagascar |
18.1 | 17.8 | 18.3 | 2010 est. |
 Angola |
18.0 | 18.0 | 18.0 | 2010 est. |
 Gambia, The |
18.0 | 17.9 | 18.2 | 2010 est. |
 Afghanistan |
18.0 | 17.9 | 18.1 | 2010 est. |
 Zimbabwe |
17.8 | 16.7 | 18.9 | 2010 est. |
 Somalia |
17.6 | 17.4 | 17.7 | 2010 est. |
 Gaza Strip |
17.5 | 17.4 | 17.7 | 2010 est. |
 Mozambique |
17.5 | 17.1 | 17.9 | 2010 est. |
 Sao Tome and Principe |
17.5 | 17.0 | 17.9 | 2010 est. |
 Benin |
17.3 | 16.9 | 17.8 | 2010 est. |
 Mayotte |
17.3 | 18.1 | 16.5 | 2010 est. |
 Zambia |
17.2 | 17.1 | 17.3 | 2010 est. |
 Malawi |
17.1 | 17.0 | 17.3 | 2010 est. |
 Ethiopia |
16.8 | 16.5 | 17.2 | 2010 est. |
 Burkina Faso |
16.8 | 16.6 | 17.0 | 2010 est. |
 Congo, Republic of the |
16.9 | 16.7 | 17.2 | 2010 est. |
 Burundi |
16.8 | 16.6 | 17.0 | 2010 est. |
 Chad |
16.6 | 15.5 | 17.8 | 2010 est. |
 Congo, Democratic Republic of the |
16.5 | 16.3 | 16.7 | 2010 est. |
 Yemen |
16.4 | 16.8 | 16.0 | 2010 est. |
 Mali |
16.2 | 15.8 | 16.6 | 2010 est. |
 Niger |
15.2 | 15.0 | 15.4 | 2010 est. |
 Uganda |
15.0 | 14.9 | 15.1 | 2010 est. |
Would you like to live in any of these countries? Would you like America to become more like them?
On Dec. 2, 2013, Dennis said: "I would like more black African immigration to the United States to bring those family values here."
Which African family values? Africa is a disaster with an 8% rate of AIDS infection. Africa has 18% of the world's land, 15% of the world's population and 1% of the world's GNP. Who wants to import that way of life?
Ernest Van Den Haag, who Prager often cites in other matters, wrote in National Review in 1965:
One need not believe that one’s own ethnic group, or any ethnic group, is superior to others... in order to wish one’s country to continue to be made up of the same ethnic strains in the same proportions as before. And, conversely, the wish not to see one’s country overrun by groups one regards as alien need not be based on feelings of superiority or ‘racism’. ...The wish to preserve one’s identity and the identity of one’s nation requires no justification...any more than the wish to have one’s own children, and to continue one’s family through them need be justified or rationalized by a belief that they are superior to the children of others.
Van Den Haag wrote in the Dec. 1, 1964 issue that intelligence could be accurately gauged by IQ tests, that it is largely heritable and that integrated education hurts whites and "demoralizes" blacks. "I am all in favor of improving the quality of education for all. But this can be done only if pupils are separated according to ability (whatever determines it). And this means very largely according to race."
Feb. 27, 2014, Dennis said: "The best explanation [for anti-Semitism] was given by a non-Jew, Ernest van den Haag. He was a major thinker that not everyone remembers today and it is too bad. He was quite something. Whatever he wrote on, he wrote with brilliant clarity."
On pg. 165 of his book on James J. Kilpatrick, William P. Hustwit wrote:
William Buckley wrote an April 8, 1969 column called “On Negro Inferiority." He praised Arthur Jensen’s research about race and IQ as “massive, apparently authoritative." He added: "Professor Ernest van den Haag, writing in National Review...brilliantly anticipated the findings of Dr. Jensen and brilliantly coped with their implications."The northern new conservative journalist Irving Kristol cautioned William F. Buckley to drop any criticism of the 1964 Civil Rights Act "in terms of racial differences." To do otherwise would be "political folly" and injure the conservative movement.
This kind of talk about race kept Prager from identifying as conservative until the conservative movement changed to a color-blind perspective in the 1980s.
Mar. 21, 2014, Dennis said: "One of my heroes [was] William Buckley Jr. He was a great man and a great thinker. I had the occasion to have dinner with him and it was a highlight of my young life."
Dennis Prager wrote a July 17, 2002 column entitled, "Why My Son's Best Friend Is Black."
[B]lack Americans have been choosing segregation. You can see it at lunch tables in many schools, in the separate black graduation ceremonies and dorms at colleges, in the proliferating number of race-based professional organizations, and in choosing to live in racially segregated neighborhoods. ...I still believe in the racial ideal I was raised with -- integration.At our Sabbath table I see the real American dream unfold, and only wish more Americans of all colors and ethnicities would share this dream. Why is my son's best friend black? Because they share values that transcend race, and because they live near each other.
I wonder what happened to this friendship as the two kids grew up? As About.com pointed out: "The older children get, the more likely they are not to socialize closely with peers of a different race."
According to Dennis, race should be a non-issue to all good people. "I'd be happy to have five kids from different races so long as they had my values," said Dennis Jan. 22, 2014.
Why did God create us differently? Why did God make me black and you white? Why did God make the next guy Korean and the next guy Asian and the other guy Hispanic? Why did God create the Indians?Steve Sailer holds by Reggie White's thinking:Well, it's interesting to me to know why now. When you look at the black race, black people are very gifted in what we call worship and celebration. A lot of us like to dance, and if you go to black churches, you see people jumping up and down, because they really get into it.
White people were blessed with the gift of structure and organization. You guys do a good job of building businesses and things of that nature and you know how to tap into money pretty much better than a lot of people do around the world.
Hispanics are gifted in family structure. You can see a Hispanic person and they can put 20 or 30 people in one home. They were gifted in the family structure.
When you look at the Asians, the Asian is very gifted in creation, creativity and inventions. If you go to Japan or any Asian country, they can turn a television into a watch. They're very creative. And you look at the Indians, they have been very gifted in the spirituality.
When you put all of that together, guess what it makes. It forms a complete image of God. God made us different because he was trying to create himself. He was trying to form himself, and then we got kind of knuckleheaded and kind of pushed everything aside.
As a Reggieist (i.e., one who considers human biodiversity both a reality and a net blessing), I'm pleased to point out that IQ tests can't accurately measure at least one mental faculty in which blacks tend to outperform whites and Asians in real life. Despite lower mean IQ's, African-Americans are not a race of talentless dullards, but are instead the most charismatic contributors to 20th Century popular culture. What mental factor underlies the black revolutions in music, sport, oratory, dance, and slang? Subjective, improvisatory creativity.Good thing that doctors don't follow Dennis Prager's color-blind approach as different medicines work differently for different races who frequently have different health challenges. As Dr. Sally Satel wrote (with assistance from Steve Sailer) in the New York Times in 2002: "In practicing medicine, I am not colorblind. I always take note of my patient's race. So do many of my colleagues. We do it because certain diseases and treatment responses cluster by ethnicity. Recognizing these patterns can help us diagnose disease more efficiently and prescribe medications more effectively. When it comes to practicing medicine, stereotyping often works."For example, like a lot of NBA stars, Scottie Pippen's below-market contract, ill-timed trade demands, team-damaging pouts, and numerous child-support obligations imply that when given time to think, he often chooses unwisely. Yet, in the flow of the game, he's a Talleyrand at real-time decision-making. Leading a fast break, there are no permanent right answers. Even "Pass the ball to Michael Jordan" gets old fast as defenses habituate. Similarly, the NFL running back, the jazz soloist, the preacher, and the rapping DJ all must heed others' expectations and instantly respond with something a little unexpected. IQ tests -- by necessity objective and standardized -- can never measure this adequately.
Further, despite his data's inevitable shortcomings in this regard, Jensen does report that blacks possess particular mental weaknesses and strengths. Among individuals with equal g's, whites and Asians (like males) are typically stronger in those visual-spatial skills so useful in engineering and many skilled trades. In contrast, blacks (like females) often enjoy better short-term memories and thus can mentally juggle more balls in social situations. (This probably contributes to the black advantage in improvisation). Jensen's findings confirm my intuition (NR, 4/6/98) that while whites and Asians tend to be less masculine than blacks in physique and personality, they are typically more masculine than blacks in mental abilities. Put bluntly, whites and Asians tend to be nerdier than blacks. How many blacks would sincerely disagree?
Forbes reported in 2005: "A flood of studies has emerged showing racial differences in how patients suffer from disease--or benefit from drugs--in ailments ranging from osteoporosis to cancer. And several more have looked at the effects of drugs on particular racial groups. Many of the doctors conducting the studies are African-American."
Steve Sailer wrote: "Knowledge of racial differences in genes is a good thing: it tells blacks that they should be extra careful to limit salt intake, that they should get checkups for prostate cancer, that they should imitate Jews with their Tay-Sachs disease testing and find out if they are heterozygous for sickle-cell anemia, etc."
So in the real world, race matters. In Prager's rhetorical world, it doesn't matter.
Another way to see the situational importance of race is in sports. As the former black star Darryl Dawkins said: "Black basketball is much more individualistic. With so many other opportunities closed to young black kids, … if somebody makes you look bad with a shake-and-bake move, then you've got to come right back at him with something better, something more stylish… It's all about honor, pride, and establishing yourself as a man."
Regarding high school basketball, Dawkins said: "So if you're not scoring beaucoup points, if your picture isn't in the papers, if you don't have a trophy, then you ain't the man and you ain't nothing. Being second-best is just as bad as being last. And if a teammate hits nine shots in a row, the black attitude is, 'Screw him. Now it's my turn to get it on.'"
Why is white basketball more structured? "Because the white culture places more of a premium on winning and less on self-indulgent preening and chest-beating."
In the 1977 NBA championships, the Portland Trailblazer (with a largely white core) matched up with the largely black Philadelphia 76ers. "They beat us in six games," Dawkins said, "and the series marked the most blatant example of the racial difference in NBA game plans. We were much more flamboyant than Portland, and certainly more talented. We had more individual moves, more off-balance shots, more fancy passes, more dunks, and more entertaining stuff. But everybody wanted to shoot and be a star (including me), and nobody was willing to do the behind-the-scenes dirty work."
"The black game by itself is too chaotic and much too selfish. No one player is good enough to beat five opponents on a consistent basis. The black style also creates animosities among the players because everybody ends up arguing about who's shooting too much and who's not shooting enough."
Steve Sailer wrote: "Contemporary American mainstream conservatism has been deformed by its allergy to leftist identity politics into arguing that traditional concepts of identity, such as ethnicity, race, kinship, sex, religious membership, and class, not only shouldn't mean anything, but that they don't mean anything, which is awfully silly."
Sailer wrote in 2007: "We realize that race is an inextricable part of human nature. Why? Because 'race' is the inevitable outgrowth of 'family.' A racial group is an extremely extended family that is inbred to some degree. When you start from this simple but profound definition, you can begin to answer all those questions that baffle and irritate...about why humans continue to act as if blood relations were important to them. (Quick answer: because they are.)"
Why bother to talk about the realities of race when it will only hurt your career? Sailer answered: "I believe truth is more beneficial to humanity than lies, obfuscation, ignorance, wishful thinking – and even hipness."
With a nod to a Tom Wolfe insight, a Steve Sailer reader emailed him:Maybe each particular group must feel that they have a theoretical chance to dominate or else there will be a psychological schism too large to bridge without overt domination of one group over another.A diverse society therefore has two options: living a lie that every group is equal in ability (eventually backed by force as it fails) or a caste system backed by force.
This would seem to argue against neoconservative color blind society that ignores group differences.
A Sailer reader emailed: "If a critical mass of blacks decides to abide by the White egocosmos, it will damage the credibility of its black counterpart, and thus compel (eventually) blacks to accept being in second place in the dominant paradigm. Thus where going by the book might be the better individual strategy, the preservation of group vanity requires the instillment of an alternative paradigm reflecting the endowments of African-Americans, where they come in first and whites in second."
In a September 23, 2008 column, Dennis Prager predicted black race riots if Barack Obama is not elected:
And it could become a rage the likes of which America has not seen in a long time, if ever. It will first and foremost come from within black America. The deep emotional connection that nearly every black American has to an Obama victory is difficult for even empathetic non-blacks to measure. A major evangelical pastor told me that even evangelical black pastors who share every conservative value with white evangelical pastors, including pro-life views on abortion, will vote for Obama. They feel their very dignity is on the line.
Intelligence
Like all of the Western world's public intellectuals who are more interested in comfort than in truth (for example, see Jason Richwine's 2013 dismissal from the Heritage Foundation for stating facts), Dennis Prager says he cares little about IQ. By being deliberately obtuse, he gets to have a nice life. On the other hand, he sacrifices truth for cant.
Jan. 27, 2014, Dennis said: "All of my life I have said that the most important macro value, societal value, is truth. Virtually all evil emanates from lies."
Feb. 18, 2014, Dennis said: "People think brains are more important than everything. I knew at such a young age that was not true. I saw these kids in high school, some of them had such magnificent brains, but they couldn't navigate life. There were kids with great brains who cheated on tests..."
"I think those studies [that show a correlation between IQ and delayed gratification], if they exist, are crap. The idea that IQ correlates with character sickens me. You think a person of normal intelligence doesn't understand delayed gratification but a person with an Einstein IQ understands it better?"
Caller: "I think they're able to live in the future a little bit more."
Dennis: "Do you know how many brilliant Nazis and Communists there were? There were more intellectuals who supported Stalin than hardhats. I'm giving you a powerful example of the lack of correlation between brilliance, great brains, and decency. There is no correlation."
Caller: "Maybe it works better in the other direction and say that most people who become petty criminals and live lives of characterless drift tend to not have high intelligence."
Dennis: "That's a good question. I don't think it's necessary. I think people of completely average intelligence can be superior human beings. I don't think the saints of the 20th Century, like those who rescued Jews in the Holocaust, had extraordinary IQs."
"The brains thing blows my mind. I know I have a good brain, but I have rarely been impressed with brains. So what? It's a blessing like a good voice is a blessing. It never excited me when I would meet brilliant people. If they weren't good, they were boring. I felt that as a child and I feel that today. Goodness interests me more than brilliance."
"This reveling in brains drives me crazy. It's like reveling in baseball ability. If you have it, great, but it doesn't make you who you are."
"The stupid stupid notion that brains determine your life. Common sense is more important than brains. Wisdom is more important than brains... The average person is perfectly intelligent enough to deal with life. I have met very very few people that I walked away thinking, that person has a very low IQ. Everybody I work with at my home radio station is bright. Every single person. Since it runs across the gamut of human background, I have to believe that the vast majority of people are bright... I know one rocket scientist who is an emotional and psychological basketcase. It's a very narrow greatness, brains. Without wisdom, common sense, and character, it's nothing."
Philosopher Michael Levin said in 1998: "Belief in the reality and significance of intelligence is inversely correlated with education, which is correlated with IQ. You have to be very intelligent to believe there is no such thing as intelligence."
Psychologist James Thompson wrote: "[H]igher IQ countries tended to be more moral, less corrupt, more humane and more liberal in their approach to human freedoms."According to Dennis: "Use your common sense. Whenever you hear the words, studies show' -- outside of the natural sciences -- and you find that these studies show the opposite of what common sense suggests, be very skeptical. I do not recall ever coming across a valid that contravened common sense."
According to the book, 50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology: "Contrary to Dennis Prager, psychological studies that overturn our common sense are sometimes right. Indeed, one of our primary goals in this book is to encourage you to mistrust your common sense when evaluating psychological claims. As a general rule, you should consult research evidence, not your intuitions, when deciding whether a scientific claim is correct. Research suggests that snap judgments are often helpful in sizing up people and in forecasting our likes and dislikes, but they can be wildly inaccurate when it comes to gauging the accuracy of psychological theories or assertions."
When it comes to studies Dennis likes, he has a difference attitude. Mar. 26, 2014, he said: "There is no evidence to support the notion that saturated fat increases the risk of heart disease. I have been eschewing chicken skin for the past 25 years. It makes me sick to think of all the boring chicken I've been eating when all the taste is in the skin. You don't know how much importance I attach to this that this is the new study. It applies to so much."
In his commentary on Genesis, Prager references 20 academic studies he likes. For example, he wrote:A society that meted out no punishments for crime would be overrun by crime. And common sense is confirmed by academic research. As reported in a major academic study, societies in which people believe in hell have fewer crimes.
According to Steve Sailer: "The greatest trick the intelligent ever pulled was convincing the world intelligence doesn't exist."
Experts in IQ such as Richwine note: "IQ scores can be thought of as individual probabilities that aggregate into certainties in large groups." In the words of NYU's Steven Goldberg, IQ is to achievement in people what weight is to achievement in offensive tackles in the NFL.
Slate published an essay by two Psychology professors Apr. 14, 2014:
IQ predicts many different measures of success. Exhibit A is evidence from research on job performance by the University of Iowa industrial psychologist Frank Schmidt and his late colleague John Hunter. Synthesizing evidence from nearly a century of empirical studies, Schmidt and Hunter established that general mental ability—the psychological trait that IQ scores reflect—is the single best predictor of job training success, and that it accounts for differences in job performance even in workers with more than a decade of experience. It’s more predictive than interests, personality, reference checks, and interview performance. Smart people don’t just make better mathematicians, as Brooks observed—they make better managers, clerks, salespeople, service workers, vehicle operators, and soldiers.IQ predicts other things that matter, too, like income, employment, health, and even longevity. In a 2001 study published in the British Medical Journal, Scottish researchers Lawrence Whalley and Ian Deary identified more than 2,000 people who had taken part in the Scottish Mental Survey of 1932, a nationwide assessment of IQ. Remarkably, people with high IQs at age 11 were more considerably more likely to survive to old age than were people with lower IQs. For example, a person with an IQ of 100 (the average for the general population) was 21 percent more likely to live to age 76 than a person with an IQ of 85. And the relationship between IQ and longevity remains statistically significant even after taking SES into account. Perhaps IQ reflects the mental resources—the reasoning and problem-solving skills—that people can bring to bear on maintaining their health and making wise decisions throughout life. This explanation is supported by evidence that higher-IQ individuals engage in more positive health behaviors, such as deciding to quit smoking...
Given everything that social scientists have learned about IQ and its broad predictive validity, it is reasonable to make it a factor in decisions such as whom to hire for a particular job or admit to a particular college or university. In fact, disregarding IQ—by admitting students to colleges or hiring people for jobs in which they are very likely to fail—is harmful both to individuals and to society.
Professor Linda Gottfredson wrote:
1. IQ (as long as it's a good measure of g) predicts a broad range of life outcomes better than does SES [socio-economic status], from GPA to longevity. Corollary: You can wash out IQ's apparent predictive superiority only if you load your SES battery with additional surrogates for parents' or own g.2. The phenotypic correlations between IQ and measures of social class (education, occupational prestige, income) are from a half to two-thirds genetic in origin.
3. SES cannot explain the big IQ differences among siblings growing up in the same household: They differ two-thirds as much in IQ, on the average (11-12 points), as do any two random strangers (~17 points). This is a glaring fact that SES enthusiasts have studiously ignored.
4. Adult functional literacy (e.g., see the fed's NALS survey) predicts life outcomes in exactly the same pattern as does IQ, though they won't tell you that. Functional literacy is measured by having subjects carry out everyday life tasks, such as using a menu to figure out the price for something. Persons scoring at levels 1-2 (out of 5) have been described as not having the ability to use their rights or meet their responsibilities in the modern world (40% of whites, 80% of blacks). Pick out a few NALS tasks at various levels and ask your critic what % of adults s/he thinks can perform them. They will be shocked and so will you when you see the data--go to my 1997 "Why g matters" article for NALS, or my 2002 "highly general and highly practical" chapter for health literacy items--e.g., on diabetes.
5. IQ predicts on-the-job performance better overall than any other single predictor (SES isn't even in the running), it predicts better when performance is objectively rather than subjectively measured, and when the tasks/occupations are more complex in what they require workers to do. At the same cognitive complexity level, IQ predicts job performance equally well in manual and non-manual jobs (e.g., trades vs. clerical. The exact same complexity pattern is found with functional literacy--the hardest items are the most complex (require more inference, are abstract rather than concrete, contain more distracting irrelevant information, etc.)
6. A large follow-up of Australian veterans found that IQ was the best predictor of death by age 40 (had 50+ predictors). Vehicle fatalities were the biggest cause (as is typical), and, compared to men with IQs of 100+, men of IQ85-100 had twice the rate and men IQ 80-85 had three times the rate. (Remember, SES could not explain this.) The US (and apparently Australia) forbid induction of persons below IQ 80 because they are not sufficiently trainable--found out the hard way.
7. Finally, if you succeed in describing g as a general learning and reasoning ability (one that gives high g people an increasing edge when tasks are more complex), then it is easy to show g's life and death relevance when you describe how health self-care and accident prevention are highly dependent on learning and reasoning. Consider what it takes to be an effective diabetic--lots and lots of judgment on a daily basis, or you're likely to lose your sight, your limbs, etc.
Gottfredson wrote:
Of all human traits, variation in general intelligence (g) is the functionally most important in modern life. The first question that behavior genetics tackled was ‘‘how heritable are within-group differences in intelligence?’’—the answer: ‘‘very.’’
Gottfredson said: "Keep in mind that false belief in infinite human malleability led to some of the worst horrors of the 20th century. I also think it is patronizing and usually self-serving when elites contend that the American public cannot be trusted with certain facts."
Gottfredson wrote:
If all 13‐year‐olds took the same 15‐minute test (WASI), I could give you each child’s odds for all these adult outcomes without knowing anything else about them.
– Drops out of high school,
– Holds mostly unskilled jobs, skilled jobs vs. professional jobs
– Performs those jobs well
– Lives in poverty AND
– Can find a particular intersection on a map, or grams of carbohydrate per serving on a food label
– Adheres to a medical treatment regimen for diabetes or other chronic illness
– Dies prematurely
Charles Murray said:"IQ is a raw material to which you add all sorts of other things [such as ethics and industriousness] which we don't know how to measure well."
Dennis refuses to read the classic 1994 book by Charles Murray and Richard Hernstein, The Bell Curve.
Yet when it came to a topic he cared about -- marijuana use -- Dennis read approvingly from the Wall Street Journal Jan. 23, 2014 that marijuana lowered teenager's IQ: "I believe that."
In Prager's view, IQ matters not at all except for when it does.
May 1, 2023, Dennis said: "The man who picked up our dog Otto for cremation, it turned out that his German Shepherd saved his life when he was 11 months old. He ran into the street and his German Shepherd grabbed him back. German Shepherds are bright. There's a list of intelligent dogs, 1 through 80, and English Bulldogs [such as Otto] are 76. What is the advantage of a bright dog? The odds are that they will be neurotic because they perceive more. I just want a happy animal."
So in the same train of thought where he begins by mentioning how a smart dog saved a boy's life, Prager concludes by stating that a smart dog is of no advantage. How many lives have been saved by the heroic actions of English bulldogs?
Steve Sailer wrote in 2009:
Have you ever noticed how in the New York Times' universe, IQ is unquestionably valid and terribly, terribly important in the Health section of the newspaper? (See, for example, the NYT's recurrent coverage of the effects of the exposure to lead in reducing I.Q.) In this Health section article, for example, the Times is getting worked up over an IQ test given to 2-3 year olds, which is pushing the age limits of IQ testing. And the sample size is only 53. And yet, there's absolutely zero quibbling about the usefulness of IQ testing in this article. It's simply assumed that, of course, everybody knows that a difference in average IQ scores of about eight points is a big deal. Yet, in the Education section of the Times, where you might think IQ would be even more relevant, it rarely comes up. And when it does put in an unwelcome appearance, it is often dismissed as discredited.
In a 2009 interview at the International Society for Intelligence Research, Charles Murray said: "Intelligence is absolutely essential in economics and political science except it is always called 'educational attainment.' It is the construct that dare not speak its name because people will not confront that educational attainment is statistically highly correlated with cognitive ability and it just might be the cognitive ability that is responsible for social outcomes."
If IQ shapes how people turn out more than preaching does, than preachers like Dennis Prager are less important. If America's greatest need is moral instruction, however, then Prager is the man.
Pundits such as Prager tend to say the things that will most swell their own importance.
On Oct. 23, 2013, Dennis said to his guest, John Alford, associate professor of political science at Rice University and one of three authors of the 2013 book, Predisposed: Liberals, Conservatives, and the Biology of Political Differences: "Isn't that a risky thing that you undertook to argue that there are biological bases for political positions?"
Sometimes telling the truth is risky.
On Dec. 2, 2013, Dennis said: "We have in the United States a certain percentage of conscienceless people. When I think about this knockout game and the laughter that accompanies it, we have a certain percentage of young people, disproportionately among blacks, that are conscienceless."
Former Heritage Foundation policy analyst Jason Richwine points how IQ affects morality:
IQ, a construct that psychologists use to estimate general intelligence, has been separately linked to elements of social capital, such as sophisticated ethical thinking, altruism, planning for the future, political awareness, adherence to informal community standards of behavior, and cooperation for the greater good.The social attitudes of citizens are the building blocks of social capital, and IQ plays a role in shaping many of them. For example, psychologists have developed measures of moral reasoning that overlap substantially with IQ. When confronted with a moral dilemma, a person operating at the lowest level of moral reasoning would consider only his own self-interest. As moral reasoning becomes more sophisticated, people tend to give more consideration to community welfare, and to apply abstract principles to resolve moral dilemmas. Because of the cognitive demands of such reasoning, smarter people are much more likely to transcend simple self-interest in their ethical thinking. People who do so are likely to be better neighbors and better citizens.
Intelligent people are also likely to be more altruistic, which could help form tighter bonds within communities...
It makes intuitive sense that smarter people should be able to internalize future rewards more easily. They are probably more future-oriented because they can better manipulate their surroundings, whereas incompetent people exert less control on their future, making it murky and unknown. Whatever the cause, the impulsivity of low-IQ people has serious implications for social capital. People in less intelligent populations will be less willing to set up networks for potential long-term payoffs, make personal investments in the community, and follow basic norms of behavior with the expectation of future reciprocity.
In his commentary on the Book of Genesis, Dennis wrote:
Since it is impossible for people with empathy to understand people who lack empathy, one can draw only one of two conclusions. Either some people are born without the ability to empathize, or they are people who can empathize—but only with those who are like them. I think many—but not all—people in the first group can be taught some degree of empathy. As for the second group, they need to be taught that people unlike them are just as human as they are and suffer just as they do.
Empathy is a form of abstract thought. The ability to engage in abstract thought is measured by IQ.
Dennis wrote June 7, 2011:
While dining out last week, I periodically looked up at one of the television monitors to see the score of the first game of the NBA finals. As there was no sound on to interrupt diners’ conversations, the monitor was in caption mode: One could read rather than hear the words spoken. At the conclusion of the game, an announcer was interviewing a member of the victorious Miami Heat players. I saw from the captions the player saying the words “they isn’t.”According to the 2013 PISA test results: "Asian Americans outscored all large Asian countries (with the exception of three rich cities); white Americans outperformed most, but not all, traditionally white countries; and Latino Americans did better than all Latin American countries. African Americans almost certainly scored higher than any black majority country would have performed."Closed captions display the words spoken. They don’t correct for poor grammar.
All I could think was: How can a grown man in America today say “they isn’t” rather than “they aren’t”?
First, how is it possible for anyone to graduate an American elementary school, not to mention a high school or, most incredibly, attend college, and leave with an inability to conjugate the verb “to be”?
Second, has anyone — a parent or another relative, a teacher, a friend, a coach — in that player’s life ever corrected his grammar?
I assume that the answer to the second question is “No.”
And I assume that the answers to both questions are related: The left, which dominates our culture and educational institutions, has too often lowered standards for black Americans.
People with low IQs are going to have more difficulty with grammar and basic tasks of life. Linda Gottfredson wrote:
Adults near the threshold for mild mental retardation (IQ 70) can usually learn simple work tasks (mopping a floor, answering a telephone, etc) if given sufficient hands-on, one-on-one, repetitive instruction and supervision. People of average psychometric intelligence (IQ 100) can learn a wide variety of routine procedures via written materials and demonstration. Individuals near the threshold for mild giftedness (IQ 130) can be self-instructing...
On the whole, g is not correlated with differences in personality, temperament, or physical strength, and it is only moderately correlated with interpersonal... skills...
Finally, g level has highly generalized effects on individuals' wellbeing, from physical health to social status... g...is generally the best single predictor -- better than socioeconomic status -- of both the good and the bad life outcomes that concern policymakers (e.g. success in school and work, delinquency)... Compare, for instance, the risks facing young white adults of very low IQ (below 75) to those of very high IQ (above 125). The former are twice as likely to become divorced within five years (21% versus 9%), but their risk of unemployment is 6-fold (12% versus 2%) and living in poverty is 15-fold (30% versus 2%)...
Cohort studies reveal robust relations between childhood IQ and adult mortality... [E]ach additional IQ point was associated with a 1% reduction in relative risk of death...
IQ was the best predictor of motor vehicle fatalities [three times as high for people with IQs 80-85 as compared to those scoring 100-115].
Mar. 20, 2014, Dennis said: "Very few people are stupid..."
According to Linda Gottfredson, 40% of urban out-patients don't understand when their next doctor's appointment is scheduled, 70% don't understand how many pills of a prescription to take, and 95% don't understand the informed consent form. Stupidity kills and it is not evenly distributed among all groups.
According to the results of the NALS 1993, most American blacks can't write a brief letter explaining an error in a credit card bill, let alone use an eligibility pamphlet to calculate SSI benefits. About half will struggle to locate an intersection on a map.
Sailer wrote: "Jewish intellectuals have a tendency that on any topic related to Jews, they tend to think baroquely many steps down the line. Thus, the full panoply of the subjects that have been assumed to be bad-for-the-Jews and therefore ruled out of discussion in polite society is breathtakingly broad -- for example, IQ has been driven out of the media in large part because it is feared that mentioning that Jews have higher average IQs would lead, many steps down the line, to pogroms."
Martin Luther King
Dennis Prager often praises Martin Luther King. On Jan. 27, 2011, Dennis's Facebook page said: "Celebrate Martin Luther King day today by reading and sharing the profound 'Letter from a Birmingham Jail.' Print it out and put it on the kitchen table for the kids to read. It's an important national holiday. Put the flag out and talk about the Reverend and read excerpts at dinner tonight."
In an Apr. 2, 2013 column, Dennis included Martin Luther King in the same sentence as George Washington and Abraham Lincoln:
It was this book that guided every one of the Founding Fathers of the United States, including those described as "deists." It is the book that formed the foundational values of every major American university. It is the book from which every morally great American from George Washington to Abraham Lincoln to the Rev. (yes, “the Reverend,” almost always omitted today in favor of his secular credential, “Dr.”) Martin Luther King, Jr., got his values.
Apr. 22, 2014, Dennis wrote:
In colleges throughout America, students are taught to have disdain for the white race...For example, from the day they enter college, many students are taught about white privilege -- how innately advantaged white students (and all other whites are). Last week, the president of Western Washington University posed the question on the university's website: "How do we make sure that in future years we are not as white as we are today?"
Imagine if the president of the University of California at Berkeley had posed the question, "How do we make sure that in future years we are not as Asian as we are today?"
Inner city young blacks who work hard in school are routinely chastised by other black youth for "acting white."
The undermining of the very concept of values was starkly made clear last month at a national inter-college debate tournament.
As reported in the Atlantic last week:
"On March 24, 2014 at the Cross Examination Debate Association (CEDA) Championships at Indiana University, two Towson University students, Ameena Ruffin and Korey Johnson, became the first African-American women to win a national college debate tournament, for which the resolution asked whether the U.S. president's war powers should be restricted. Rather than address the resolution straight on, Ruffin and Johnson, along with other teams of African-Americans, attacked its premise. The more pressing issue, they argued, is how the U.S. government is at war with poor black communities."
In the final round, Ruffin and Johnson squared off against Rashid Campbell and George Lee from the University of Oklahoma, two highly accomplished African-American debaters with distinctive dreadlocks and dashikis. Over four hours, the two teams engaged in a heated discussion of concepts like 'nigga authenticity' and performed hip-hop and spoken-word poetry in the traditional timed format. At one point during Lee's rebuttal, the clock ran out but he refused to yield the floor. 'F--- the time!' he yelled.
In a national intercollegiate debate contest, a black debating team won by transforming the topic of the debate, one that that had nothing to do with race, into a race question.
But to object to this, or to argue that a team might be disqualified for yelling "f--- the time" when told it had gone over the time limit, or to ask what performing hip-hop has to do with the topic "whether the U.S. president's war powers should be restricted" -- is now deemed to act white.
May 14, 2014, Dennis said: "We're told about old white men. The bane of society. Guess who supports the arts? Old white men. As they move on, who's going to support the arts. Boy, is this country going to long for old white men one day, especially left-wing institutions, all supported by them."
"Old white males should go on strike. See what happens to the institutions of America. To the museums. To the orchestras. To the ballets. To the operas. To the colleges. Who do you think gives to all these endowments? Who do you think buys the tickets to these [classical music] concerts? Last time I was at Disney Hall, it didn't look all that multi-racial and multi-ethnic to me. Pretty much all old white males and females. Maybe the group they love to attack has done some good for society?"
O.J. Simpson Not Guilty Verdict Oct. 3, 1995
Dennis Prager wrote June 10, 2008:
The day the O.J. Simpson verdict was announced, I said to my then-teenage son, “David, please forgive me. I am handing over to you a worse America than my father handed over to me.”
With the important exception of racial discrimination — which was already dying a natural death when I was young — it is difficult to come up with an important area in which America is significantly better than when I was a boy. But I can think of many in which its quality of life has deteriorated.
What kind of man apologizes for not being able to change the direction of a country of 300 million people?
Judaism, Homosexuality & Civilization II
In mid-November 1996, Dennis Prager told the editor of the Jewish Journal of Los Angeles, Gene Lichtenstein, that he wanted to submit an article on Judaism and homosexuality. Gene said he’d publish it. Two weeks went by and nothing appeared. Prager called Gene and asked what happened. Lichtenstein said that he so disagreed with the piece that he would not publish it without publishing a rebuttal in the same issue.
Gene sought a rabbi to write a rebuttal, but none of them would, despite their strong disagreement with Prager’s ideas. So Lichtenstein wrote a rebuttal which he published with Prager’s essay in the Journal’s November 22nd issue.
The Jewish Journal then published a series of letters attacking Dennis. The most significant was signed by sixteen rabbis, four Conservative and 12 Reform. “Apparently,” wrote Dennis afterwards in his journal The Prager Perspective, “Mr. Lichtenstein does not believe that the letters he publishes need engage issues or even approximate respectful dialogue. The letters… were of a level so low, so filled with invective and even hatred toward me that I wonder if Mr. Lichtenstein wonders about the moral level of his ideological allies. I wonder whether he was embarrassed by what he published week after week. Or perhaps, he took the high road in engaging me, while happily publishing all those who took the low road.”
I remember the Sabbath morning at Stephen S. Wise temple after these letters were published. There was something different about Dennis Prager’s demeanor. He was shaken in a way I had never seen before. It was the rabbis’ letter that did it, I suspect. Two of the rabbis were friends — Neal Weinberg and Elliot Dorff.
Recently, the Jewish Journal provided coverage to a diatribe by Dennis Prager, who attacked gay and lesbian rabbis. We Los Angeles-area rabbis feel that we can respond more fully and more appropriately within our own constituencies to the specifics of Prager’s poorly argued, homophobic, indeed cruel, reading of Jewish values.In 1997, Dennis Prager wrote in his journal The Prager Perspective:
We are rabbis, male and female.
We are rabbis, heterosexual, gay, lesbian and bisexual.
We are rabbis, discharging holy tasks that we feel called upon to do.
We are rabbis, serving in different movements.
We are rabbis, serving various constituencies.
We are rabbis, reflecting diverse theologies.
We are rabbis, embodying tradition in distinct ways.
We are rabbis, committed to teaching and perpetuating our glorious heritage.
We rabbis affirm one another in the work that we do.
We rabbis support each other in our personal lives.
We rabbis glory in the diversity of the rabbinate.
We rabbis honor the different talents that we each bring to our ministries.
We rabbis recognize that each bring strengths to our people.
We rabbis acknowledge that each rabbi is a bearer of Torah.
We rabbis celebrate that we include so many who are so qualified and so caring.
May every Jew find the rabbi who best suits his/her needs. May every Jew be grateful that other Jews find rabbis who meet their needs. May every rabbi be granted the insight, wisdom and sensitivity to meet the spectrum of religious, educational, cultural, social, intellectual, emotional and spiritual needs of our people, to the best of our capacities.
Rabbi Leslie Bergson, Claremont Colleges
Rabbi L.B. Sacks-Rosen, Congregation Shaarei Torah
Rabbi Elliot Dorff, University of Judaism
Rabbi Don Goor, Temple Isaiah
Rabbi Moshe Halfon, Temple Ami-Shalom
Rabbi Avi Levine, Temple Beth Israel
Rabbi Jane Litman, Kol Simchah of Orange County
Rabbi Debra Orenstein, Wilstein Institute for Jewish Family Policy
Rabbi Arnold Rachlis, University Syngagogue }
Rabbi Joel Rembaum, Temple Beth Am Rabbi
Steven Carr Reuben, JCC of Pacific Palisades
Rabbi Lisa Edwards, Beth Chayim Chadashim
Rabbi Rafael Goldstein, Los Angeles Jewish AIDS Services
Rabbi Steve Tucker, Temple Ramat Zion
Rabbi Neal Weinberg, University of Judaism
Rabbi Bridgit Wynne, Leo Baeck Temple
By the end of January [1997], the Jewish Journal had published my one essay on homosexuality and rabbis, and then published an editor’s rebuttal, a statement on the low moral level of my ideas signed by 16 rabbis, seven letters attacking my decency, and one letter agreeing with me.Prager’s response in the Jewish Journal was headlined: “Dennis Prager: Firing Salvos at his Rabbinic Critics”
Had I written that Israel should make Jerusalem a bi-national city; or that Jews should consider adding Buddhism to their Jewish identity; or that Jews should observe the Sabbath on any day of the week that best suits them, I would not have received more opprobrium.
There are a number of reasons for this:
First, Los Angeles has a particularly large concentration of left-wing rabbis.
Second, the Los Angeles Jewish Journal is the most monolithically left of any mainstream big-city Jewish newspaper. That is why the editor would not publish my piece unless accompanied by a rebuttal. While pieces from the Left are published every week without rebuttal, a piece against the Left cannot be published alone.
Third, while most practicing Jews agree with me, most Jews, like most non-Jews, have been rendered publicly silent by the ferocity of leftist invective on the gay issue. No decent person wants to be called “homophobe.”
Fourth, few people know either the need for, or the importance of, making the case for preserving the heterosexual ideal. I have been writing on Judaism for 25 years, and have only recently come to understand the heterosexual revolution that the Torah and Judaism wrought.
I had decided not to reply to any of the letters that maligned me (not one dealt with issues I actually raised), but when the 16 rabbis maligned me, I knew that a response was necessary.
Sixteen “heterosexual, gay, lesbian and bisexual” rabbis signed a letter to The Jewish Journal, calling my piece on homosexuality and Judaism “cruel,” a “homophobic diatribe” and “poorly reasoned.”Five of the 16 rabbis (Orenstein, Dorff, Sacks-Rosen, Weinberg, Wynne) responded:
Concerning the charge of “cruelty,” my article did not contain a harsh word, let alone words of cruelty. In fact, I wrote that a homosexual Jew is, of course, as much a Jew as any of us, and that gay-bashing is a moral offense. I wrote that Judaism is rooted in the ideal of heterosexuality, but there is not a shred of cruelty in that. The only cruelty in this whole issue is in the rabbi’s letter.
As for “homophobic,” shame on these rabbis for emulating the McCarthy right by giving someone they disagree with a horrible label instead of responding to arguments. The rabbis did not quote me once. They wouldn’t, because if they did, it would be obvious that they engage only in ad hominem attacks, not intellectual or religious responses.
“Poorly reasoned”? Andrew Sullivan, a prominent gay spokesman and former editor of the New Republic, publicly lauded my arguments as a model of fair debate on the issue. And if my article was so poorly argued, why didn’t any one of these rabbis write a response showing the world just how poor my arguments are?
And, now, bisexuality is defined as Jewish too. I thought the argument on behalf of Judaism holding homosexuality as just as Jewish a practice as heterosexuality as just as Jewish a practice as heterosexuality rested on homosexuals not having a choice. But don’t bisexuals, by definition, have a choice of which sex to love?
What depressed me about the letter was not the name-calling instead of dialogue. I experienced that when I debated the Jewish rightist, the late Rabbi Meir Kahane, and I experience it from the Jewish left. I am used to being attacked, since, unlike these rabbis who work and live among those who agree with them, I am used to debating my positions and being attacked every day, three hours a day.
What is most depressing is to see three respected Conservative signatories to the letter. With my friend Elliot Dorff’s signature on this letter, and that of the Conservative movement’s teacher of prospective converts, another friend, Rabbi Neal Weinberg, and the signature of one of the seminary’s former heads, one wonders what has become of Conservative Judaism. Does it only differ from the left wing of Reform in its commitment to religious rituals? Does Conservative Judaism actually now hold that drinking milk after eating chicken is religiously wrong, but a person having sex with both sexes is religiously acceptable? Does Rabbi Weinberg teach prospective converts to Judaism that Judaism doesn’t care whether a Jew has sex with the same sex or even with both sexes? Would Rabbi Rembaum perform a same-sex marriage? If he would perform such a marriage, has he told his congregants? And if he wouldn’t, why isn’t he labeled a “homophobe”?
Most Jews, myself included, were appalled at the hate-filled descriptions of the late Yitzhak Rabin that emanated from parts of the Jewish right. In what way do the hate-filled descriptions of me by these rabbis and all the other nine letters you published against me differ?
I am disappointed by something else – the absence of public support from the many rabbis who I know agree with me. Hopefully, The Journal will now receive a letter signed by twice as many rabbis in support of what I wrote. But if the Los Angeles Jewish community and its rabbis do not find maintaining the Jewish male-female ideal worthy of their attention, I do not want to be a voice crying in the wilderness, while those arguing for acceptance of bisexual behavior among rabbis are considered mainstream.
We signed the substantive portion of the original rabbinic response…[that] affirmed our desire for a pluralistic and inclusive rabbinate, made up of…various sexual orientations…One rabbi apologized to Dennis -- Neal Weinberg -- and letters poured into the Jewish Journal, supporting Dennis and his position. Rabbi Joseph Telushkin wrote:
We neither saw nor approved, and from what we have gathered, at least a few other colleagues neither saw nor approved, a preamble that characterized Dennis Prager’s position in unfortunate and unjustified terms. While we disagree profoundly with Dennis Prager’s argument, we regret that out names were attached to those personal remarks and, more important, that they were printed at all.
We hope that people on all sides of this issue will avoid provocative rhetoric and engage in this important communal discussion with respect and civility.
The letter you published charging Dennis Prager with being homophobic is so untrue that I find it painful to see that it was signed by no less than 16 rabbis, all of them bearers of a tradition that regards spreading a damaging untruth about a person, as one of the most serious offenses a Jew can commit.Conservative Rabbi Michael Gotlieb of Congregation Kehilat Ma'Arav, Santa Monica, wrote in:I do not know most of the rabbis on the list, but there are four whom I do know and for whom I have sincere affection and respect: Rabbis Elliot Dorff, Debra Orenstein, Joel Rembaum and Neal Weinberg. I turn to these four people - I am sorry to do so in a public forum, but since Dennis was attacked in public, I feel the need to respond in public - to ask if they carefully read Dennis' original article. And if they did, could they please cite what it is that he wrote that justifies them labeling him homophobic, a label as ugly as antisemitic.
I have known Dennis Prager for 18 years. I worked for him for 11 summer sessions at the Brandeis-Bardin Institute, where he served as the director up until 1983. He has influenced countless numbers of Jews (myself included), many of whom went on to the rabbinate and other key posts of leadership throughout the Jewish community. Say what you will about Dennis, one thing he is not: homophobic.What pains me about the letter, "Rabbis, One and All," is its tone. Who should know the power of words and the pain they can inflict, more than my fellow rabbis? My 16 colleagues who signed the letter did nothing more than attack Prager personally. They offered nothing in the way of an alternative point of view. … To merely discredit someone with whom you disagree on such a sensitive issue is as unsophisticated as it is ungodly.
More than a decade later, Rabbi Gotlieb would perform Prager's third wedding.
Rabbi Leonid Feldman of Temple Emanu-El of Palm Beach, FL, wrote:
As a Conservative rabbi, I was ashamed that some of my classmates at the seminary participated in the ugly personal attack against Dennis Prager. I was also shocked to find that one of the teachers I used to respect [Dr. Dorf], also participated in unfairly discrediting an opponent instead of addressing the issues.Reform Rabbi Mordecai Finely, of Ohr Torah, wrote:As a former Soviet citizen and a Refusenik, I was horrified by the similarity between the letter signed by the rabbis and the letters against Refuseniks and dissidents that used to be printed in Pravda.
…Dennis has conducted his side of the debate responsibly, accurately, thoughtfully and, considering that he is taking a side that can hurt people's feelings, humanely. …Rabbi Dorf stated that Mr. Prager "maligned" Conservative Judaism. I could find no maligning whatsoever in Dennis' response to his detractors. Rabbi Dorff states: "Prager accuses the Conservative movement of restricting itself to ritual matters alone." In fact, Prager only asked if Conservative different from Reform in matters of ritual alone…Rabbi Daniel Gordis took on his colleague Elliot Dorff in an essay that he submitted to the Jewish Journal, but the editor, Gene Lichtenstein, refused to print it unedited. So Gordis decided to not publish it there.
Indeed, the greatest irony of this whole debate is found in another part of Rabbi Dorff's response to Prager. Dorff states, "…rabbinical schools of the [Conservative] movement do not admit sexually active homosexuals to their student bodies…" This is precisely the stance which Prager has advocated, but one that Dorff labels…as "morally odious and deeply un-Jewish."
Dennis wondered where were the Orthodox? He emailed a rabbi on the Orthodox right, a friend [perhaps Yitzhock Adlerstein], who responded:
You don't REALLY have any doubts about the Orthodox position on homosexuality, do? The number of Orthodox rabbis who still bother to look at the Journal, though, is probably less than five. I am not kidding.“I have actually introduced gay male friends to other men,” said Dennis in a 2009 (?) lecture on “Feelings: Key to the Liberal Mind.”And you haven't exactly made it easy, over time, for people in the Orthodox camp to run into your corner of the ring and help hold your hand aloft. There are too many other positions that come with your territory that we have to distance ourselves from.
So we are all in a bind. You're discovering that the only ones who will hold a line in the final analysis are the Orthodox. But you don't always like that line, and then do exactly what the Conservatives are doing on this issue: pick and choose. So you are left out in the cold.
And so are we. We completely, categorically, enthusiastically support what you are saying about homosexuality - and can't find a safe way to say it.
So all I can do is offer you a personal congratulations; an invitation to join Truth any time you want; and the satisfaction of knowing that outside of the pages of the Jewish Journal there is no question that you have the complete support of the frum community. Hopefully of the Ribbono Shel Olam [Master of the Universe] as well.
Feb. 7, 2013, Dennis Prager said:
If you had a son in the Scouts and his Scoutmaster was openly gay would you be comfortable sending your son and his troop on the overnight with that Scoutmaster? If so, would you be okay with sending your daughter and her troop on an overnight with a male Scoutmaster?
If gay Scoutmasters are admitted, a lot of people won't put their kids into the Scouts. Not out of hatred of gays, but concern that Scout leaders would be a problem if they were gay. Not because all gays are pedophiles, but only men, straight or gay, have any proclivity to pedophilia. The issue is male sexuality, not gays.
I know this is much too complex for the ACLU. They are so blinded by ideology and corrupted their ability to use common sense, that they don't understand what I've said. As soon as they hear a word, a buzzer goes off. The left-wing brain is composed to respond on cue.
Mar. 20, 2013, Dennis described the ACLU "as the single most destructive organization in the United States."
"The ACLU has more money than any school district. They just bully their way. People are just intimidated. The ACLU are left-wing bullies. Anything that represents traditional values must be destroyed."
The Disney Years
The Disney years (beginning 8/5/95) at KABC were not a happy time for Dennis. May 2, 1997, he was ordered to talk about Eddie Murphy picking up a transvestite hooker and he refused, saying it was gossip.
“Everybody hated it when Disney took over,” a former KABC employee told me. “[Program director] George Green left after running the show for about 35 years. Maureen Lesourd came in. Nobody liked her. She lasted 18 months. ‘Synergy’ is the word for Disney. It means that everybody supports everybody. It means that everybody is a tool for everybody. Disney only bought ABC as an outlet for their programming. It was a smaller, more friendly company, before Disney bought it. Then it became just another arm of a huge corporation.”
April 26, 2010, Dennis said:
I have a story about the word ‘thesis.’ This is a true radio story. I’m not sure that even my two spouses (Sue and Prager’s producer Allen Estrin) know this.Aug. 29, 2011, Dennis said:
When I was with my first station, I was with ABC in Los Angeles for 17 years. I have only warm feelings for those years.
When Disney took over ABC, it decided that the only thing that mattered were ratings. And so they put in a general manager at the station who said, ‘None of this high-quality talk stuff. We’ve got to go down in the gutter.’
It was a very bad period. I thought I’d be let go because I wasn’t prepared to do everything this woman wanted me to talk about. It was a very tense time. She left eventually. I stayed.
I once used the word ‘thesis’. I was called in to the program director’s office. He said, ‘Dennis, I was listening to you today and you used the word ‘thesis.’
I remember thinking, what could possibly be wrong with that? Did he think I used the word ‘feces’?
He said, ‘Dennis, that is too highfalutin a word. If you want really high ratings, you don’t use the word ‘thesis.’
Whenever I have used the word on the radio since then, I see this program director in front of me. ‘Dennis, no, don’t use the word ‘thesis’.
I am surrounded by good men, folks. I’d rather be surrounded by good women but you can’t have everything. Actually, that’s not true. I don’t have a preference.In his 2004 lecture on Deuteronomy 12, Dennis said:
I think that both men and women would rather work with men…
Who would you rather work with and for? I had a female boss once in my life. She was the head of a previous station. It was a horror. She wanted me to lower in every way the level of the show. To speak about sex scandals in Hollywood. That was the big one. I’ll never forget. It was the only time in my life in 29 years of broadcasting that I thought I might be fired because I said no.
What does God want me to do? I try that all the time. I don’t succeed all the time. I ask myself before every show, what does God want me to do?Sept. 15, 2010, Dennis said: “At one place of work, I was in one of these seminars [at KABC], and I think I drove the woman crazy with her totalitarian talk about what was permitted. I can show you my breasts but you can not comment on them. That’s sexual harassment law in a nutshell.”
I was torn. It was really an issue for a time. This is what God wants me to use the microphone for and this is what my employers’ want me to use the microphone for. Employers in the secular media want ratings.
I didn’t talk about the O.J. Simpson trial and I had an only-LA show one of the two prime stations in LA (KABC). I talked about the verdict.
I kept saying to myself, ‘Dennis, God didn’t give you the gift of speech to talk about Kato Kaelin.’
It was the end of my TV career because I wouldn’t do stuff they asked.
I’ve never deluded myself on the sin issue. I’m enjoying myself. I never fooled myself that this is OK. That’s the road to ruin, not the sin.
Dennis had many detractors at KABC. Some who worked with him claim that he was universally hated at the station for his arrogance. Many of Prager's coworkers over the years sound scared to make any criticism of him in case he sues for defamation. One man who worked with Dennis for years found himself going home every day thinking about what Dennis had said on his show. Then he began noticing that Dennis didn't understand many the articles he was reading from nor the events he was commenting on. Dennis just used the news to get on a soap box with his Pragerisms however disconnected they might be from reality. It was all a con. In the course of a few months, the man went from fascinated with Dennis to disgusted with Dennis.
That disgust reaction? It never left him. And he never picked up another guru.
Is God In Trees?
In the Spring of 1997, I sat near Dennis Prager on a Saturday morning at Stephen S. Wise temple while he took furious notes (it is a violation of Jewish law to write on the Sabbath and Prager rarely breaks this law except when he’s pushed to sign an autograph, etc) on the sermon by atheist professor Daniel Matt on the Big Bang. Dr. Matt saw spiritual significance and ultimate meaning in such natural phenomena.
Prager disagreed and devoted the June 1, 1997 edition of his newsletter The Prager Perspective to the question, “Is God in Trees?”
I recently heard a Jewish professor/author lecture on the Kabbalah. Like many other non-traditional Jews, he uses the Kabbalah (Jewish mysticism) to sustain his nature-centered views. “God is in the bark of a tree,” he told the audience.
Many nontraditional Jews and Christians, not to mention followers of New Age thinking, maintain as this professor does, that “God is in the trees” and “Trees are divine.”
There are three problems with this view: theological, logical, and moral.
In a 1995 lecture on why God is important (tenth lecture on Exodus), Dennis said: “When I look at a mountain, I want to [bow down]. I feel insignificant. When I visited the Himalayas, I was shaken… The tops are where jet planes fly. I am not a nature worshiper. I am a God believer, a supernatural God, and I am standing there and this is awesome. I am insignificant. This is where it’s at.”
Happiness Is A Serious Problem
In January 1998, Dennis published his fourth book Happiness Is A Serious Problem. “My wife Fran has had to endure my preoccupation with happiness for some times,” Dennis wrote in the introduction to his book. “She has also graciously sat through many of my lectures on the subject, including four consecutive nights in four South American countries (in slower English, no less) and has read every word and made critical suggestions. She and our wonderful children, Anya, David, and Aaron, are already happier people – thanks to my finally finishing this book.
“…My wife is often dissatisfied with the level of communication in our marriage. In her view, we could almost always be more open and honest about our feelings and spend more time together. While she is happy in our marriage, her dissatisfaction with the level of our communication ensures ever greater intimacy and therefore a better marriage.”
Employees
Dennis Prager usually employs women. Slender blonde Laurie B. Zimmet, born in June, 1963, served as Prager’s personal assistant from 1995 – 2000. The avid mountain climber taught for several years at the day school of the Pacific Jewish Center, founded by Michael Medved. She met Dennis and Fran at Brandeis-Bardin in 1991, establishing immediate rapport. The Pragers’ boy Aaron called her “Aunt.”
“My assistant, Laurie Zimmet,” wrote Prager in his introduction to Think a Second Time, “is more than my right arm, she is a source of ideas, a proofreader; and a one-person support system.”
Dennis said to Laurie in a 1996 lecture on Exodus 20: “If I don’t [do a good job repeating your point], feel free to resign. Did I tell you that she sent me to New York for no reason? I don’t even want to tell you because it would hurt her feelings that she got the date wrong and I went to New York for no speech. Do you know what it is like to walk on 33rd St. for no reason. It’s a phenomenon very few of you will experience in your life, being 3,000 miles from home for no reason. She’s the best though. She really is. You just have to live with that stuff. Everyone of us a quota of flat tires and you have to meet it.”
Reacting to the Congressman Mark Foley scandal, Dennis wrote Oct. 24, 2006: “…I oppose any sexual activity between a politician and a page, even of majority age. In my capacity as a nationally syndicated radio talk show host I have had numerous young women (and men, but they are not relevant to this discussion in my case) serve as interns. I have always believed that in their eyes I was supposed to represent the ideals that I stand for, not a man on the hunt for young flesh.”
Prager’s one prominent male assistant was Mark Wilcox who developed the Micah Center for Ethical Monotheism. Wilcox left on bad terms in late 1994. Said one source who worked with both of them, “Mark hates Dennis.”
“Most men do not like to be vilified,” said Dennis May 7, 2010. “I am vilified. While I get to hear many beautiful warm things said to me on the radio, if you look me up on the Internet and any expletive you can think of put in with my name and you will get thousands of hits. Do I enjoy it? I don’t enjoy it. Do I lose sleep over it? The only thing I ever lose sleep over is when I am misquoted. It drives me crazy for idealistic reasons. I live so that I can have a good influence on people. If people change what I say, they undermine my ability to do good and that really does make me angry.”
Dennis said June 23, 2010, “The original sin [by General Stanley McChrystal]… you don’t have a guy from Rolling Stone live with you for a month. If a guy from Rolling Stone lived with me for a month, it would be devastating, and I have a very clean and happy-go-lucky life but I know it would be portrayed in profoundly dark ways.”
Dennis says that some of his biggest mistakes have come from the desire to do good.
I remember one Sabbath morning in 1995, Dennis picked up a hitchhiking Jew and gave him a ride to Stephen S. Wise temple. At the end of services, Dennis got up and gave a little talk to raise money for the guy who was apparently in dire need.
A lot of people gave money. Then the guy turned out to be a jerk, hassling the female rabbi Tova August and security had to be called to get rid of him.
In a 2004 lecture on Deuteronomy 13, Dennis said:
One of the great lines ever comes from a Christian pastor.
I did an hour this week [on the radio] about my disappointing people. Because I got this email from someone and I never answered his email, which was apparently very warm about how I had touched his life. I apparently didn’t reply to his email. I get 200 emails a day… It’s impossible.
He wrote me another letter — you’re a phony.
Folks, I’ve been disappointed by the same thing in my life. I wrote this Christian pastor a long letter telling him how great this idea was and that I was going to use it in my own work. I never heard from him. Do you think I think any less of him? I don’t know if he got it. I don’t know if he read it. If he did, I hope it touched his life. It’s narcissistic to expect that everybody will react because you wrote a letter.
And the great line? When God says about Adam it is not good for man to be alone, it is a statement that even God is not enough.
On August 2, 1998, Dennis Prager turned 50. “Fifty did hit me,” Dennis said Aug. 3, 2010. “I had such a great time when I was young… There was a real great time then because it was much less burdened by any issues. You just realize that that can not go on forever. There was a book that made an impression on me early on — Necessary Losses by Judith Viorst."
Conservative
Mark Wilcox said to me in 1994 that he was responsible for getting Dennis to change his party affiliation to Republican the year before.
In a 2010 interview at Stephen S. Wise temple, Dennis said: “It was a black woman Republican who came over to me at a speech and said, ‘It is time for you to register as a Republican. Put your registration where your mouth is.’ She was right. She gave me the form.”
Around this time, Dennis stopped describing himself as a “passionate centrist”, a phrase he’d used for more than 15 years.
Jan. 15, 2011, Dennis said: “I still think of myself as a passionate centrist. I dropped the term because in modern terminology, there’s no question I am a conservative. I thought it would not sound terribly honest if I agree with conservatives 92% of the time and called myself a centrist.
“I still think I’m a liberal, but liberalism has been taken over by leftism. I’ve always been anti-left.
“What I am today in terms of positions is conservative.
“I do recall making a conscious decision. I don’t think any one event did it. I recall saying to myself, ‘Dennis, it won’t sound real. You keep taking conservative positions. Call yourself that.’ I always want to sound real even though in my heart and mind I know I am [a centrist].
“Religiously, I really am a passionate centrist."
Bill Clinton – Monica Lewinsky Scandal
March 23, 2010, Dennis said: “It was the most uncomfortable, miserable time I had as a radio talk show host in 29 years of broadcasting. The entire thing was troubling to me on all grounds.”
“It was the only time I ever went to work not wanting to go to work. All of you know how much I love and treasure my job, but I felt everybody was brought down by this whole thing. I said at the time, ‘I can’t believe America is preoccupied with a stained dress. This is what we’ve come to?’ It was a plague on everybody.”
Dennis wrote Jan. 13, 2004: “I have particularly high standards to protect the dignity of public figures. For example, I may have been the only talk show host who never allowed a Monica Lewinsky joke to be broadcast on my show.”
When Prager’s radio show went national in 1999, Laurie Zimmet sought and achieved the role and title of producer, but when Prager was dropped by his syndicator (Jones Radio Network) in late 2000, and picked up by the Christian organization (Salem Communications Corporation), the new group balked at picking up several of the expenses of their predecessor, including Laurie as producer. Prager’s biweekly newsletter, The Prager Perspective, also ceased publication because the new syndicator did not want to pick up the tab.
Zimmet took other work, eventually serving in Iraq. On August 5, 2009 Lubavitch.com published:
It is as unlikely a place as any, but for Laurie Zimmet and Moshe Lans, Iraq will always remind them of how much they have in common and what brought them together. Zimmet enlisted in the United States Navy Reserve in August of 2001, two weeks shy of 9/11. She worked in various military positions and was sent to the Persian Gulf, including Iraq in 2003. After seven months, she returned to the United States, eventually returning for a year of service in Iraq in 2005. Within a few weeks of her and Lans’ arrival, serendipity struck.
KABC radio in Los Angeles decided in 2000 that they wanted all local programming. With the choice to drop syndication or KABC, Prager moved November 10, 2000 to KIEV, soon KRLA, 870 AM in Glendale in November.
“It has never been done before and I doubt it will be done again, but [KABC] allowed me to stay on the radio knowing I was leaving.” (Jan. 2002)
With a longer drive to work, and a tendency to arrive at the station just a few minutes before going on air, Prager got caught in traffic several times and did not make it to his show on time. Either somebody would fill in for him or he would be patched through via his cell phone.
In 2003, Allen Estrin became Prager’s radio show producer. He pushed Dennis to get more sleep. He could tell a drop in the quality of the show when Dennis does not.
“I have basically married Allen,” Dennis said Nov. 11, 2009.
Aug. 21, 2023, Dennis said: "Allen Estrin, who I brought to God and religion, said the biggest single thing was my dividing between thoughts and actions."
Somebody who worked with Prager told me circa 2000 that Dennis earned about $600,000 a year from his radio show.
May 14, 2012, Dennis told Hugh Hewitt that the previous year he paid $30,000 in taxes to
California.
Said Dennis Oct. 7, 2010: “I’m on well over 100 stations, 120, whatever it is. If I read an ad, I am putting my name behind what I am endorsing. I think I have a 100% batting average that what I have personally endorsed has been worthy of endorsement… There have been sponsors that I stopped endorsing.”
In a lecture delivered circa 2005, Dennis talked about what he thinks about while doing his show.
1. Keep calm. "I have a passionate nature so this took some self-control... When I hear a talk show host yell at a listener, I think they lost the battle... The calm one sounds rational."
2. Humor. "People often say they love my sense of humor. My humor is very dry."
3. Personal. "In my wife's view, I share too much about my life... The more personal and real that I am, the more effective."
4. Energy. "You must speak on radio with high energy... That sounds normal. To sound natural, that is the one unnatural thing I have to do -- to speak at a high energy level the whole time. I was given few tips by program directors, but that was one of them. One thing I often got was higher energy level. I would think that was fake, but I realized to be effective on the radio, you have to be real and high energy. When the show is over, all I want to do is play Spider Solitary. I don't want to work. I don't want to talk to anybody... I want it to sound effortless. You can't think about me. You should only think about what I am saying. My [goal] is that you do no work."
5. I talk on the radio as if I am talking to people who do not agree with me. "How can I talk in a way that that person might listen to me again?"
6. "You have to be interesting with every sentence. That's one thing every talk show host is good at -- being interesting."
7. "You can't umm and ahh. Silence is ok."
8. "Variety of topics is my trademark."
9. "Do not be offended by people who call me bad things... If you think you are the greatest when you are complimented, you will think you are the worst when you are insulted... I had a colleague at KABC who took this stuff in and he had a few heart attacks. He just took it in. If he was insulted, it bothered him. If he was complimented, he thought he was the king of the hill. If I get one, it won't be because of the show."
10. "You cannot aim to be loved."
11. "Nothing is allowed to intrude [on my concentration on the show]... You are tuning in to interesting, high-energy Dennis every day."
12. "Don't talk about what you don't know about."
During his April 10, 2023 Youtube show with twenty something pundit Julie Hartman, Dennis said: "The very first time I tried out [as a talk show host], I got the job that night. I remember saying [to himself], I must talk normal. The overwhelming majority of talk show hosts [speak in performance mode]. It takes effort to be real."
"We just got this with a donation to PragerU from a psychotherapist. 'If more people watched material from PragerU, I'd have to find another line of work.'"
Julie: "PragerU has made me a healthier happier person."
Dennis: "Do you think any left-wing show or institution got a note like that from a therapist?"
Julie: "When I first discovered you, I knew we would be friends. It was your values. But the big thing that increased your credibility was your voice. The way you speak is no different on air from off air."
Dennis: "The more the Left influences a person, the worse they become. How many people can say that if their child went woke at college and is now kinder, finer, and has a deeper relationship with [his] parents?"
"I love the Torah more than I love God. I don't believe in the Torah because I love God, I believe in God because I love the Torah."
Y2K
Said Dennis Oct. 7, 2010: “I will admit that that was the one time I fell for a hysteria. You know why? It made perfect sense.”
Breast Implants
Apr. 20, 2012, Dennis Prager was asked: "I was calling to get your opinion of breast augmentation?"
Dennis: "Here's my question for a mature woman, not a high school girl: Why would there be a reason not to?"
Mary: "I guess the opinions of other people thinking you're being vain?"
Dennis: "What does being vain mean?"
Mary: "That you are more concerned with your outward appearance than what you are inwardly?"
Dennis: "That's weird."
"If you shampoo and do your hair, are you not concerned with other people?"
"I don't know a good argument against a mature woman getting breast augmentation unless she has beautiful breasts."
Mary: "What about people who say, 'You should just be happy with what God gave you'?"
Dennis: "I think it is one of the ten stupidest lines I've heard in my life."
"What if God gave you essentially no breasts?"
Mary: "That's pretty much what I've got."
Dennis: "What if you're born deaf?"
"I would ask somebody, 'Why would God want to handicap me in attracting men?'"
"I think you care more about others if you do want to look good. Why should you brush your teeth as often or use mouthwash or deodorant? What does vain mean? Does it mean you care how you look? If so, I'm vain. I care how I look."
"Exactly how you came out is how God made you and you should do no alteration? What about Siamese twins? Did God make them Siamese twins? Did God make people deaf? Did God make people with all sorts of impediments? It is an insult to God to say that the way you came out of the womb is what God wants. Did God make you a brunette?"
Apr. 18, 2012, relationship expert Alison Armstrong said: "When a man's female type walks by, procreate breaks through the focus of providing and protecting... I've watched it happen to you during the show. You're in the middle of providing your show when your type shows up on the TV screen... They put up a lot of your type on TV."
Dennis: "On Fox News."
Dennis Prager & Orthodoxy
During the 1980s and early 1990s, Dennis spoke regularly for Aish HaTorah, then he said something permissive about masturbation, and I don’t believe he’s spoken for Aish since 1992.
“We failed with Dennis,” Aish founder Rabbi Noah Weinberg said to his faithful supporters (relayed to me by several Aish HaTorah sources between 1994-1997).
In 2000, Prager rejoiced in the Democrats’ nomination of Orthodox Jew Joseph Lieberman for vice-president. He wrote in the September 2000 issue of The Prager Perspective:
If Senator Joseph Lieberman is indeed Orthodox, it is an Orthodoxy that is considerably more elastic than the modern Orthodoxy…that I studied and saw practiced 12 years of yeshiva…
…Had I been cut this much slack growing up in the Orthodox world, I might still call myself Orthodox.
By contrast with his friendship with the late Chabad rabbi Shlomo Schwartz, Dennis has long had a difficult relationship with Rabbi Shlomo Cunin, the head of the Chabad Lubavitch movement in Southern California. Around the year 1995, Rabbi Cunin prevented a talk Dennis was going to give for Chabad in the San Francisco Bay Area.
Around the year 2006, Dennis became a monthly speaker on Sabbath mornings at the Persian Orthodox Nessah synagogue in Beverly Hills. Even though it is against Orthodox Jewish law, Dennis would drive to the shul on Saturdays to give his talks until the shul was forced to stop this (even though most of its members drive to the shul on the Sabbath), and insist that Dennis not drive if he was going to speak in shul on Shabbos.
“I am part of a religion that has roles,” Dennis said Apr. 13, 2010. “While I am not Orthodox, I am a fellow traveler in many ways. I have great admiration for things that they do. I happen to endorse the idea of roles. I don’t know what would be gained in Orthodox Judaism if women became rabbis. You say equality. All right, but equality and sameness are not the same thing. There’s nothing that argues that women are not equal. Maybe it is good that men have some specific roles because then they embrace them. Men deeply need an area to carve out as their own and it is very good for boys to see men in religion. Everybody knows that women gravitate to religion more than men, so it is particularly important that boys have male models of men in religion.”
9/11
Dennis got up on Tuesday, September 11, 2001, expecting to take the day off the radio so he could take his son David to the airport to fly to Israel to enroll in yeshiva.
In a lecture on “Secular Religions”, Dennis said: “We allowed our oldest son to go to Israel during the worst of the terror. He spent six months in Jerusalem. He heard two terror bombings. He felt he wanted to go. It had been scheduled for years. His ticket to Israel was 9/11/01. I was going to take the day off from radio to take him to the airport to say goodbye to send him off to terror-filled Israel. Then it was terror-filled America and his flight was delayed for a month.”
Between 1995 and 9/11, terrorism expert Steve Emerson said that Dennis Prager and Geraldo Rivera were the only broadcasters to have him on. (May 5, 2010)
On the Sabbath morning after 9/11, Dennis Prager told the Mountaintop Minyan at Stephen S. Wise temple, “I stand before you as a proud member of the world’s two most hated peoples — Americans and Jews.”
Dennis said in a January 2002 lecture on his ideological autobiography, “Before September 11, I was very pessimistic about this country. I believe Osama Bin Laden did more good for America than any other single person in my lifetime. He has turned this country around. People are asking what’s so special about us? People are allowed to be patriotic now.”
Sept. 11, 2002, Dennis wrote that "it is clear that 9-11 did far more good than harm. America has become a better place because of that attack."
From the perspective of 2023, that seems absurd. The quality of life in America deteriorated as a result of the 9-11 attacks with increased security bureaucracy and destructive invasions of Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq in 2003.
In a 2004 lecture on the 13th chapter of Deuteronomy, Dennis said:
Nine eleven changed Jewish life… The things that I can say in lectures to Jews now that do not elicit hoots and boos and derision is unbelievable. I could not talk about Jewish choseness before 9/11. Nowhere do Jewish audiences now find this bizarre. Real evil has confronted them. The centrality of Jew hatred in the world has made it evident that there may be some truth that Jews walk a different path. Any Jew with any Jewish identity is now prepared to hear this without laughing or bouncing the lecture fee. I am stunned. I speak more now in Jewish life than ever before. Sixty two Jewish communities last year and I don’t take all the ones I’m invited to. I can’t obviously.In 2004, Dennis took his 11-year old son Aaron to Israel.
I say this almost all the time and it’s unbelievable to me. I’m pinching myself. They’re not yelling at me? They are giving this a standing ovation in Dallas? The largest group of Jews ever to convene in Texas I spoke to last year and I spoke about [Jewish choseness]. There is no other way to understand Israel and the centrality of Jews in the world and the hatred? I believe America is hated because it is the one society in history to affirm Jewish choseness. It is the one Judeo-Christian society in history. You latch on to the Jews, and you get the blessings and the hatred of a lot of people.
It’s not just 9/11. It’s the eruption of Jew-hatred and Israel-hatred and America-hatred so that all of it wrapped together is shaking people up. Not only can I say to Jews certain things that I couldn’t say before, but to non-Jews. I couldn’t talk about America being chosen before 9/11. I would’ve been dismissed as a kook and set off to some weird radio station.
I wanted him to see Israel and it had some of the effect.
It is a very powerful thing for an identifying Jew to go into a world that is Jewish. You never have that experience [outside of Israel].
Let’s take Hebrew. When he was watching Dragon Ball Z in Hebrew, I had a big smile on my face. He didn’t understand the dubbed language. For him to know that Hebrew is alive. It’s not just the language he’s learning for his bar mitzvah was a powerful experience. Wow, they even do cartoons. Not just Isaiah.
One time he said, Dad, do you realize that five of the letters between one and ten begin with the letter shin? He was starting to think about the Hebrew language as he had never done before except under semi-coercion.He learned for the first time that there are people who want to kill Jews. It wasn’t abstract.
We were taken, because of the nature of my work, to see the last bus blown up by the Palestinian terrorists in which eight people were murdered and many maimed. He didn’t have a supercilious attitude. He saw holes in the seats where human beings were maimed and killed.
He told me at times that he was nervous when we drove by a bus. I’m happy for that. Life isn’t just Dragon Ball Z cartoons. He’s old enough now.
He slept perfectly well at night. He didn’t have nightmares.
He even worried about eating in any restaurant. He was happy when we went to restaurants where there weren’t a lot of people because he understood that they want to blow up a lot of people. I told him about choseness and that this is the price we pay but look at how everybody goes around normally.
He saw the fence being built. He asked a tremendous number of questions.
This was my 15th trip to Israel. It has always been a religious battery-charger for me. I am the battery-charger for a lot of people. People tune in to me and I charge them up as Americans, Christians, Jews, but I’ve got to get my batteries charged too.
My son [David] went there at the height of the terror and it changed his life. He said, ‘Dad, before I went, pretty much the biggest issue in my life was would the Lakers win another championship. And now the biggest issues in my life have to do with God, good and evil.’
That’s pretty good for eight months abroad. That’s what Israel would do when you’re studying Torah in Jerusalem and you hear the blasts three times in a year, you hear people blown up. You take life seriously. There are epic battles going on with Israel as the fulcrum.
I was across the street [in Bethlehem in April 2002 when the Church of the Nativity was taken over by Palestinian gunmen]. It was a rather harrowing moment. When Israeli soldiers say, ‘Run, there are snipers,’ you really run. I’m not sure it was wise to visit. My wife is shaking her head. (2005 lecture on Deut. 19)
Apr. 11, 2012, Dennis Prager said: "As countries become more left, two of the characteristics they embrace are secularism and internationalism. The reason that ends up with vast support for the United Nations -- you don't believe in any transcendent ethic because you don't believe in God. God is the source of a transcendent morality. But they know that you have to have a transcendent morality or there is no such thing. You can't say that what is right for me is right for me, because then you have no argument against mass torture, mass rape, mass genocide.
"Since there is no God who is the source of a trans-national and trans-individual morality, the United Nations supplants God, supplants religion. The United Nations gives you a transnational and trans-individual morality. What is right? What the United Nations says is right."
I don't know anyone who gets their morality from the United Nations, but what Dennis says sounds profound if you don't think about it much.
In a debate at Oxford University uploaded to Youtube April 29, 2015, Dennis said: "In modern history, every war has been between a free state and a police state or two police states. I can't think of a 20th Century example of any other. Where in the world other than Israel does anyone ever argue that the free state doesn't want peace and the police state wants peace? This would be the first free state in history to prefer war to peace."The United States invaded Iraq in 2003. Wasn't that a free state going to war with a police state?
The United States invaded Afghanistan in 2001. Wasn't that a free state going to war with a police state?
In the 1990s, the United States bombed Serbia. Wasn't that a free state going to war with a police state?
In the 1960s, the United States went to war against North Vietnam. Wasn't that a free state going to war with a police state?
The United States intervened in Latin America countless times over the past century. Weren't those examples of a free state entering conflicts with less free states?
George W. Bush
Dennis Prager loved President George W. Bush whose disastrous legacy includes occupying Iraq and Afghanistan at a cost of trillions of dollars on the false premises that these countries threatened America, removing standards for mortgage lending and sending America into the worst recession since the Great Depression, allowing in millions of low-achieving illegal immigrants, and campaigning in 2000 against profiling Arabs at airports.
Dennis wrote Mar. 11, 2003: "I believe that either divine intervention or good luck on the magnitude of a lottery win explains George W. Bush’s rise to the position of president."
I have loved and admired this man [George W. Bush] ever since I felt that I got to know him during his presidential campaign. (Before his winning the Republican nomination, I knew so little about him and thought so little of his chances of defeating Al Gore that I voted in the California primary for John McCain.) I believe that this man is changing history for the better, that he is the dam holding back the waters of chaos, that he saved this country at a time when Democrats would have failed it, and that he is both kind and strong, real and decent, powerful and humble.
So when I had the opportunity to stand in line with my wife and youngest child to simply shake this man’s hand, I rushed at the opportunity. I waited in line as excited as most people would be to greet their favorite Hollywood star. Wearing a silly grin, I told the congressmen and senators around me that I felt like a 7-year-old about to meet Willie Mays or Derek Jeter. I even broke into a sweat.
…My wife told him that when she lights the Sabbath candles every Friday night in our home, she says a prayer for him. And I told him that I say a prayer for him each week at synagogue.
Unless he is a faker — and I believe that I can sense a faker a mile away — it was clear that the president was moved. Which is exactly what we hoped for. We know how much he values prayer, we know how much hatred he receives, and we suspect that he does not often associate Jews with those prayerfully supporting him.
He stopped and told us that only those who understand prayer could understand how much this means to him and asked if we would like a family photo with him. Imagine your child getting to take a photo with every member on his favorite baseball or football team and you can imagine my excitement.
Lawrence Auster wrote in 2005 that folks like Dennis had already given away the game:
Our quasi-religious faith in America as the spreader of freedom around the world grows in proportion as our actual America loses its culture, its morality, its spiritual and historical cohesion.The more we empty our country of its historical meaning, the more hysterical becomes our embrace of Bush’s messianic rhetoric, which is not about America, but about the world.
After 2007, few people aside from Prager saw Bush in a positive light. Steve Sailer, for instance, saw him as "Chauncey Gardiner with a mean streak", "irresponsible" and "uninterested in proficiency and honesty".
The careers of the pundits who were wrong about invading Iraq (Charles Krauthammer, Jonah Goldberg, Rich Lowry, Fred Kagan, Robert Kagan, Victor Davis Hanson, John Podhoretz, William Kristol, David Brooks, Thomas Friedman, Peter Beinart, Jeffrey Goldberg, and Fareed Zakaria) prospered while those who were right (William S. Lind, Robert Scheer, Jonathan Schell, and Scott Ritter) had few rewards. The pro-invasion pundits appearing on Prager's radio show between 2002-2012 outnumbered the opposed by about fifty to one and being massively wrong did nothing to diminish their air time (on Prager's show and elsewhere).
Success in punditry has nothing to do with being right (witness the popularity of frauds Malcolm Gladwell and Steven "Freakanomics" Levitt) and everything to do with serving people what they want to hear.
Dennis supported invading and occupying Afghanistan after 9/11. "I'd rather die fighting evil than live ignoring it, and that goes for my children," said Dennis May 9, 2014.
Dennis had no position on the invasion of Iraq in 2003, calling it the greatest gamble by a president in a century. Once the battle joined, Dennis said America had to win for the sake of its prestige. In other words, it had to "keep shoving troops and money into a meatgrinder" for honor, noted political scientist John Mearsheimer who wrote in 2014:
As Daryl G. Press notes in his important book, Calculating Credibility, when a country backs down in a crisis, its credibility in subsequent crises is not reduced. “A country’s credibility, at least during crises,” he writes, “is driven not by its past behavior but rather by power and interests." Thus, the fact that America suffered a humiliating defeat in the Vietnam War did not lead Moscow to think that the U.S. commitment to defend Western Europe was not credible.Nov. 1, 2010, Dennis said: “When George W. Bush won the second time, I came close to sobbing on the air out of relief because I knew we would’ve left Iraq, among other things.”
After the last American troops left Iraq August 18, 2010, what exactly was accomplished at the cost of seven trillion dollars? On Feb. 20, 2014, Dennis said: "In Iraq we fought the greatest evil of our time today, the violent Islamists, we defeated them, we defeated one of the most grotesque dictators of the 20th Century, and if we had stayed there, just as we did in Japan, Korea and Germany, there would have been a lot more peace today."
Dennis said October 28, 2008: “If John Kerry had won [in 2004], we would’ve been defeated in Iraq. A defeat in Iraq would have reverberated around in the world in a massive renaissance of Islamic terror. The United States of America would’ve been defeated by Al Qaeda and other terrorists and it would not end. This war would’ve only increased.”
The Passion
Dennis Prager played an important role in the controversy over this 2004 film. Prior to his weighing in, the Jewish Right (as represented by such figures as Rabbi David Lapin and Michael Medved) appeared united with their Christian peers in arguing that Gibson was a victim of left-wing smears, but Prager wrote:
Early this past summer, Mel Gibson invited me to see “The Passion,” his film on the trial and crucifixion of Jesus. The invitation was significant in that I was the first practicing Jew and active member of the American Jewish community to be invited. He did so because he believed, correctly, that he could trust me. I have long worked to build trust between Jews and Christians, especially traditional Christians.Miami Yom Kippur 2004
…I cannot say that I am happy this film was made. Nevertheless, if the vast majority of Christians and Jews of goodwill try hard to understand what film the other is watching, some good can yet result. The last thing Jews need is to create tension with their best friends. And the last thing Christians need is a renewal of Christian hatred toward Jesus’ people.
Dennis wrote Sept. 28, 2004:
I was in Miami Beach, Florida, this past weekend.
And I got evicted from my hotel.
Yes, the Trump International Hotel notified me and its other guests that we all had to leave the hotel because Hurricane Jeanne was headed to the South Florida coast.
…I was in Miami Beach to serve as scholar in residence at a prominent local synagogue for Yom Kippur. Upon arrival at the synagogue Saturday (the holiday began at sunset Friday evening), the 700 or so people were told that the synagogue was closed due to the impending hurricane. Many other synagogues closed in mid-afternoon. Why? Largely because of fear of liability engendered by the local government (that itself was afraid of liability) that declared a “mandatory evacuation.”
I wonder if Dennis Prager rethought his position after Hurricane Katrina took 1,836 lives in August 2005.
The Courts
On January 17, 2007, I shelled out $4:75 to search “Dennis Prager” on the LA Superior Court website and found nine cases.
Here’s Dennis Prager (Aug. 6, 2006) vs. The Prager Perspective. Here’s the TPP cross-complaint for breach of oral contract and misrepresentation (filed Oct. 5, 2006). Dennis Prager answers were filed Nov. 8, 2006.
The dispute has since been settled.
In a case filed May 15, 2000, Bank of America sued Dennis Prager for not paying back a loan of over $30,000. The plaintiff filed to dismiss the suit in September, 2000. I assume there was a settlement.
In case number SC 033536 filed November 7, 1994 (EARL KORCHAK, ET AL VS LIGHT MANAGMENT SERVICES, INC ET AL) Dennis Prager was one of four plaintiffs in this lawsuit that would be dismissed August 2, 1995.
On December 23, 1994, Dennis Prager along with MULTIMEDIA ENTERTAINMENT INC. were defendants in the case (BC 118757) TIM STEPHEN VS MULTIMEDIA ENTERTAINMENT INC ET AL. The plaintiff asked for dismissal of the case with prejudice on September 9, 1996.
Around 1999, Dennis met Scott Webley, a former actor on General Hospital (1977-1978) who owned a production company (ShowBiz Studios) and several Internet businesses (Showbiz.com, etc).
According to Los Angeles Superior Court case BC 357131 (in an Oct. 5, 2006 filing by Scott Webley’s attorneys, responding to this August 6, 2006 filing by Dennis Prager’s attorneys), Prager and Webley agreed orally in late 2000 or early 2001 to operate The Prager Perspective Limited Liability Company to sell Prager’s writings, radio show, and talks via dennisprager.com, etc, and to split the revenues.
17. Beginning, in or about January 2001 through in or about late 2003 or early 2004, Prager and his assistant Alan Briese delivered the master tapes of the Radio Show to Prager LLC’s office. During this time, Prager and his assistant Alan Briese represented to Cross-Complainants that these master tapes were lawfully taken from the Radio Station [KRLA] and Cross-Complainants [Scott Webley and TPP] were to transfer these recordings onto cassette tapes and/or CD for sale and distribution.The dispute was settled in early 2007.
18. Salem, with Prager’s knowledge, consent, and/or direction, knowingly and intentionally, and to further the business of Prager LLC, Salem uploaded electronic feeds of each daily broadcast from the Radio Show directly onto the Website in or about late 2003 or early 2004. …to on or about January 13, 2006. Prager LLC made the Radio Show available to its customers by way of electronic downloads…
21. …Prager LLC offered a membership subscription for a variety of services.
22. Cross-Complainants…believe…that Salem discovered in or about the summer of 2005 that Prager LLC was a successful and profitable business venture….
23. At this same time…Cross-Complainants learned Prager had entered into an agreement with Salem regarding the Radio Show… Salem contended Prager had transferred all production and syndication rights to the Radio Show… Salem wrongfully demanded that Prager LLC, including its members Webley and Prager, turn over the Website and anything related to the Radio Show to Salem…
24. On or about January 13, 2006, Salem discontinued the uploads of electronic recordings of the Radio Show onto the Website.
25. Shortly thereafter, customers contacted Prager LLC and complained that they could not access the downloads of the Radio Show. Because the downloads of the Radio Show ere no longer available, Prager LLC was forced to refund membership subscriptions…
27. On or about June 14, 2006, Salem Radio filed an action in the Ventura County Superior Court entitled Salem Radio Network Incorporated v. The Prager Perspective, LLC and Scott Webley…transferred to Central District of the Los Angeles Superior Court…BC 358558. The Salem Lawsuit alleges in part:a. Salem Radio and Prager entered into an agreement on or about November 6, 2000 that only Salem Radio would produce and syndicate the Radio Show.34. Prager breached the Agreement [with Scott Webley] by entering into the Salem agreement…conspiring with Salem to stop the electronic downloads of the Radio Show onto the Website, and conspiring with Salem to sue Webley…
c. Webley and Prager LLC, not Prager, wrongfully copied the Radio Show from 2001 to January 2006 onto the Website. Webley and Prager LLC then marketed, sold, and distributed electronic and tangible expressions of the Radio Show on the Website and collected $300,000 in revenue without compensating Salem Radio.
41. Prager made these representations with knowledge that they were false when made…with an intent to deceive Cross-Complaints to market, sell and distribute such materials.
44. Prager’s misrepresentations were willful and malicious…
The Grand Canyon
Dennis Prager wrote Aug. 5, 2003:
…That the ACLU would write a letter protesting three little plaques at the Grand Canyon with verses from the book of Psalms provides a clear example of how intent the organization is on destroying the Judeo-Christian moral foundations of this society. This, after all, is the same ACLU that went to court in Florida to protect a Muslim woman’s right to be photographed for her driver’s license ID wearing a veil! If it ain’t Judeo-Christian, the ACLU is a big fan of religion.Said Dennis in a 2007 lecture on Leviticus 1: “I battled for the plaque and they reinstated it. I went to Phoenix to give a speech at a synagogue. About ten nuns showed up from the local order that had put the plaque there originally. They came to thank me and they did a dance around me.”
…But I was incensed that the National Park Service of the United States of America would remove plaques acknowledging the Divine as the author of natural beauty (“How varied are your works, Lord! In wisdom you have wrought them all; the earth is full of your creatures” was the subversive inscription on one of the plaques). I therefore devoted an hour of my radio show to this subject on the day the news item appeared, and asked my listeners (especially those who hear me on KKNT in Phoenix and KVOI in Tucson) to send me an e-mail if they were prepared to join me on a march to the Grand Canyon. I also urged all my listeners to call the Park Service in Washington, D.C.
Breastfeeding
In 2003, Dennis Prager devoted two columns to breastfeeding: "The religious-like fervor for breast-feeding and loathing of bottle-feeding need to be explained. I acknowledge having no scientific basis on which to challenge the many scientific studies that point to the health benefits of breast-feeding -- such as fewer infant infections, fewer early allergies, getting the mother's antibodies, and so on. I do, however, believe that in a health-conscious home, these benefits are negligible."
Linda Gottfredson said that breastfeeding is the evolutionary norm and that not breastfeeding lowers intelligence.
Liberty
Feb. 1, 2011, Dennis wrote: "Through the use of public opprobrium, laws, and lawsuits, Americans today are less free than at any time since the abolition of slavery..."
Fascism
Tolerance, Health, and Fascism... if there is a real fascist threat to America, it comes from the left, whose appetite for state power is essentially unlimited.
I have never written that there is a threat of fascism in America. I always considered the idea overwrought. But now I believe there really is such a threat — and it will come draped not in an American flag, but in the name of tolerance and health...
We saw it in New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s call for a law limiting the amount of soda a person can order at one time.
In the name of health, people are banned from smoking outdoors, cigar stores are prohibited from allowing customers to smoke inside them, and, incredibly, California is about to ban electronic “cigarettes” as if they were real cigarettes, even though they contain no tobacco, nothing is burning, and they emit only water vapor.
In the name of health, some businesses, like the Bert Fish Medical Center in Florida and Kids II, Inc. (Baby Einstein, Disney Baby), do not hire those who smoke at home. In the name of health, for the first time in American history, what you do — legally — at home will be reason for companies’ not hiring or terminating employees.
Why Are Jews Liberal?
Lawrence Auster selected passages from a 2005 column by Dennis Prager:
* … Jews (outside of Israel) are indeed overwhelmingly liberal and disproportionately left of liberal as well.Auster wrote:
* Most Jews are frightened by anything that connotes right-wing—such as the words “right-wing” and “conservative.”
* Liberal Jews fear most religion. They identify religion—especially fundamentalist religion and especially Christianity—with anti-Semitism.
* Despite their secularism, Jews may be the most religious ethnic group in the world. The problem is that their religion is rarely Judaism; rather it is every “ism” of the Left. These include liberalism, socialism, feminism, Marxism and environmentalism. Jews involved in these movements believe in them with the same ideological fervor and same suspension of critical reason with which many religious people believe in their religion.
* The Jews’ religious fervor emanates from the origins of the Jewish people as a religious people elected by God to help guide humanity to a better future. Of course, the original intent was to bring humanity to ethical monotheism, God-based universal moral standards, not to secular liberalism or to feminism or to socialism. Leftist Jews have simply secularized their religious calling.
* Liberal Jews fear nationalism. The birth of nationalism in Europe planted the secular seeds of the Holocaust (religious seeds had been planted by some early and medieval Church teachings and reinforced by Martin Luther). European nationalists welcomed all national identities except the Jews’. That is a major reason so many Jews identify primarily as “world citizens”; they have contempt for nationalism and believe that strong national identities, even in America, will exclude them.
As Prager describes it, the overwhelming majority of Jews oppose, fear, and regard as evil everything that our society is based on: conservative values, free enterprise, religion, Christianity, even nationhood itself, and they are compelled to these anti-American views by what they see as their religion.Dennis Prager wrote Oct. 14, 2014:
One of the deepest disappointments in my life has been Jews’ opposition to wars against evil. I had always assumed that, as the victims of so much evil throughout history, and as heirs to the great moral teachings of the Bible and Judaism, Jews, of all people, would support fighting on behalf of victims of the greatest evils.Contrary to what Dennis Prager alleges, Judaism has been strangely silent about the need for Jews to lobby their non-Jewish host nations to fight wars against evil.Take fighting Communism, for example. Along with Nazism, Communism was the most genocidal movement in human history; it actually enslaved and murdered considerably more people than Nazism. Yet, most Jews didn’t support anti-Communism in general nor anti-Communist wars in particular. Even worse, Jews were disproportionately pro-Communist. In Stalin’s time, the Yiddish press was the most pro-Communist press in the Western world. And among those in the West who gave Stalin the secrets to the atomic bomb, nearly every one was a Jew.
How could that be? How could so many people who see themselves as bearers of a great moral legacy, or who simply see themselves as highly moral, have either been supportive of the greatest mass murder machine ever devised; or, as was more often the case, opposed fighting the greatest mass murder machine ever devised?
On what moral grounds did Jews oppose supplying the South Vietnamese government with arms to help save itself from being taken over by Communist North Vietnam? Most American Jews not only opposed fighting the Communist regime of North Vietnam, they even opposed merely supplying the South Vietnamese government with military hardware so that it could defend itself when, in violation of the 1973 Paris Peace Accords, North Vietnam attacked South Vietnam. And in those very same accords, America had promised to replace every South Vietnamese bullet and tank lost in defending itself.
After all, American Jews hadn’t opposed the Korean War, in which nearly 37,000 Americans and more than two million Koreans died. That war was a mirror of the Vietnam War. The southern half of the Korean peninsula — just like the southern half of Vietnam — was pro-West and anti-Communist; and the Communist North, backed by China and the Soviet Union, sought — in both Korea and Vietnam — to forcefully impose Communism on the south.
Nothing has changed today. Most American Jews vigorously supported President Barack Obama’s plan to remove all American troops from Iraq. The consequences, which everyone who opposed this plan knew would happen, were that Iraq would go from relative stability to mayhem and bloodbath. Why hasn’t this mattered to most American Jews?
The Most Controversial Thing Dennis Prager Ever Said
According to Wikipedia (taken April 6, 2010):
In mid-November 2006 it was reported that Keith Ellison, the first Muslim elected to the United States Congress (for Minnesota‘s 5th congressional district), “will take his oath of office with his hand upon the Koran, the Islamic holy book.”[1][2] In reaction to the news, conservative media pundit Dennis Prager criticized the decision in his November 28, 2006 column entitled “America, not Keith Ellison, decides what book a Congressman takes his oath on.”[3] The column attracted national attention from both Ellison and Prager supporters. Presented with the fact that all members of the House officially swear in (or affirm) en masse without the use of any religious text, and that such works are only used in ceremonial reenactments afterwards, Prager stated “that’s the whole point: it’s exactly because it’s ceremonial that it matters”.[4] In response to a wave of criticism, Prager released another column on the topic on December 5, 2006 entitled “A response to my many critics – and a solution”.[5]As of Nov. 8, 2013, the Wikipedia entry on this controversy is about 20 times as long as its entry on Dennis Prager.
Prager rescinds call for Ellison not to serve
Despite writing that Ellison wants to use “the Koran. He should not be allowed to do so …If you are incapable of taking an oath on that book [the Bible], don’t serve in Congress”,[3] in a telephone interview with the Associated Press, Mr Prager said he did not think Mr Ellison should be banned from serving. “I don’t think anything legal should be done about this.”[4] In an interview with USA Today’s Andrea Stone, Prager announced “that he’s going to keep pressing the issue, though he conceded that trying to ban Ellison from choosing to use a Qur’an ‘may well be’ unconstitutional. He’ll be writing and talking about this issue again”. Prager said “I’m not arguing legality. I’m arguing what you should do.”[33]Prager dismisses Tanakh Oaths
Prager’s Nov. 28, 2006 article claimed that “for all of American history, Jews elected to public office have taken their oath on the Bible, even though they do not believe in the New Testament”.[3] While for all of American history Jews elected to public office have indeed taken their oath on the Bible, several American members of Judaism elected to political office “have departed from the [Christian] Bible as well. Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle used the Tanakh when she took her oath in 2002, and Madeleine Kunin placed her hand on Jewish prayer books when she was sworn in as the first female governor of Vermont in 1985.”[21] In the Federal Congress Debbie Wasserman Schultz also used a Tanakh(see above), as did Ed Koch (D-NY) who served in the US House from 1969 to 1977.[34] Likewise, Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) who is now entering his seventeenth term of office, stated “he had never used a [Christian] Bible at his own swearing-in ceremonies.”[34]When asked about this Prager said these “Jewish officeholders who had insisted on the Hebrew Bible were “secularists” who didn’t believe what was in it anyway.”[33]When confronted on November 30, 2006 CNN’s Paula Zahn Now by Eugene Volokh with the fact that “[Associate] Justice [of the Supreme Court, Arthur] Goldberg used the Tanakh, the Jewish Bible.” Prager responded “Justice Goldberg used [the] Old Testament, which is part of the American Bible.” Volokh began to point out that the lack of New Testament in Goldberg’s Bible proved that Prager’s assertions were mistaken, but was cut off as the segment ran out of time.[28]In his Dec. 5, 2006 article Prager again acknowledged some Jews had used the Tanakh, “Even the vast majority of Jews elected to office have used a Bible containing both the Old and New Testaments, even though Jews do not regard the New Testament as part of their Bible. A tiny number of Jews have used only the Old Testament. As a religious Jew, I of course understand their decision, but I disagree with it.”[5]Prager calls on Ellison to bring Bible with Qur’an
In his December 5, 2006 column entitled “A response to my many critics – and a solution”, Prager’s solution in the title is for Ellison to swear on the Islamic Qur’an which he believes to be sacred along with the Christian Bible which he does not. Prager wrote “It is not I, but Keith Ellison, who has engaged in disuniting the country. He can still help reunite it by simply bringing both books to his ceremonial swearing-in. Had he originally announced that he would do that, I would have written a different column — filled with praise of him. And there would be a lot less cursing and anger in America.”[5] In a Dec. 7, 2006 interview Prager continued along these lines, saying “I’m afraid we are becoming a diverse, secular society without any roots, and this is symbolically an example of that. The Bible is the repository of our values, not the Constitution…and I’m asking him to honor that and include the Bible along with the Koran.”[37]As an example Prager has referenced the case in 1999 when “M. Osman Siddique, a Virginia businessman of Bangladeshi origin, used the Quran to take the oath when he became the U.S. ambassador to Fiji and three other Pacific nations: Nauru, Tonga and Tuvalu. He took the oath on the Bible and the Quran, with the Quran on top”.[38] Siddique was “the first Muslim to be appointed to represent the United States abroad as an Ambassador. Following his swearing-in ceremony, Siddique said he believed he was the first American ambassador of the Islamic faith to take the oath of office with his hand on the Holy Qur’an. The Christian Bible is traditionally used to swear in US officials and Siddique said his wife, Catherine Mary Siddique, provided one for the ceremony.”[39]Appearing on MSNBC with Tucker Carlson, Prager said “If he [Ellison] had the Koran and a Bible as one Muslim ambassador did about 10 years ago, I think it was the ambassador to the Fiji Islands, don‘t recall exactly, I wouldn‘t have ever written the column. …If he can‘t bring the Bible along with his Koran, that’s a statement that we ought to take seriously. …We should pressure him to doing the great thing to unify Americans and bring the Bible along with the Koran. That’s not exactly a terrible demand. It doesn’t in any way compromise his Islamic faith. It says that he is saying to the American people, look, I am part of you. I don’t want to demolish the tradition that has been unbroken since George Washington. I don’t think that’s too much to ask of Keith Ellison.”[25]Ellison did not denigrate the Bible and spoke of the influence both Catholicism and Islam had on his development saying “people draw strength and moral courage from a variety of religious traditions. Mine have come from both Catholicism and Islam. I was raised Catholic and later became a Muslim while attending Wayne State University. I am inspired by the Quran’s message of an encompassing divine love, and a deep faith guides my life every day.”[40]Prager’s Dec. 27, 2006 column
On December 27, 2006 Prager returned to the issue in a column called “The culture war is about the authority of a book”[49] Prager espoused that the root of the controversy was over people arguing if the Torah was inspired or not, “Does the person believe in the divinity and authority of the Five Books of Moses, the first five books of the Bible, known as the Torah? …What matters is not whether people believe in God but what text, if any, they believe to be divine. …a belief or lack of belief in the divinity of a book dating back over 2,500 years is at the center of the Culture War in America…it not only explains these divisions; it also explains the hatred that much of the Left has for Jewish, Protestant, Catholic and Mormon Bible-believers. For the Left, such beliefs are irrational, absurd and immoral. Which is exactly how most conservatives regard most leftist beliefs…This divide explains why the wrath of the Left has fallen on those of us who lament the exclusion of the Bible at a ceremonial swearing-in of an American congressman. The Left wants to see that book [the Torah] dethroned. And that, in a nutshell, is what the present civil war is about.”[49]Prager also listed beliefs he claimed were held by liberals, “leftist beliefs, such as: there is nothing inherently superior in a child being raised by a mother and father rather than by two fathers or two mothers; men and women are not basically different, but only socially influenced to be different; Marxism was scientific; that the Soviet Union was not an evil empire; it was immoral for Israel to bomb Saddam Hussein’s nuclear reactor; morality is relative to the individual or society; there is no moral judgment to be made about a woman aborting a healthy human fetus solely because she doesn’t want a baby at this time; material poverty, not moral poverty, causes violent crime, etc.”[49]It has been noted by many that Keith Ellison’s support of access to abortion and gay rights is at odds with the traditional interpretation of the Qur’an, “Chances are, if Muslims saw another candidate with Ellison’s stands on gay rights, abortion, and his suspiciously boiler plate platform on Israel, Iran, and the Middle East, they would not support him. Yet Ellison has the admiration of his Muslim constituents…the notoriety supersedes the reservations. Beyond this, Muslims in the west should realize that they are seeing the face of future generations take shape, generations that might adopt cultural and political values that aren’t necessarily the same as their forebearers or against Islam as they choose to practice it. Politically speaking, issues like equal rights for gays within a pluralistic society make sense when Muslims demand the same equal protection”.
In a column Dec. 5, 2006, Dennis wrote: “In addition, there was widespread coverage on left-wing blogs, which, with no exception I could find, distorted what I said, charging my column and me with, for example, racism (see below), when race plays no role at all in this issue or in my column. For the record, because I deem this a significant statement about most of the Left, I found virtually no left-wing blog that was not filled with obscenity-laced descriptions of me. Aside from the immaturity and loathing of higher civilization that such public use of curse words reveal, the fury and hate render the leftist charge that it is the Right that is hate-filled one of the most obvious expressions of psychological projection I have seen in my lifetime.”
Introduced before a speech at U.C. Berkeley May 5, 2008 as a “spirited controversialist,” Dennis said: “How many people at your age, I’m speaking to the students here, when somebody asks you what do you want to do when you graduate, you say, ‘I’d like to be a spirited controversialist.’ It’s not the sort of occupation one anticipates in life.
“I’ll never forget the former University of Judaism in Los Angeles, and currently the American Jewish University, had a number of years ago the following ad for its distinguished speaker series: ‘The University of Judaism is proud to present this year Nobel laureate and conscience of the Holocaust, Elie Wiesel, internationally renowned Jewish educator Yitz Greenberg and the controversial Dennis Prager.’"
In a speech Jan. 24, 2007, Dennis said: “It’s very rare that passion defeats reason when I speak. I’m very rational, I’m very calm. I was so passionate. Nobody had raised this issue. It was new to me too. I wrote sentences such as, ‘Keith Ellison should not be allowed to take his oath on the Koran.’ That was a mistaken sentence. I acknowledged it immediately. He is allowed to do whatever he wants. He can take his oath on the phone book. I totally understand that. My concern…has been…the place of the Bible in American life. If we don’t get our values from that book, where will we get our values from?”
On March 14, 2011, Dennis said: “I have refrained from saying anything critical of Congressman Ellison because of the article I wrote years ago when he was first sworn in and sworn in on a Koran, and I wanted him to swear on a Bible rather than a Koran. I think I made a mistake. My reasoning was sound. My values were sound. My upshot was not sound. I said it at the time and I say it again today.
“I actually apologized to him in the halls of Congress. We met up. I apologized. He not only accepted my apology very graciously, he told me his mother is a big fan of the show. She listens every day.”
Jan. 9, 2014, Dennis said: "I believe the best Islam ever will be created in the United States... I believe the best Christianity ever formed was in America... Judaism only didn't create as great a thing as was created here. Christianity alone didn't create as great a thing as was created here."
In a 2010 interview at Stephen S. Wise temple, Dennis said: “I got very close to the Muslim community. It was when they didn’t say a word about the slaughter of Israeli children in pizzerias [2000-2002] that we had a falling out. It was very painful to me. I went to the home of the leading Muslim in LA [Mahmoud Attoot (sp?), cardiac surgeon] and he came to my home. We got quite close and then nothing. I know they made the perfunctory statements against terror."
Dennis got no support from prominent Jews for his stand on Keith Ellison swearing on the Bible. It is impossible to imagine an Orthodox Jewish intellectual making Prager's argument that Keith Ellison should swear on America's Bible (the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament). Jews don't talk about "America's Bible" and rarely talk about "Judeo-Christian" anything. So when Dennis explains he doesn't have the temperament to be Orthodox (7/13/01), it reveals how many of his public positions are shaped by his feelings.
The Ellison incident also illustrates how Dennis Prager believes as much in Americanism as in Judaism, and that sometimes his Americanism trumps his Judaism, a religion that says nothing about which non-Jewish scripture a Muslim politician in American should swear upon when entering office.
Lawrence Auster wrote Dec. 5, 2006:
On one hand, like a conservative, he posits that America has a particular moral and religious culture. He says that the Judeo-Christian tradition is central to American life and must never be challenged. On the other hand, like a liberal, he insists on the totally non-discriminatory inclusion in this country of Muslims who obviously are going to challenge that culture. And when, as has inevitably happened, the Muslims do challenge it, Prager’s conservative side springs back into action and he denounces the Muslims for disrespecting the American tradition!Prager, quite rightly, wants America to be a particularist, “Judeo-Christian” society. Yet his liberal principles of equality and non-discrimination lead inevitably to the destruction of the religious and moral particularity that he prizes.
Islamo-Fascism
The Wikipedia entry on Islamo-Fascism noted: "In a 2016 lecture, American historian Paul Gottfried proposed that some strains of Islam could accurately be described as Islamist or Islamic terrorist but definitely not fascist, because he maintains that the only accurate use of Fascism is to describe the government of Italy under Mussolini from 1922 to 1938."First, the term is not anti-Muslim. One may object to the term on factual grounds, i.e., one may claim that there are no fascistic behaviors among people acting in the name of Islam -- but such a claim is a denial of the obvious.
So once one acknowledges the obvious, that there is fascistic behavior among a core of Muslims -- specifically, a cult of violence and the wanton use of physical force to impose an ideology on others -- the term "Islamo-Fascism" is entirely appropriate.
Second, the question then arises as to whether that term is anti-Muslim in that it besmirches the name of Islam and attempts to describe all Muslims as fascist. This objection, too, has a clear response.
The term no more implies all Muslims or Islam is fascistic than the term "German fascism" implied all Germans were fascists or "Italian fascism" or "Japanese fascism" implied that all Italians or all Japanese were fascists. Indeed, even religious groups have been labeled as fascist. During World War II, for example, Croatian Catholic fascists were called Catholic Fascists, and no one argued that the term was invalid because it purportedly labeled all Catholics or Catholicism fascist. When the left uses the term "American imperialism," are they implying that all Americans are imperialists? Then why does Islamo-Fascism label all Muslims?
Third, given the horrors being perpetrated by some Muslims in the name of Islam -- from the genocide currently being practiced by the Islamic Republic of Sudan, to the mass murders of innocents in Iraq, Israel, America, Britain, Bali, Thailand, the Philippines and elsewhere -- what term is more accurate than "Islamo-Fascism"? "Islamic totalitarianism"? "Jihadists"? "Bad Muslims"?
The left's organized crusade against Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week was simply the latest shame in the long and shameful history of the left's inability to confront those engaged in great evil -- like the left's ferocious opposition during the Cold War to labeling communism as "totalitarian" or "evil" and its nearly universal condemnation of President Ronald Reagan's description of the Soviet Union as an "evil empire."
That Muslim student groups and other Muslim organizations joined with the left in the ad hominem condemnation of Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week was most unfortunate. Many Muslims know well that there is indeed such a thing as Islamo-Fascism, and they should be the first to join in fighting it. It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists.
Paul Gottfried wrote Nov. 21, 2007:
Although I admit to having given my vote last fall to Rick Santorum in his unsuccessful campaign to hold on to his U.S. Senate seat, I have been appalled by his recent harping on the menace of “Islamofascism.” Santorum has lent himself to a largely neoconservative-funded campaign, headed by journalist David Horowitz and Washington lobbyist Frank Gaffney, to make us aware, in Horowitz’s words, that “Islamofascism is the greatest danger America has ever faced.”So pervasive is this danger that, according to Rick and his friends, they have had to organize on American college campuses a consciousness-raising-event, which started on Monday, called “Islamofascism Awareness Week.”
As a modern European historian, I am shocked by this silliness.
Fascism was a European movement of the interwar years, and one that came in a wide variety of forms. Almost all fascist movements were reactions to the spread of communism and to the threat that it posed to civil peace and existing property relations.
Most fascists took advantage of the weakness of liberal parliamentary institutions in their countries to draw support from a threatened middle class, and they sometimes (although not always) targeted as their enemies national minorities and particularly Jews.
Were it not for the Nazi variant of this once widespread central- and southern-European movement, no one would even recall the fascists, except as an historical footnote.
It was the viciousness and expansiveness of German Nazism, and Hitler’s particularly shocking brutality toward Jews, Poles and others whom he regarded as “subhuman, which has given the fascists a bad rap.
I doubt that Rick, David and New York celebrity Norman Podhoretz, who has just published an overwritten book on the subject, would be calling obnoxious Muslim fundamentalists a world “fascist” danger, were it not for the continued media and public preoccupation with Hitler’s crimes.
In today’s Europe, all self-important progressive forces call themselves “antifascist,” although it cannot be shown that what they oppose has anything to do with interwar European fascism.
If the public and the producers of the History Channel thought about the mass murders committed under communist tyrants as often as they do about Hitler’s killings, we would now be in the midst of “Islamocommunist Awareness Week.”
Needless to say, I would find such an event to be as ridiculous as what is now being scheduled in the name of American “antifascism.”
The problem with this misnaming of one’s enemies is that it creates inaccurate pictures of what is going on right now.
Bin Laden is not a stand-in for Benito Mussolini, or for Hitler. He is an international terrorist, who must be combated for the most part through coordinated police actions and the selective use of military forces...
More often than not, historical parallels, and particularly for people with obvious obsessions, are something we should not engage in.
Israel
In a 2006 essay, Dennis wrote about the Hamas landslide: "That is one reason why the Bush doctrine — we need to spread democracy everywhere possible, including, or even especially, in the Arab world — is so valid."
In a speech at U.C. Berkeley May 5, 2008, Dennis said: “I was not a pro-settlement person. I did not speak out much about it. When it was asked in a forum like this, I didn’t hesitate. I didn’t use my radio abilities to criticize Israel.”
“Here is why I don’t speak out against Israel. If Israel did something evil, that would be a different story… Baruch Goldstein. There I did speak out because that was evil. Beyond that, I’ve had this attitude, which I tell American Jews, if you want to get involved in Israeli policy making, make aliyah (move to Israel). It is not our children who are in the Israeli army. We do not take those buses that are blown up. I have supported every left-wing and every right-wing Israeli prime minister…
“My opinion is as important as when people ask me, if you were God, would you have made a mosquito? I’m not God, it is irrelevant what I would do. And I’m not Israeli.”
“I wish Israel would’ve built only a handful of settlements that were absolutely necessary for security or religious reasons.
“But I always have this question — why is it OK for one-quarter of the Israeli state to be Muslim but Palestine must be judenrein? If Muslims can live in the Jewish state, then Jews can live in the Muslim state.”
In a 2014 essay, John Mearsheimer pointed out that the United States had few if any strategic interests in the Middle East. "Israel is now so confident of its military superiority over its Arab neighbors that it is actually reducing its conventional forces."A Lawrence Auster reader wrote in 2007:
Prager, rightfully so, is very proud of Israel. Yet he denies everyone else what he readily assumes of Israel, namely, that its ethno-cultural makeup have something to do with its success and its very being. If five million non-Jews settled in Israel it would cease to be Israel, but somehow if five million Ugandans settled in Hungary it would still be Hungary? It has been said, correctly in my view, that if a Jewish state had been created in modern day Uganda it would be an economic success. Can one think of a state with 1) worse neighbors, or 2) scarcer natural resources than Israel?
This is something I have noticed among liberal Jews: a refusal to allow others to affirm what is celebrated in one’s own—distinctiveness.
Male Sexuality
In the Spring of 1999, Dennis gave a series of four lectures on male sexuality at the University of Judaism:
I talked to other guys and I realized I was in the normal range of perversion...
Jean Calvin was astonished to not find an explicit reference to fornication (sex between the unmarried) among the sexual prohibitions of the Hebrew Bible.The area of greatest divergence between Christianity and Judaism, aside from theology, is in sex. Fornication is mentioned repeatedly as a sin in the New Testament. It is not mentioned in the Old Testament.
In attitudes towards sex, we live in a Christian country. The dean of the Harvard Divinity School, on his computer was found pornographic images. It was so terrible that it was assumed he would have to resign. I suspect that if he were at Hebrew University, the Harvard of Israel, in a similar capacity, he would not have to resign. People would've said, it's none of our business.
In Israel, which is permeated more by Judaism than the United States, prostitution is largely legal. In the United States, it is not...
There are times when a woman would have to say no. There are things that a woman has a right to say, 'Honey, I love you but that is not something I can engage in.' On the other hand, it depends on what it is. A woman has a perfect right to say, 'I don't want to be urinated on.' If that's his thing. If it's her thing too, then it's beshert. They have met their divine partner.
If she says, 'Fellatio just grosses me out,' that's a problem. It should not gross you out to have oral sex...
I have read almost nothing intelligent on this subject [pornography]. It is so emotionally charged.
...Playboy is pornography. I subscribe. Is it softer than Juggs? Yes!
The levels [of pornography] are fascinating to understand the power and meaning of sex. One level was pubic hair. Pubic hair was a major moment when Playboy began to allow pubic hair. Female genitalia is the dividing point between hard and soft porn.
What is our aim with regard to men? Do we want to produce a man who doesn't lust except after his wife? That's the aim of traditional religion. That's the aim of women... I don't want to create men who only lust for their wife. That's a saintly ideal I don't hold for the real world. In Heaven, that's the way men are. I'd like to create a man who leads an upright life, an honorable man, who's responsible, good and faithful to his wife and to his family, and treats women as befits the treatment of fellow human beings made in God's image...
When it came to masturbation, my father said to me when I was nearing puberty, 'Dennis, I don't know if you're masturbating. I don't want to embarrass you. Let me just tell you, in my view it is morally equivalent to urinating.' That was the end of the discussion. We never discussed the issue again.
There's nobody in any religion who'd rather live in any of the societies that ban pornography than to live in this society. There's a direct correlation between the banning of pornography and other human freedoms. You can't pick and choose the freedoms you want to allow.
Family Life
After living 79 years of their lives in Brooklyn, Prager’s parents moved to Englewood, New Jersey (near Dennis’ brother Kenny) in 1997. Max got an hour almost every year on Prager’s radio show.
In a lecture on Deuteronomy (the 22nd, delivered in February of 2004), Dennis said: “I decided when my children were born, that I would never be too busy for them because I’m always too busy. There’s no time my children cannot come into the home office where I work and start talking to me. It doesn’t occur to them. I have never said, I can’t talk now.
“I have a theory that if you talk to your kids when they want to talk to you, they’ll talk to you when you want to talk to them.”
In March 2004, Dennis said: “It is valuable to my children that I have a special seat at the dinner table. We’re never at the dinner table at my house, it’s fairly academic but at least we are on the Sabbath. Whenever we are, that’s dad’s seat. Do you think I care about dad’s seat for me? For my ego?
“I ask that my kids the first time at the day we see each other, that they get up and give me a hug. I give them a hug too. I don’t stand there and wait for them to genuflect before me. I’d do that with my father when he’d walk in the room. I’d not just sit on the couch and say, hi dad.”
“I let my kids argue with me. Do you know how I know it’s OK? Because in the Torah, people argue with God. He finds its OK.”
“God never says, ‘Because I said so.’ Parents always say, ‘Because I said so.’ As a kid, I hated it because there were times they were wrong, which is inevitable. The number of times I’ve been wrong when arguing with my kids is the most humbling part of my life. When the six year old child turns out to be right is very hard to admit. I let my kids argue and sometimes they were right.”
Said Dennis in a 2001 lecture on Numbers 30-31, “Aaron always used to ask, ‘Who’s the boss?’ He was fixated when he was four who was the boss in the house.”
Said Dennis in a 1998 lecture on Exodus 25: “When my son [David] was eight years old, nine years old, he said, ‘Can I use a tape recorder on Shabbat?’ I said yeah, if you record Shabbat songs or Torah study, which ended the use of the tape recorder immediately. It became an academic issue. What he wanted to record was some popular stuff or to make jokes and hear himself talk.”
Said Dennis in a 2001 lecture on Numbers 27-29: “We allowed our youngest child to watch what we called Shabbat videos. If the subject was the Torah, he could watch the video. Electronics was not the issue, the content was. In my opinion, it worked well.
“We rarely go out Friday nights to home. One Friday night we went to a home that allowed television. He was about five, six years old. He came running over and said, ‘I can’t believe it. They’re watching secular television.’ He knew the difference between the holy and the secular thanks to a Shabbat ritual.”
Dennis said he found sports and cigars a great way to bond with his sons. (May 8, 2012)
"I'm not going to say, 'Let's sit and talk.' One of my sons [Aaron] would think something was so horribly wrong that I should get an MRI. Let's talk? But let's have a cigar. But let's going to a ballgame. Of course! Then you talk... My youngest son is in LA. We went to a dozen [LA Kings] hockey games. It's very very good for us." (May 23, 2012)
On Dec. 12, 2013, Dennis was asked if his wife appreciated how much he enjoyed hockey. "Only an unmarried man could ask that question," he said. "Does she appreciate? That is a joke. I'm choking."
I notice that women tend to fake all sorts of interest in her man's enthusiasms until they marry at which point her interest disappears and her contempt begins.
Dennis said in a 1995 lecture on Exodus 6:
My wife got very sad when one of our fish died, which was particularly funny as she had just had a tuna sandwich for lunch. I pointed out to her, ‘Fran, how sad can you get? You just had a tuna melt.’ She started laughing and crying at the same time. I realized why she had gotten sad over the death of one of our fish. We had unwisely named our fish. If you eat a sandwich and it was really a Jerry sandwich, you were having Jerry for lunch, you’d recoil. A tuna sandwich is not a problem.I vowed after I saw my wife’s reaction, we are no longer naming our fish. It’s a puffer, it’s a yellow tang, and that’s it. Just tonight, a yellow tang died. Nothing. Dennis, could you take that out? It’s ugly. There was no emotional connection because it was a yellow tang.
Dennis said in a 1995 lecture on Exodus 7: “I see people who don’t forgive non-malicious acts and then forgive terribly malicious acts. I see people who are angry at friends who forgot to show up one day for an appointment and they will carry a grudge for a year…
“Last night I was at this reception. I was with this assistant district attorney. She was asking about my having conducted the national anthem at the Hollywood Bowl with the LA Philharmonic.
“I said, the L.A. Times music reviewer had a comment. That while the rendition of the national anthem was well received by the crowd, he gesticulated too much.
“She said, which one wrote it? I said, I don’t have a clue. She said, ‘You don’t know who wrote a negative thing about you? I would remember it until the day I die. My husband is just like you. He doesn’t take these things personally.’ It’s an example of a male-female difference… It meant nothing to me. For example, it affects my wife much more than it does me when I am attacked. I’ll go home and have dinner and she is seething. ‘He should drop dead. He should have boils and frogs and blood.’ That’s the norm.”
No one in my family had ever divorced. I assumed that marriage was for life. So when my wife and I divorced after five years of marriage and three years after the birth of our son, my world caved in. I was a failure in my own eyes.I later remarried but confided to my wife, Fran, that I couldn’t shake the feeling that my family life had failed. She asked me what was wrong with our family now (which included her daughter from a previous marriage and my son). I had to admit that, aside from the pain of being with my son only half the time (my ex-wife and I shared custody), our family life was wonderful. “Then why don’t you celebrate it?” she asked.
That’s what I decided to do. But first I had to get rid of the image of a ‘perfect’ family.
In his July 1995 introduction to his collection of essays Think a Second Time, Prager wrote about his wife: “As for my life partner, my wife, Fran, ever word in this book reflects her wisdom. She has taught me so much – about courage, patience, authenticity, women and being a father – that I can date a significant part of my intellectual and emotional life as Before Fran and After Fran.”
While they were married, Fran called Prager’s show about once a year. Once she called to argue with Dennis about his taking out a muffin from an all-you-can-eat restaurant. Another time she publicly reprimanded him for chasing a dangerous driver. In the fall of 1999, she called to talk about David’s desire to be “the head of the house” when he marries.
On January 1, 1996, Fran and her daughter Anya appeared on Prager’s KABC show for an hour. A woman phoned in to get their reaction to Prager’s liberal stand on pornography. Fran offered an ambivalent response while Anya, in effect, said that Playboyp magazine was cool. Fran hated the 1997 movie Boogie Nights (about the porn industry), and an hour through asked Dennis if they could leave. He said no. On his radio show, Prager said he found the movie pointless.
Fran speculated that many of Prager’s filthy interests are a reaction to his yeshiva upbringing.
Regarding his child-raising philosophy, Dennis Prager said: “I drive them crazy on character. I only get angry if I see meanness, if I see a lie or something like that. And if they don’t get great grades, they don’t get great grades.
“I give up a lot of things to be with my children. There is one time in life where your children are aching to spend time with you. If you don’t then, then they won’t spend time when you ache to spend time with them later. When they say, ‘Daddy, watch,’ I get up from my comfortable chair and I do watch. I’m on a book tour now. I brought my whole family to the East Coast for the weekend to be with me. It’s the best investment… to be with your family.” (CSPAN 1996)
Said Dennis in 2010: “In my house, I didn’t care what grades you got. And it showed. I did care about whether or not you complained. You could not complain.”
In his lecture on Deut. 21:15, Dennis said: “Though I am totally modern in my approach to raising children, in the belief that they must have freedom, that they can not be my clone, that they must have autonomy, that they are allowed to argue with me. You’d be shocked at what a emancipated progressive liberal father I am, probably too much at times. Nevertheless, there must be a point where disobedience can not be tolerated. Even the child needs that. As much as love, a child needs guardrails.
“With one of our children, we’ve had a number of wayward and rebellious children in their time, they’ve turned out well, when I really did set the boundary and got angry and was firm, there was actual relief in the child’s face and demeanor after that. Phew, I won’t drown. The child with tantrums wants to be stopped from the tantrum.”
The Pragers lived in the Pico-Robertson neighborhood of West LA on Canfield Avenue (the home was later bought by Rabbi Steven Weil in 2000) until moving to Hidden Hills, in the San Fernando Valley, in June of 1997. Fran wanted country living and Dennis hoped it would help their marriage. I have no reason to believe that the move was Dennis's idea and it was likely one in a series of things he'd try to save his second marriage. The move came at the end of the first seven years of marriage when illusions about one partner have largely fallen away and the hard work begins.
After 1994, I rarely saw Fran at temple with Dennis.
Said Dennis in a 1998 lecture on Exodus 25: “I just got a bank loan. They asked for my race. I filled in other and wrote in Mesopatamian-American.”
“I’m one of the lucky ones who can change his mind,” Fran told the LA Times in February 1998. “I’m relentless in getting him to look at emotional issues in terms of what he’s feeling, not thinking. I think I’ve helped him get out of his head more and into his heart.”
Prager told the LA Times that he’s easy to live with. “I’m even-tempered. My wife doesn’t lose me to sports or drink. I’m kind to her, but I do have all the quintessential male attributes that drive women crazy, including not remembering every conversation, and not yearning, quite as much as wives do, to confront all emotional issues.
“At a dinner party, I’d rather talk to women. The men are either talking about politics, the economy or sports, which bores the daylights out of me. I’d rather talk about babies’ feeding habits. Women think that’s a put-down and I’m blown away by that. Why is what my baby likes less elevated than how the Lakers are doing?”
The most embarrassed that I’ve heard Prager become on a phone call to his radio show came in 1995, when a woman asked him what his chief vice was. He stammered out something about sex.
On December 12, 2012, Dennis spent an hour of his show asking if we are doing overweight women who want to marry any favors if all we do is tell them how great they look. Two-thirds through the show, Dennis said he would be glad when the hour was over. "That might be the only time I've said that."
"I was told regularly in my family that I was lazy. And it hurt. It also prompted me to work very hard. I asked myself, am I lazy? And in my inner being, I certainly am. So did those comments hurt? They did. Did they prompt me to act in a more responsible and better way? They did."
In the year 2000, David Prager graduated from Shalhevet. Dennis wrote June 1, 2004: “At my older son’s graduation from a religious Jewish high school a few years ago, every single man in the audience wore a jacket and tie and the women were similarly formally dressed.”
Said Dennis in a 1998 lecture on Exodus 28, “I am unhappy that both of my kids’ schools do not have uniforms.”
In a debate hosted by the Orthodox Union on Dec. 24, 2006, Dennis Prager said: “My oldest son [David], in a deep rebellion, has decided to become an Orthodox rabbi [which never happened].”
“My brother [Kenny], who is Orthodox, says to me, ‘I should’ve been Reform. Then my kids would be Orthodox.’”
David Prager married in 2006. Anya married in 2007.
May 15, 2023, Dennis said: "My son [David] has two of his own children and two step-children, his wife's children. Both he and his wife had children from before. The two daughters call him abba [Hebrew for father] though they have a daddy they're bonded to."
"[David] has a mother and father. She is married to another man. She's been with him for 25 years. When David had his first child, we obviously shared a grandchild. We asked, what do you want the grandchild to call you and what do I want the child to call me? She said, 'I want the child to call me grandma. And I would like my husband to be called grandpa.' And I thought that's logical, and I took another name, pappy."Dennis Prager’s kid, David Prager, has been working at PragerU as Chief Development Officer since January 2020. He previously served as President at PragerConnect for almost eight years since March 2012.Furthermore, The George Washington University graduate was associated with GrowltSmart Ltd as VP of Business Development for five years, from 2009 till March 2015.
Similarly, David also worked as a financial advisor at Morgan Stanley Smith Barney for a year in 2007 & served The Aleph Society in 2006.
Besides having an extensive & impressive resume, David Prager also has a beautiful marriage with his partner and has welcomed four kids together.
Sept. 26, 2022, Dennis said: "This is one of the great moments of my life. I was at a Prager U fundraiser in Grand Rapids, Michigan. My son David is the head of fundraising for Prager U. He's part of the brain trust at Prager U. I gave a talk and I mentioned this guy saying I was transparent. David then got up to talk and he said, 'What my dad did not tell you is the challenge of being raised by a trans parent.'"
"The better people know me, the more receptive they will be to my ideas."
In his 2007 lecture on Leviticus 3, Dennis said: “Just tonight I was speaking to my older son, who, bless him, wrote a commentary on the portion of the week read in synagogue and sends it out to his email list. I get a great deal of joy from that. In his latest one, he wrote sympathetically of the mystical tradition.
“I said, ‘Dave, you’re becoming a mystic.’ He said, ‘Yeah.'
“I am thinking here I am a rationalist non-Orthodox Jew and what is my oldest son? An Orthodox mystic.
“The trick for a parent is to say, ‘Wonderful!’ The sooner you learn to say wonderful, the happier you are, the happier they are, the happier the world is.”
In a May 2012 lecture, Dennis said: "There are people who love davening (prayer). My son [David], my father and my brother."
"The siddur (Jewish prayer book) wasn't given by God. The Torah was given by God."
In a 2005 lecture on Deut. 24:5, Dennis said: “I’m better known than most dads are. My kids will get when they say their name, ‘Are you related to Dennis Prager?’
“My sons are very funny. My oldest son has a more developed humor at 22 than my youngest son at 12. He’s working his way through this so he decided to answer someone in New York, ‘Dennis Prager? Yeah, he’s the third cousin on my mother’s side.’ And the guy said, ‘Cool!’
“A terrible example and this was done by a rabbi in a mid-Western city. He says, ‘Are you related to Dennis Prager?’ The rabbi took him for 20 minutes around the hall introducing him as Dennis Prager’s son. He didn’t even say ‘David.’ David had no identity. David was the son of someone. To me that is incomprehensible.”
May 14, 2010, Dennis said: “When you think you’ve had an impact on your own child, then you really think you have a point. People say often, what is it like to be Dennis Prager’s kid? If you ask my kids, I’m sure they’ll have a whole host of answers for that question. I have always said, the last people I think I will really influence are my own kids. They don’t see me as Dennis Prager. I’m dad.
“Yesterday I was talking to my oldest son. He was telling me, ‘You know you are so right.’ I was thinking, oh my God, really?
“It’s a cousin from his mom’s side, a young woman in her thirties who contracted cancer. He said, ‘Her attitude is so upbeat, dad, and you are so right that people who act in a positive way, they do so in spite of their circumstances and people who act depressed do so despite how good they have it in life.’”
In a lecture on Deut. 26 delivered around 2005, Dennis said: “I’m a father of three. I worry all the time [that my kids will find a good job]… The purpose of having children is to keep you humble. People have this vision that when I walk into my house, my kids say, ‘Dad, tell us about ethical monotheism.’ Not quite accurate.”
“When my kids had ambivalence about me, I said, ‘No prob. You just have to honor me.’”
“I was a fairly lenient parent,” said Dennis April 2, 2010. “There were two things, however, I had no tolerance for — meanness and complaining.”
“I can’t stand [the wearing of baseball caps backward]. While there are undoubtedly some kind and decent people who wear it backward, men specifically, I think it is a sign of childhood. I gave my kids until a certain age to wear and then banned it. There was an argument. There was objection that I didn’t know what I was talking about, but it worked. Not everything has worked. Boys have to willfully mature or they stay boys. There’s no higher appellation in life than ‘Be a man!’ The aspiration to be and act and dress like a man should be there.”
We are wrong when we tell our children that they cannot argue with us. In fact, because I try to formulate my views on life from the Bible, especially the Torah, I have been raising my children far differently than I otherwise would have.
My original inclination, as it is of most parents, was to regard arguing as a form of disrespect and insubordination. But early in my life as a father, something powerful struck me as I taught the Bible: I realized that Abraham and Moses both have prolonged arguments with God, and not only doesn’t God mind, He seems to welcome them.
Feb. 25, 2012, Dennis said to Adam Carolla: "My younger son is 19. He's a total slob, like every male I know. He finally moved out of the house last week. He's studying. He's got an apartment. He talked to me the other night about how he now vacuums every day, he takes off his shoes when he walks into his one-bedroom little apartment lest he dirty his apartment, does his laundry, uses soap in the shower. I said, wow, why are you doing all these things? And he said, because mom isn't there to do it."
Adam: "And possibly he's gay."
Second Divorce
February 6, 2023, Dennis said about his first two divorces: "In the first case, it was very mutual. In the second case... Husbands and wives should make love outside of the bedroom and have sex inside of the bedroom."
On his January 16, 2023 Youtube show, Dennis said: "I know I worked my tail off to make the second one work. For a long time. It was 17 years. I was up against an insoluble dilemma. She's the mother of my second child. She had been sexually abused by a relative as a child."
Julie: "Did she have issues in her previous marriage?"
Dennis: "I don't have the answer. I never posed the question to the ex-husband... The bad things came to fruition."
In 2004, Dennis cited personal reasons for not running for the Republican nomination for the US Senate. May 7, 2021, he told Jordan Peterson: "Here is a massive disadvantage for people who are conservative. I'll use myself as an example. I've been asked to run for office all of my public life. I once did file to run for senator from California and then I woke up sober, and I don't even drink. I'm more interested in influence than power."
Said Dennis April 15, 2011: “I never bought the idea [that we should cut the pay and benefits of politicians]. We are only going to have millionaires run for office if we do that. It sounds sweet and meaningful and it is utterly destructive. Every law passed to ban further income for politicians means that more millionaires and billionaires will run for office. The only thing these reforms have accomplished is that we have the largest percentage of the super wealthy in the U.S. Senate.
“I considered very seriously running for the U.S. Senate [in 2004]. I am not rich. It makes it virtually impossible. You have to be a household name like Arnold Schwarzenegger to come in and he was super-rich.
“This is the thinking I excoriate every day. Ask what does good, not what feels good.”
Said Dennis in a February 2009 lecture on Feelings: Key to the Liberal Mind: “I was gonna run for the U.S. Senate against Barbara Boxer. I don’t know that I should’ve. I think I touch more people through radio. That’s what I ultimately decided. As a senator, there’s one advantage — if you can get to the Senate, you can get to the presidency, but I don’t think that I’ll be president.
“I met with one of the highest ranking Republicans at his office [Arnold Steinberg?] in Beverly Hills and he didn’t know who I was. I don’t take it personally. It’s impossible to offend me. I wasn’t offended. I just thought, how could someone be so high up in the Republican party and never have heard of a man who had been on talk radio in his own city for 20 years? They are so out of it in the Republican party.”
“We do need an articulate charismatic spokesman. The press of course will eat up anyone who does this. I flirt with running all the time, with throwing my hat in the ring. I know I’m articulate. I know how to speak to people. I’ve had a lot of practice in this but I know among other things what the press would do to me. Talk about a track record. They would get all the recordings from 26 years in radio. They would isolate 17 different clips to show me to be every evil thing possible.”
Dennis announced his divorce on his radio show Dec. 30, 2005. His second marriage had been unraveling for years.
“You can ask my wife,” said Dennis Dec. 13, 2010. “The pain that I have had in my life I have always viewed as a possibility of bringing more insights to people to help their life. Since I do have a microphone and I do write, I do have the ability to talk to more people than most people do. I’ve wanted to use whatever I’ve gathered from pain to help others.”
In an interview of author John Gray (circa 2005), Prager agreed with the comment that husbands appreciate their wives much more than wives appreciate their husbands.
In a 1996 lecture on Exodus 20, Dennis said: “My wife often says, ‘How did you unravel that conversation? This person was totally convoluted and then you explain it like it was a road map.’ If your wife compliments you, it is a good sign. It’s not like I come home every day and hear that I’m the greatest thing in the world. It’s not a daily occurrence.”
In a 2004 lecture on Deut: 8, Dennis Prager said: “Love is a manic state… You’re taken over. Now, you can’t preserve a manic state or you’d go nuts but you can create feelings of love by doing things… I remember one bachelor who said to me, ‘What do you mean marriage is an effort? Who wants to work at marriage? I work all day at the office. I want to come home and stop working.’ So of course he got married and later divorced. I guess he didn’t want to continue working when he got home.”
Jul. 13, 2011, Dennis said that a male caller’s need for 2.5 sexual encounters a week with his wife “was a good number.”
Dennis opposed gossip. He doesn’t want journalists scraping through his life — or any life — looking for scandal. He’s said on the radio that he doesn’t have anything shocking in his past that he needs to hide.
Jul. 5, 2011, Dennis said: “There is not one of you, not the most angelic person listening to this show, about whom if enough were known, I could not write a history of you, a biography of you, that would make you look terrible. There is no such human, from Moses to you. You have some beloved aunt or uncle who’s like an angel, I swear to you that if enough were known, a biography could be written about them to make them look despicable. That’s what the left has done to America.”
On June 29, 2004, Dennis Prager wrote:
You can now add former Illinois Republican Senate candidate Jack Ryan to the list of those gratuitously humiliated by the news media. For no good reason, the Chicago Tribune and WLS-TV petitioned to have the divorce proceedings of Jack and Jeri Ryan released and published. In it we learned that Jeri had accused her ex-husband of wanting to take her to sex clubs on three occasions to have sex in front of other people.When it came to Senator Edward Kennedy, however, Dennis Prager wrote July 30, 2013:I happen to oppose having sexual intercourse in front of others. But I don’t want to know what Jack Ryan sought to do with his wife. It is none of my business, oh gods of media, and none of yours. And I especially don’t want his 9-year-old son to know.
But for the Tribune and WLS-TV, it was too good a story. They hid behind the excuse that it is the “public’s right to know.” But this is self-serving and hypocritical nonsense.
If the public needs to know about the sexual desires (desires, not even practices) of a senatorial candidate, it also needs to know the sexual desires of the men and women who run the Chicago Tribune and WLS-TV.
Consider the example of the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy. He had been expelled from college for paying someone to take his exams. His role in the death of a woman with whom he spent an evening would have sent almost anyone without his family name to prison -- or would have at least resulted in prosecution for negligent homicide. And he spent decades using so many women in so public a way that stories about his sex life were routinely told in Washington. Read the 9,000-word 1990 article in GQ by Michael Kelly, who a few years later became the editor of the New Republic...On Nov. 12, 2013, Dennis wrote: "Bill Clinton who regularly used his positions of power to take advantage of women."And liberal positions were all that mattered to the left and to the liberal media that largely ignored such lecherous behavior as the "waitress sandwich" he made in a Washington, D.C. restaurant with another prominent liberal, former Senator Chris Dodd.
When Dennis used his public speaking to meet women, was that using "his positions of power to take advantage of women"?
Max Prager wrote in September 2004:
Although our other son Dennis lives 3000 miles from us, he phones us several times during the week inquiring as to our health and what’s going on in our lives. His wife, Fran, never neglects to e-mail us with info regarding their lives and what is going on with Anya and Aaron, their children. David, Dennis’s son by a previous marriage has given us joy since he was born.Dennis Prager wrote April 12, 2005:…Dennis as well has given us a great deal of joy and pride in his many accomplishments. Listening to him on the radio for three hours 5 days a week when he broadcasts nationally over close to 70 cities, reading his weekly articles on “World Net Daily” and “Town Hall”, listening to his many tapes of his lectures given throughout the world, viewing him on the most popular TV news shows and, last but not least, emceeing the 7 hour annual Chabad telethon gives his parents nachas (joy and pride).
One of the most frequently offered arguments by proponents of same-sex marriage is that it is not gays wanting to marry a member of the same sex that threatens the institution of marriage, it is the high divorce rate among heterosexuals.Fran Prager filed a petition for divorce (BD431230) on August 11, 2005.…It is simplistic to maintain that the one criterion of success or failure in marriage is permanence. There are marriages that provided years of comfort to a couple and a fine home to their children that eventually end; and there are permanent marriages that have provided neither comfort to the couple nor a loving environment for their children. If the end of something renders it a failure, every one of our lives is a failure, since they all come to an end.
Finally, marriage is threatened not by divorce, but by people not marrying in the first place — as is increasingly the case in the two European societies that have redefined marriage to include couples of the same sex. Our present high divorce rate is not stopping the vast majority of Americans from wanting to marry. Nor should it. Nothing provides the antidote to narcissism, or the environment for the healthy raising of children, or the way for people to take care of one another, as does the marriage of a man and a woman. And while most divorces are terribly sad, divorce itself no more undermines the institution of marriage than car crashes undermine the institution of driving. In fact, the vast majority of people who do divorce deeply wish to marry again; painful divorce has not undermined marriage even among those who have divorced.
Dennis did not mention this on air for more than four months.
Sept. 28, 2012, Dennis said to a caller: "If your wife leaves you and your little kids and you loved her, that's going to create a hole, but I tend to think that holes that are made in adulthood are really in most cases widening holes that we've had from childhood. That's been the case in my life."
On Dec. 6, 2005, Dennis wrote the first of two columns entitled "If You’re Thinking Of Marrying":
1. Is the person your best friend or at least becoming so?Dennis wrote Dec. 13, 2005:2. Aside from sex, do you enjoy each other?
3. Is there chemistry between the two of you?
4. Does the person have a number of good friends and at least one very close friend of the same sex?
5. How does the person treat others?
6. What problems do the two of you now have? And what inner voice of doubt, if any, are you suppressing?During the second hour of his show Dec. 30, 2005, Dennis read an announcement through his tears that he was getting divorced.7. How often do you fight?
8. Do you share values?
9. Do you miss the person when you are not together?
10. Is the person unhappy?
11. How much of your love is dependent on the sex you are having?
12. What do people you respect think of the person you’re considering marrying?
He said he did not regard the marriage as a failure. They had many good years together and they raised good kids.
He said they had tried for years to work out their problems. They had gone to therapy.
Dennis said that he was worried that his listeners would take his moral teachings less seriously because of his divorce.
After telling his kids about the divorce, Dennis said his next priority was to tell his listeners.
“I received after that announcement 800 emails within a day, 799 of which were something like, I can’t believe this, Dennis, but I had tears in my eyes. I just stopped my car for a minute and took a breather. I felt like my father was telling me he was divorcing mom.
“I was stunned. I had no expectation, but I learned… that people were relating to Dennis as much as they were relating to what I was saying.” (2008 lecture on 25 years in broadcasting)
“That’s a very tough phrase, by the way, ‘Better to have loved and lost than never to have loved,’” said Dennis Prager July 10, 2009. “It’s a tough one. I have believed that. I think it’s true, but it’s a toughie.”
When it comes to love and marriage, Dennis believes he's the victim of bad luck. Jan. 5, 2010, Dennis said: “Let me give you a realization I came to about life that I did not know 20 years ago. The role of luck in good marriage. I am now convinced that the vast majority of long-term good marriages are good because they’re lucky that they found the right person for them. Period. End of issue.
“Had you asked me this 30 years ago, I would’ve said, shared values and a lot of noble-sounding things. People who worked hard on their marriage.
“I look at my parents who had 69 years of marriage. And they would be the first to tell you that they had a great marriage…because they were unbelievably lucky. They met the right person for themselves. People in happy marriages should be very humble about judging people who are less happy or are in divorce situations.”
Dennis wrote in 2011: "[I]ssues related to others' marriages, divorces, and infidelities are too complex an arena for outsiders to draw immediate conclusions about a person."
Yet we do because real life teaches us that a person who stays married to a spouse and stays faithful, is more likely to be a solid person than someone who can't stay married. We also suspect that the teachings of a person who's never divorced are more likely to be solid than the teachings of someone who's had multiple divorces.
In his first lecture on Numbers (circa 2006), Dennis said: “Marriage forces you to confront yourself.”
Dennis: “It’s disgusting to make these blanket condemnations of everyone who’s divorced as if they are lazy slobs who woke up one day and said, ‘I think I’ll move on here. Seventeen years, big deal. I want a more exciting life.’
“I don’t know anyone who’s divorced who didn’t go through hell, went through counseling, went through trying, went through crying.” (Nov. 22, 2010)
In the April 3, 2008 roast, nobody mentioned Prager's divorces.
Marital Obligations
If a wife loves her husband, she shouldn’t let her mood always determine whether or not she has sex with him, Dennis Prager argued in two columns at the end of 2008.
It is an axiom of contemporary marital life that if a wife is not in the mood, she need not have sex with her husband. Here are some arguments why a woman who loves her husband might want to rethink this axiom.
First, women need to recognize how a man understands a wife’s refusal to have sex with him: A husband knows that his wife loves him first and foremost by her willingness to give her body to him.
…A man whose wife frequently denies him sex will first be hurt, then sad, then angry, then quiet. And most men will never tell their wives why they have become quiet and distant. They are afraid to tell their wives. They are often made to feel ashamed of their male sexual nature, and they are humiliated (indeed emasculated) by feeling that they are reduced to having to beg for sex.
In Part I, I made the argument that any woman who is married to a good man and who wants a happy marriage ought to consent to at least some form of sexual relations as much as possible....Mar. 21, 2014, Dennis said: "When that couple where now she would like any form of sexual relations once or twice a month, when they were newlyweds or even dating, was it once or twice a month? Wasn't that change unfair? Isn't that a misleading thing? He has a normal sex drive and the rules are changed on him early in the marriage?"That solution is for a wife who loves her husband — if she doesn’t love him, mood is not the problem — to be guided by her mind, not her mood, in deciding whether to deny her husband sex.
If her husband is a decent man — if he is not, nothing written here applies — a woman will be rewarded many times over outside the bedroom (and if her man is smart, inside the bedroom as well) with a happy, open, grateful, loving, and faithful husband. That is a prospect that should get any rational woman into the mood more often.
"If she could say to him, we're really having some form of sexual contact here regularly but I just want you to know that in ten years it will be once or twice a month, I think he should be told in advance, just like if he's attentive early on but in ten years, he prefers watching TV to attending to her, he should say that early on."
Lack of sex in a marriage is often a symptom of trouble, not just a cause. If a couple came to a therapist asking, "Why aren't we having more sex?", they'd hear points such as:
* Let us help you hear the perspective of the other person.
* Distance in the marriage can cause grave issues in sex. If you're a workaholic, if you don't spend much time with your spouse, she's not likely to want sex with you. If she wants to connect and you want to work, that creates distance between a couple. Women want to feel important and they need an emotional connection to have sex. They're not going to want to give to you if they don't feel close to you. If someone is poking you, who wants to have sex with a porcupine?
* If a spouse doesn't feel like they have much power, if they don't feel like they have an equal say, they might use denial of sex as a weapon.
* Most men are counter-dependent (fine as long as they get laid and paid, notes therapist Mark E. Smith) and many men and women are co-dependent (needy and insecure). This is not a combination that leads to lasting passion.
* Is there anything you're doing to make yourself less desirable to your spouse and to make your spouse feel unsafe in pursuing you?
* Our emotions are entangled and this can make sex feel unsafe. Until a woman feels safe, nothing good is going to happen.
* What was the model of marriage you grew up with?
A Steve Sailer reader emailed him: "I think that most men are secretly (or openly) afraid that women don't like sex and only view it as a bargaining chip to get what they want out of males (companionship, emotional and physical support, or babies). Women are afraid that men only want them for sex and thus view emotional support of females mainly as a chore that they perform in order to get sex, or in order to have her give him children."
The 12-step group Sex and Love Addicts Anonymous posts 40 questions for self-diagnosis, including:
* Do you feel that you don’t want anyone to know about your sexual or romantic activities?In her book, The Female Brain, Dr. Louann Brizendine wrote about a husband's frustrated desire for sex with his wife: "It's just like what happens with a woman and verbal communication. If her partner stops talking to her or responding emotionally, she thinks that he disapproves of her, that she's done something wrong, or that he doesn't love her anymore. She'll panic that she's losing him. She may even think he's having an affair." (Pg. 92-93)
* Do you feel you need to hide these activities from others—friends, family, co-workers, counselors, etc.?* Do you get “high” from sex and/or romance? Do you crash?
* Do you believe that sex and/or a relationship will make your life bearable?
* Have you ever felt that you had to have sex?
* Do you feel desperation or uneasiness when you are away from your lover or sexual partner?
* Do you feel desperate about your need for a lover, sexual fix, or future mate?
* Do you feel that you’re not “really alive” unless you are with your sexual/romantic partner?
* Do you feel entitled to sex?
* Do you believe that the problems in your “love life” result from not having enough of, or the right kind of sex?
* Do you feel that life would have no meaning without a love relationship or without sex? Do you feel that you would have no identity if you were not someone’s lover?
* Do you have sex and/or “relationships” to try to deal with, or escape from life’s problems?
* Do you find yourself needing greater and greater variety and energy in your sexual or romantic activities just to achieve an “acceptable” level of physical and emotional relief?
* Do you need to have sex, or “fall in love” in order to feel like a “real man” or a “real woman”?
* Are you unable to concentrate on other areas of your life because of thoughts or feelings you are having about another person or about sex?
* Do you feel that your life is unmanageable because of your sexual and/or romantic behavior or your excessive dependency needs?
* Have you ever thought that there might be more you could do with your life if you were not so driven by sexual and romantic pursuits?
Dec. 2, 2010, Dennis Prager said: “A man needs most from a woman in a relationship is to be admired.
“The reason the denial of sex is so terrible to a man is not primarily the biological deprivation, but he translates it in his mind as a lack of taking him seriously, a lack of admiration and love.
“There is really only one thing that can not be overcome by most men in a marriage — being held in contempt by his wife.”
“My father was married to my mother for 69 years, 73 years together. Always, it was a sort of mantra that my father would say, ‘Your mother puts me on a pedestal. That’s what every woman needs to do for her man.’”
Apr. 20, 2011, Dennis said: “I look at troubles I have had as I now have more good things I can tell the public.”
Sept. 15, 2010, Dennis Prager’s favorite expert on male-female relations, Alison Armstrong, told Dennis: “You don’t understand women and you think you do. I knew it the first time I was on your show and I wouldn’t say it. You said you thought women didn’t want sex as much as men because they don’t focus on it. I knew then that you didn’t understand women because of your idea that women focus period. Women don’t focus.”
La Canada Flintridge
In 2006, following his second divorce, Dennis Prager bought a home in La Cañada Flintridge.
"Shortly after his arrival in La Cañada Flintridge, Prager initiated local celebrations of Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur in 2008 and 2009 at the La Cañada Flintridge Country Club. The event attracted hundreds, but very few of them locals, he said, and was moved west last year to Studio City.”
“I call this place Norman Rockwell-ville. This is a beautiful slice of America, that’s why. First of all, I like the way people treat each other. It has the very best small town feel. I like that a lot of times people know each other. I like the kids who work at Penguin’s yogurt, and I like the celebrations of July 4 and Memorial Day. There’s a lot to like here. It’s a decent place. A nice mixture of backgrounds. I live in a cul de sac, and one neighbor’s parents came from Syria, another came from Korea, and I’m Mr. Jew. We get along great.” (La Canada Online, Dec. 14, 2010)
May 16, 2012, Dennis said: "I've never understood the relationship between divorce and leading a war against marriage. I consider a divorce to be a tragedy and to be like a car crash. People who have car crashes have not decided to change the definition of a car. There are two people who are changing marriage. Those who don't marry. The singles. People like the new president of France who simply has a girlfriend of many years. That's a war against traditional marriage because you didn't marry. To marry and remarry does not mean you are against traditional marriage. It means your marriages didn't work."
On May 16, 2012, Conor Friedesdorf of The Atlantic asked Dennis: "Do you think that no-fault divorce, the state redefining marriage as not something 'to death do us part' but can be exited relatively easily, do you think that is a more radical change than gay marriage?
Dennis: "There's no comparison. First of all, 'to death do us part' is unique to parts of the Christian ceremony in modern history. As Jew who's been married, I can tell you there's no such thing as that in the Jewish wedding ceremony and Judaism predates Christianity by 1300 years. There has never been a Jewish marriage with the words or the implication, 'to death do us part.' Divorce was always allowed and you didn't have to find fault with the other person to divorce and Jewish family life was known for being stable.""Ask the most conservative anti-divorce person, do you think there is a bigger change between same-sex marriage and no-fault divorce, and I can't imagine one saying no-fault divorce."
On BookTV April 21, 2013, Elizabeth asks Dennis: "On a personal level, what has been the hardest challenge in your life?"
Dennis: "Divorce after 17 years was a terribly painful thing. You build hopes. You have dreams. You have a child. It's all very painful. I don't think there is a close second to that. I had every dream of a picket fence."
Third Marriage
From PragerRadio.com, on Jan. 5, 2009:
Dennis and Sue were married December 31 by Rabbi Michael Gotlieb at his synagogue, Kehillat Ma’arav, in Santa Monica, California.The former Susan Reed [her mom is a psychiatrist], known to all as Sue, was raised in the Los Angeles area, graduated from Occidental College, obtained her law degree from Loyola Law School and was admitted to the California Bar in November 1994. After a half-year practicing business transaction law, Sue left her career to be a full-time mother to her two boys, one of whom is autistic, and shortly thereafter also to raise her two nieces after the death of their mother, Sue’s 35 year-old sister, Cyndi, [died] from cancer.
Sue met Dennis at a speech he gave for the Jewish organization Chabad in San Diego, where she lived until 2008 when she moved to Los Angeles.
Dennis Prager wrote on his website:
As many listeners and my friends and family know, my divorce after 19 years with Fran was a very painful period of my life. Happily, Fran and I remain friends and share the raising of our son, Aaron.Many people advised me against marrying again. After all, they argued, I had no plans to have more children. And we live in a society that hardly demands marriage, let alone the remarriage of middle aged individuals. More than a few men additionally argued that I would come to value my “freedom.”
To be honest, I understood these arguments, but I believe that marriage is the greatest of all social institutions; I happen to agree with God who said in Genesis, “It is not good for man to be alone.”Nevertheless, with all my belief in marriage, I would not likely be getting married at this time were it not for Sue, whose goodness, love, intelligence, and emotional stability have been a blessing to me and to all those who know her.
Through all that I have experienced, I believe I can fairly say that I have learned a great deal about men, women, and marriage. It is one reason I began the “Male-Female Hour” to help others in relating to the other sex and in their marriages.
Over time, I hope many of you will get a chance to meet Sue.
I thank all of you who have shown me such warm and loving support over these past few years. You have no idea how much that has meant to me.
From ECelebrityMirror.com June 17, 2021:
Susan is available on Facebook name, Susan Springett Reed Prager. Her profile picture is a cute little pup which seems to be an English Mastiff pup. Likewise, Susan has no public photos uploaded, but she did mention her academics... Susan, graduated from Loyola Law School in Los Angeles. She further mentioned her major at Occidental College as political science.Sue...was raised in the Los Angeles area. She graduated from Occidental College with a major in Political Science and got her law degree from Loyola Law School. She was later admitted to the California Bar in late 1994. Moreover, after a half-year practicing business transaction law, Dennis Prager’s spouse left her career as a full-time mother of two boys...
The Prager couple first met at a speech Dennis gave at the Jewish organization Chabad in San Diego. Sue, aka Susan, used to live in the area until she moved to LA...
The pair exchanged vows on 31 December 2008 in an intimate ceremony.... Sue’s [non-autistic] son attended LA Canada High back in 2010...
Sue also raised her two nieces after the death of Sue’s 35-y/o sister Cyndi from cancer.
La Cañada Flintridge “is the childhood home of his wife Susan (who as Susan Springett graduated from La Cañada High School, which her son from a previous marriage now attends).”
Dennis met Sue (who came from an evangelical Christian home) in 2004. With a female friend acting as her cheerleader, Sue came up to him after a speech he gave in San Diego and the mutual attraction was immediate. "It took me two minutes to figure out that this was the woman I should be with," said Dennis October 11, 2022.
Dennis drove home, presumably to his wife Fran, and got an email from Sue and their relationship began.
December 12, 2022, on his Youtube show with Julie Hartman, Dennis said: "I talked about this with Jordan Peterson. Here I am 21 years old, and I am being sent to places to give lectures. Generally, it is lecture and Q&A. Everyone assumes the lecturer goes home after Q&A. People would line up to ask me more questions... I said to myself, who am I to leave? I am younger than all of these people. I've done it the rest of my life. That's how I met Sue. She was the last one in line to ask a question."
May 13, 2014, Dennis said: "I have the Susan diet. It's named after my wife. I've adopted it and it's been very good for me. Eat whatever you want, just eat little of it. I even adopted her method of doing that. We've known each other ten years. I adopted this after year two. I have not had a whole desert in about seven years. The way to do that is to adopt her, I never saw it in practice before her, if you give her a piece of candy, it will last about 20 minutes. I watched her do this. It's almost scalpel like, the tiny piece. It works because the taste buds do not know quantity. There's nothing more pleasurable about a giant piece of cake than a tiny sliver of cake so if you keep eating slivers, you'll reach half and you'll feel like you've had a whole piece."
In January 2010, I received emails from educator Deanna Bregman. She said she was Fran Prager's best friend. She said she had lived with Dennis and Fran. She said that Dennis had a relationship with Sue while still married to Fran. She complained to me: "You painted a pretty picture [of Sue]."
Sue is 15 years younger than Dennis. She is a convert to Conservative Judaism. On page 392 of his book Still the Best Hope, Dennis thanked "Rabbi Michael's overseeing Sue's studying of Judaism." This is the same rabbi who conducted their wedding.
On the next page, Dennis wrote: "Regarding Sue, words fail this professional communicator in describing the immensity of the role she plays in my intellectual life, not to mention the rest of my life. She is a sort of secret weapon during every one of my radio shows, as we instant-message (IM) one another while I broadcast. Ronald Reagan was quoted as having said that it all it took for him to feel lonely was for Nancy to leave the room. I know what he meant."Dennis wrote: "Why must we regard inter-dating as inevitably the abandonment by the Jew of his or her Jewish identity instead of the non-Jew coming to Judaism and the Jewish people?"
Jan. 6, 2010, Dennis said: “I am prepared to say, and I don’t think it compromises my male persona, that I don’t like going to bed alone. I think one of the great perks of marriage is precisely those moments. And I am not talking sex.”
A review of Dennis Prager's Feb. 25, 2012 public dialogue with Adam Carolla says: "We learn that Prager’s wife can only fall asleep if what he calls “the Hitler Channel” [the Military Channel] is on in the background."Jan. 27, 2014, Dennis said: "I watch the ID channel. It's my wife's way of falling asleep. A couple of homicides and you doze off. I can't avoid it. We share a bed."
April 9, 2010, Dennis listed his wife’s little joys in life — “books, coffee, dogs, walks, planting, ’70s music, choral music.”
At Stephen S. Wise temple in 2010, Rabbi David Woznica asked Dennis: “What is the greatest consistent source of joy in your life?”
Dennis thought for a second and a little sheepishly, said, “OK. My wife.”
Oct. 21, 2010, Dennis talked about a conversation he had with a man on a plane: “I told him that my wife doesn’t complain and never yells at me. He said, ‘Were her vocal chords removed?’”
Nov. 10, 2010, Dennis said: “My wife will have me check out some women.”
Dec. 28, 2010, Dennis said: “I get enough disagreement outside of my house. Inside my house, I really like harmony. The more you agree on [as a couple], the better. When you step outside the house, you can take on the world. Inside the house, you don’t want to take on your spouse.”
From Prager’s show March 16, 2011:
Dennis: “You are the wife. You are doing work in the kitchen, washing dishes or in the garden gardening. There are no kids around. Your husband stops by to say something and he grabs your tush. Are you offended? Are you pleased?”
“The politically correct answer is that this is unwanted. That it is a form of marital sexual harassment.”
“When the couple loves one another, I hold that that is a good thing. I know that it is the last thing on the woman’s mind. So what? The more your husband who loves you wants to grab you, the better it is for both of you.”
“If your husband is still doing this after ten years of marriage, I think the two of you are blessed.”
“I have this line and I will use it while in the car with my wife. It’s one of the fun sayings of marriage. ‘Honey, the last thing on your mind is the first thing on my mind.’
“That is as true as it gets in the sexual realm most of the time in a marriage.”
Mike calls: “This issue should come up only once in a marriage. Each spouse tells the other when it happens that they like it or they don’t like it. And it would never come up again.”
Dennis: “We disagree. My whole point is that if they have decided he shouldn’t do it, they should rethink the decision.”
Mike: “If it hurts somebody for any reason…”
Dennis: “We are hurt because we decided to be hurt. Because the mind decides to be hurt. Why would a woman be hurt if the husband she loves grabs her?”
Mike: “Why is anyone uncomfortable about anything?”
Dennis: “Just as I want men to rethink a lot of things they do, I want women to rethink too. If the subject was just to do what is comfortable, I would do another hour here. I don’t think we should be guided by feelings only.”
“The response, ‘Can’t you see I’m busy?’ would have a terribly deflating effect on most men.”
“Our screener, married for 25 years, IMs me that her husband can grab away, but he may not whistle at her to get her attention.”
“If every woman thought this was a great thing, I wouldn’t have this subject this hour. The spirit of our times is that a man doesn’t do that. He asks permission first.”
A wife calls from Phoenix. “I was loading the dishwasher last night and my husband said, ‘Could you do that again? Could you put something else in there?’”
Dennis: “Why would we deprive our wife or our husband of so much joy when the price to us is so minimal?”
“I don’t advocate this as a prelude to immediately engaging in sexual intercourse. I’m advocating that this grab be accepted for what it is — the playful sexual grab of a loving husband.”
A male caller says about his first wife who repelled his advances: “Playful touching was not welcomed. I think it had a lot to do with the eventual failure of that marriage. Some of the things that went on inside my head: ‘I felt less than, less than her. I felt that at some level I must disgust her. You internalize that and you get depressed. What I thought was an expression of love and my natural way of being was somehow wrong and repellent in her eyes.”
Dennis: “If he never sees you as a piece of meat, it’s a platonic relationship of roommates.”
“Another man is calling in to say that grabs are OK, but maybe you should also rub the shoulders and think about what she wants.
“Guys, grabbing your wife when you want is one of the most basic masculine things that you express. The emasculating messages of college have been injurious to male-female relations. Of course a man has to be sensitive to the feelings of his wife in the same way you have to be sensitive to the feelings of your male friends. It’s wonderful for your marriage if this happens and he asks you to put another dish in the dishwasher.”
In a January 2010 debate with Shmuley Boteach in Manhattan, Dennis said: “I was born with courage. I take no credit for my courage. To say some of the things I say takes courage because they go against prevailing opinion. I believe that if a wife says to her husband periodically, twice a year, ‘Honey, I know male nature, and I want you to know that I appreciate the fact that you remain faithful’ is terrific for a marriage.
“I don’t think it works exactly in both directions. I think there are things he should thank her for, but not necessarily fidelity. There are women who do battle to stay faithful, but I doubt that they are in good marriages. Men in good marriages do battle to stay faithful.”
“If we don’t agree on male nature, debate is useless. If we don’t acknowledge that male nature is variety oriented and stimulated with phenomenal ease, like seeing a thigh. That is not true for women. There are no ads featuring male thighs.”
“If a man doesn’t admit this battle [to stay faithful], he’s either lying to you or he’s asexual.”
“A man wants to know that his wife understands his sexual nature. Most men don’t tell their wives about it, which is why when I eventually write my book on male sexual nature, my working title is,
‘Your Husband is Not a Pervert’. The vast majority of men are afraid that their wives will think they are perverts if they open up about their sexual nature. So they shut down and then women wonder, ‘Why is my husband so quiet?’ Because he can’t freely talk about his nature without you thinking he’s a sicko. So I do it on their behalf. I’m the husband’s best friend.”
Dennis replied to a question from Lisa Oz: “It gives you an idea of how close my wife and I are that I can say [in front of her], yes, I see women that I would like to bang regularly but I wouldn’t. And she knows that. One of the reasons that I love her so much is that I can be that honest. I don’t know a man who is honest who would have a different answer. I know Shmuley [Boteach] does. He has talked himself into this. Fine. If he has to fool himself into — I have no desire for any other woman on earth — fine. It may be true. I’m not speaking for 100% of males. I’m speaking for 99% of males.”
“The reason I love Judaism is that it is real about men. Something has happened to negate the realizations of Judaism. Don’t sit in a room alone with a woman. Why not? Don’t you have divine energy? Would a great rabbi even think of that? Of course he thinks of it because he’s still a male.
“I want people to eat right. It is a battle for me every day not to have more dessert. My true nature is carrot cake in the morning, cheesecake at lunch and an ice cream sundae in the evening.”
“Your mind should be as translucently open as possible [to your spouse]. When I asked my wife why she loves me, she said that I have no black boxes. That she really feels she knows me.”
Shmuley: “If your wife just asked you, what did you do in the bathroom? Would you give her the details?”
Dennis: “If my wife asked me that, I would think that she has a tumor in the brain.”
Shmuley: “I think you should work on it. You should be more open.”
Dennis: “What’s on your mind and what you excrete are different.”
“If you feel that masturbation and lust is the same as actual adultery, you are in that regard Christian and not Jewish. That is what Jesus said.”
Shmuley: “I counsel so many couples today where porn is destroying the marriage.”
Dennis: “I argue that if a man looks at porn for an hour a day, which I would hardly counsel, I have 50 other questions other than that to know about their marriage. Do they love each other? Do you have an active and good sex life? If they do and the wife is not deprived of his love and affection, looking at porn does not kill the marriage. Your advice kills the marriage because you have so toxified porn that you have told women that if he looks at it, he doesn’t love you.”
Shmuley: “Porn destroys marriages.”
Aug. 17, 2011, Dennis said: “Divorce is not what kills marriage… What kills marriage is not marrying. Divorce is a tragedy. It is not a statement about marriage. It is a statement about a particular marriage. Most divorced people want to marry.”
Oct. 31, 2011, Dennis said his wife travels with him 80% of the time. "Ideally you should spend as much time together as possible."
Dennis wrote Nov. 15, 2011 about his wife: "She is a non-practicing lawyer with a particular interest in and knowledge of taxation and the economy. She decided to stay home to be a full-time mother to her two boys (one of whom is autistic) and her two nieces (who lost their mother, my wife's sister, to cancer, when they were very young). Between talk radio, History Channel documentaries, BookTV on C-SPAN2, recorded lectures from The Teaching Company/The Great Courses, and constant reading, she has led a first-class intellectual life while shuttling kids, folding laundry and making family dinners."
Dennis tells Adam Carolla Feb. 25, 2012: "One of the kicks that I get out of life is at night if I'm at a stop light and women with nice legs are crossing the street and my headlights are there to illuminate their lovely limbs.
"So we were in Florida visiting my son and grandson. There were some young women walking into the hotel where I was pulling up. In their skirts. And just as they passed the headlights, a big gust of wind came. And I looked at my wife and said, 'Sue, I just won the lottery.'"
On Hugh Hewitt's show for three hours on May 9, 2012, Dennis said Sue has been a vegetarian since age 14.
On Feb. 28, 2013, Dennis said to Adam Carolla: "I will walk into the bedroom, and my wife will be laughing and I know she's reading your book."
Adam: "You should probably get dressed next time before you walk into the bedroom."
Dec. 21, 2012, Dennis tried to compliment a 17 year old (probably not Jewish) female caller by saying that if he was 17, he would try to be her boyfriend. She gave a strained chuckle, leaving Dennis asking if she took what he said as a compliment.
On the same hour, Dennis said the "Christian American" was his favorite group of people.
Mar. 11, 2013, Dennis said to his guest, Amity Shlaes: "You look terrific on camera. I don't think we have ever met in person and I did not know how you would come across but you come across terrific. You look great."
Amity: "Thank you."
Dennis: "You're like eye candy."
May 8, 2013, Dennis said: "The only arguments my wife and I have are in the car about my driving. There are no other arguments. To say backseat driver about my wife is to not even begin to describe what happens."
Producer Allen Estrin sided with Sue when she reminded Dennis about the time in Denver in 2012 he stopped on the freeway for cars to go by so he could get on the exit ramp he wanted rather than get off on the next exit.
On his April 3, 2023 Youtube show with Julie Hartman, Dennis said: "Everyone I am close to [including friends Dr. and Mrs. Stephen Marmer, Mr. and Mrs. Allen Estrin], including my wife, is a result of my being a public figure. If you have really good values, it is not easy to meet a lot of people, but if you are a public figure with good values, it is easier."
Julie: "There are a lot of famous people who treat their fans in a transactional way. You marry your fans."
January 30, 2023, Dennis said that Youtube his cohost Julie Hartman is his first platonic female friend.
July 6, 2022, Dennis asked Julie: "How are you sleeping?"
Julie: "I am sleeping quite well."
Dennis: "Your not hiding who you were [as a conservative] enabled you to sleep better."
Julie: "It's everything. The reason I sleep better is because of this podcast. Because sometimes I would lie awake and think about how can I move the ball forward in America. Now that I have this and my responsibilities will only grow when I go full-time at Salem in September, I'll sleep great because I've done my duty today. It's very cathartic."
Within a few episodes, Julie was back to lamenting her inability to sleep.
In a Mar. 14, 2012 column, Dennis Prager outlined the characteristics of happy people:
People who control themselves.
People who are given little and earn what they have.
People who do not see themselves or their group as victims.
People who rarely complain.
People who have close friends.
People who are in a good marriage.
People who act happy.
People who aren't envious.
People who have few expectations.
People who are grateful.
Francine Dies
Francine Prager died February 4, 2014. From her online obituary:
Prager, Francine (Flentje), 66, passed away on February 4, 2014, near her home in Thousand Oaks, California. Her children, Anya Wayne and Aaron Prager and close friends, Deanna Bayer and Shula Bryski were at her bedside.Francine grew up and attended public schools in Bluff City, Kansas and later studied vocal music at Bethany College in Lindsborg and the University of Kansas. She was an accomplished musician and was crowned Miss Kakeland in 1967. She later moved to Chicago and established a successful acting career, appearing in television commercials and movies and becoming a member of the Screen Actors Guild. She recently taught piano and voice lessons in Thousand Oaks and is being recognized for her contributions in founding the Conejo Jewish Day School.
Fran is survived by daughter, Anya (Larry) Wayne of Oakland, California; son, Aaron Prager of Thousand Oaks; brother, Ed (Marla) Flentje of Wichita; sister, Deborah Flentje of Colorado Springs; and close friends, Deanna and Kenny Bayer of Thousand Oaks. Memorials may be sent to Chabad of Thousand Oaks.Fran's daughter Anya posted: "Love you always, Momma. You were brave, compassionate and never stopped growing, never turned your head away from life even to your last hours. Bereft at your loss, we come together today to honor and remember you. And to send you off to the next world with a cheer for your seven decades of vivacious life."
Recession 2007-2009
Dennis wrote March 17, 2009: “So, too, the current economic decline was brought about in large measure by people in the financial sector widely regarded as “brilliant.” Of course, it turns out that many of them were either dummies, amoral, incompetent, or all three.”
“The reason we have too few solutions to the problems that confront people — in their personal lives as well as in the political realm — is almost entirely due to a lack of common sense, psychological impediments to clear thinking, a perverse value system, to a lack of self-control, or all four.”
On March 10, 2009, Dennis Prager wrote: “The adulation of extremely wealthy Wall Street “wizards” has ended. Most of those people produced nothing of worth and believed in economic nonsense.”
Staying Fit
On April 9, 2010, Dennis Prager got a question about how he stays fit while traveling so much. “I am surprised at the energy level and how healthy I stay,” said Dennis. “It’s an immense amount of travel. It’s unbelievable. And the work. Every day, a show. A column every week. A second column every other week for the Jewish Journal of Los Angeles. A book that I’m writing. The lectures. That’s pretty hefty.
“There are a few answers. One, is luck. I am very fortunate. I was given blessed with tremendous energy. Two, my attitude is so upbeat, I am convinced that with all the endorphins that I secrete, it helps my health tremendously. I really maximize the joys of my life… When I stopped off yesterday after my show at 3 p.m. Atlanta time and went to a cigar place, I only had two hours, because at 6 p.m. I had to be at the Cobb Energy Center for the evening with Bill Bennett and Congressman Price, I knew I had to maximize my pleasure in the midst of all this work. Three, I take supplements. I do believe in them… I don’t get enough sleep. Sometimes I get to take a nap for 20 minutes in the day, that’s a big help. Small portions are the secret to weight. I should do a show on the clean plate club, having to eat it all. Better advice is whatever is on your plate, leave half of it.”
Dennis said in 2004 in his lecture on Deuteronomy 25, “I don’t have a lot of time. I have a show to do tomorrow morning so when I get home, I have to read a lot. I do all my reading at night. I go to bed about 2 and get up about an hour before the show and hope that nothing happened at night. The second I wake up, I call Allen [Estrin] and ask, ‘Allen, anything happen while I was sleeping?’”
In a column Nov. 21, 2006, Dennis wrote: “My father is 88 years old and has been smoking a few cigars a day… He not only taught me the joys of cigars. He also taught me the importance of thinking for myself and how to lead an honorable life that includes as much joy as possible.”
Dennis wrote July 15, 2003: “I smoke a pipe and cigar, and I am amazed at the certitude and chutzpah in the 5-year-olds who have visited my home who confidently walked over to me to tell me I shouldn’t smoke! Had they seen me drinking alcohol, as children regularly see adults do, it would never occur to them to say such a thing.”
The Case For America
In a column July 3, 2007, Dennis wrote: “A generation of Americans with little American identity — emanating from little American memory — has already grown into adulthood. The nation whose founders regarded itself as the Second Israel must now learn how to survive from the First.”
In 2009, Dennis Prager decided to devote his fifth book to making the case for America.
Prager’s guest that hour was Stefan Halper, Senior Fellow in the Department of Politics and International Studies at the University of Cambridge. His new book was The Beijing Consensus: How Chinese Authoritarian Model Will Dominate the 21st Century.
Stefan: “The greatest challenge to China is American ideas… India, in many respects, reflects American pluralism, multiparty democracy and the market. The problem is that the United States has not stepped up to the line and told its story. It has not revitalized the American story.”
Dennis: “We are kindred spirits. That’s my whole thing… We haven’t even taught Americanism to Americans, let alone to the Chinese.”
On May 23, 2010, Dennis Prager spoke on a panel at the University of Denver with Sarah Palin and Hugh Hewitt. He stated America's greatest problem, and it just so happened to be the thing he felt most qualified to fix, just as 35 years earlier, the Jews' greatest problem just so happened to be the thing he felt most qualified to fix.
Here’s a selective transcript of this video:
Former U.S. Senator from Colorado, Bill Armstrong, asks Dennis: “If you had to identify a single threat to the future of our country, what would it be?”
Some in the conservative crowd yell out “Obama!”
Dennis: “No, it’s not Obama. If, God forbid, President Obama came down with an illness, nothing would change. Nothing! I believe the greatest threat facing the United States of America, and I have believed this my entire adult life, is that we have not passed on what it means to be American to this generation.
“A society does not survive if it does not have a reason to survive. That’s true for individuals. Where there is a why, there is a how. Nietzsche. We have lost the why. The Greatest Generation did not teach my generation what Americanism is. It’s not its fault. It wasn’t taught.
“This goes back 100 years to John Dewey, to the importation of European professors, to our universities… The average American who deeply loves this country and even has conservative values can not articulate what those values are.
“When we understand this American trinity of ‘In God We Trust’, Liberty, and E Pluribus Unum, that is uniquely American. It is not European. The French preferred liberte, fraternite, and egalite. We don’t. We believe in equality of birth, not in equality of result.
“When it is understood what America stands for, when it is understood that there is a moral dimension to a smaller government, it is not an economic question, it is a moral question.
“We give far more charity per capita than Europeans do. Why? Are we born better? No. The bigger the government, the worse the citizen. They are preoccupied in Europe with how much time off? Where will they vacation? When will they retire? These are selfish questions."
Jun. 23, 2011, Dennis Prager did his first Fourth of July ritual declaration.
All of the calls to the show were negative about the ritual. Concluded Dennis: “It’s easy to criticize and hard to build.”
Dennis wrote July 2, 2011:
Four years ago, I wrote a column titled “America Needs a July Fourth Seder.” In it, I explained that “national memory dies without national ritual. And without a national memory, a nation dies.” Many readers and listeners to my radio show responded by creating their own rituals to make the day far more meaningful than watching fireworks and eating hot dogs. I now present a simple 10-minute ceremony that every American can easily use on July Fourth. It is a product of the Internet-based Prager University that I founded nearly two years ago. We call it the Fourth of July Declaration…
During a public dialogue with Adam Carolla Feb. 25, 2012, a man said it would be great if Adam Carolla would "narrarate Dennis's new book and add some colorful language to punctuate the points."
Adam: "We call it punching it up in the business."
Dennis: "Where I would have, 'Soviet leader Brezhnev,' you would add, 'that piece of shit.' That's great. An x-rated version of my book."
It was the only time I've heard Dennis say shit. Even in private, Prager rarely swears.
Dec. 12, 2011, Dennis Prager said: "As a white person, may I say that most conservative whites believe that a great majority of blacks think this country is a racist cesspool. If they don't, then everyone who speaks on their behalf is a liar who's not representative of blacks, and I don't believe that. I don't believe that blacks walk around grateful to be in America and how unracist it is."
Caller: "Most blacks think America hasn't dealt with its race problems and there is still a great amount of racism."
Dennis: "White liberals believe that."
Caller: "You here on all sorts of right-wing talk radio show that if black people only understood that conservatives have their best interest at heart, they wouldn't vote 90% for the Democrats. They're not smart enough to figure out that conservatives truly make their lives better but they keep voting Democrat because they're taken in by race huxsters."
Dennis: "I believe that. It's not racism. I believe that about my fellow Jews. They're not smart enough to realize that the left is their enemy. They're stupid. They're naive."
Caller: "So black people are stupid?"
Dennis: "On this issue, sir. Obviously, Jews are not known for being stupid. On the issue of who their friends are and who their enemies are, Jews are stupid and blacks are stupid."
Caller: "How can they just be stupid in one narrow area of their life?"
Dennis: "Are you kidding?"
Caller: "How does this happen?"
Dennis: "Because their emotions overtake their intellect."
Caller: "So they're emotional and stupid?"
Dennis: "Yes. The emotions make you stupid. It's true for all of us. When I don't think rationally, I become stupid."
"Blacks are blinded by anger at whites. That's what I believe. If you want me to lie and then patronize blacks... That's what you want. Mr. Prager, don't say what you actually think. Say what will make blacks feel good. I take blacks more seriously than you do."
Caller: "You are racist. Blacks are not capable of having clear political thought."
Dennis: "I said that about my fellow Jews. Am I anti-Semitic?"
Caller: "No. There's a difference between anti-Semitism and racism."
Dennis: "Here's the rule, folks. Say a critical word about blacks and you're a racist. That's what that entire segment was about. You can criticize Jews, whites, any group, but if you criticize blacks, you're a racist. My view is that if you can't criticize blacks, you're a racist."
April 11, 2012, Dennis said: "There's a new phenomenon now of kids, very often inner city, as a mob going into stores and robbing them. The latest is in Portland, Oregon. I expect this to happen more. The rhetoric of the left is that the reason they are not richer is that the rich are rich. This is what the president has been saying. Close the gap and the economy will improve. The economy will improve if the rich get poorer."
"Kids are now taught that it is unfair that there are those with so much more money than they have. What is the difference between robbing from the rich and taxing the rich at a certain rate? The moral difference? Both are at gunpoint. If you don't give me your money, I put you in jail. Is there any percent in which there is no difference between robbery and taxation?"
Oct. 29, 2013, Dennis said he was a six on a 1-10 scale about his optimism for America (10 being most optimistic).
John Casey wrote about "The Revival of Tory Philosophy" in the March 17, 2007 edition of The Spectator:
Edward Norman (then Dean of Peterhouse) had attempted to mount a Christian argument for nuclear weapons. The discussion moved on to 'Western values'. Mrs Thatcher said (in effect) that Norman had shown that the Bomb was necessary for the defence of our values. Powell: 'No, we do not fight for values. I would fight for this country even if it had a communist government.' Thatcher (it was just before the Argentinian invasion of the Falklands): ‘Nonsense, Enoch. If I send British troops abroad, it will be to defend our values.' 'No, Prime Minister, values exist in a transcendental realm, beyond space and time. They can neither be fought for, nor destroyed.' Mrs Thatcher looked utterly baffled. She had just been presented with the difference between Toryism and American Republicanism.Divisive
Dennis Prager is often accused by liberals of being divisive. Susan, a self-described liberal Jew, phoned Prager's show with that complaint on May 16, 2012.
"Clarity can not possibly do a disservice," said Dennis. "Conservatives never think it is a disservice when you clarify liberal-conservative differences. Only folks on the left."
On Oct. 29, 2013, Dennis Prager wrote that Barack Obama is "the president who has done the most damage."
Among presidents in modern American history, he has also been a uniquely divisive force. It began with his forcing Obamacare through Congress -- the only major legislation in American history to be passed with no votes from the opposition party.On Nov. 26, 2013, Dennis said he can't think of anything positive Obama has done (killing Osama Bin Laden was an easy decision that any president would have taken).Though he has had a unique opportunity to do so, he has not only not helped heal racial tensions, he has exacerbated them. His intrusions into the Trayvon Martin affair ("If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon") and into the confrontation between a white police officer and a black Harvard professor (the police "acted stupidly") were unwarranted, irresponsible, demagogic and, most of all, divisive.
He should have been reassuring black Americans that America is in fact the least racist country in the world -- something he should know as well anybody, having been raised only by whites and being the first black elected the leader of a white-majority nation. Instead, he echoed the inflammatory speech of professional race-baiters such as Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.
Vietnam
Dennis Prager wrote Feb. 15, 2011:
It was difficult to control my emotions — specifically, my anger — during my visit to Vietnam last week. The more I came to admire the Vietnamese people — their intelligence, love of life, dignity and hard work — the more rage I felt for the communists who brought them (and, of course, us Americans) so much suffering in the second half of the 20th century.Diet
Unfortunately, communists still rule the country. Yet, Vietnam today has embraced the only way that exists to escape poverty, let alone to produce prosperity: capitalism and the free market. So what exactly did the 2 million Vietnamese who died in the Vietnam War die for? I would like to ask one of the communist bosses who run Vietnam that question. “Comrade, you have disowned everything your Communist party stood for: communal property, collectivized agriculture, central planning and militarism, among other things. Looking back, then, for what precisely did your beloved Ho Chi Minh and your party sacrifice millions of your fellow Vietnamese?”
Dennis has usually been on the chubby side and to combat this he's tried many different diets. During the 1980s, he'd proclaim such wisdom as "only fat makes you fat." In 1995, he encountered Dr. Barry Sears and had him on his show for three straight hours. Dennis went on the Zone diet, was pleased with the results, and stuck with it. In 2006, Dennis spent an hour of show with psychologist Seth Roberts, the author of The Shangri-La Diet: The No Hunger Eat Anything Weight Loss Plan. The book jacket ended up quoting Dennis: "In fact, it might benefit a few billion."
Mar. 24, 2014, Dennis said: "I'm very very interested in nutrition. I'd say 15 years ago at least, I started speaking about carbs rather than fats being the problem. I kept saying fat doesn't make you fat. That was my motto."
2009
Dennis spent his 61st birthday (Aug. 2, 2009) with friends (two gay men) and their baby. (Dec. 11, 2009)
“I have a gay niece,” Dennis said Feb. 10, 2010. “I adore her. I adore her partner. We regard her partner as part of our family.” (June 22, 2010)
“My niece..had a religious commitment ceremony. The family all attended but with the provision that it was not called a marriage and the blessings were not identical to those of a marriage. And then the family went to the commitment ceremony. My belief is that for family you do pretty much anything.” (Aug. 13, 2010)
Aug. 11, 2009, Dennis said: “I am the recipient of a lot of love and I am very appreciative of it, but that’s not what I seek. I am touched by it but that is not what I seek, and, ironically, I think that’s why I get a lot of it. If you don’t seek it, you are more likely to get it. You can’t go into your [work] day and say, how can I be loved today?”
Said Dennis July 9, 2010: “My extended family is almost all to the left of me and I love every one of them.”
Said Dennis April 18, 2013: "Both of my boys are conservative but my extended family is overwhelmingly liberal. I have to tell you. I was back in New Jersey. I love my family. That's my example of our need to understand there are good people on both sides. I just have to think of my extended family. My niece's son is 11. He's one of these kids who thinks a lot. He's also guileless. He's completely non-jaded and completely open with what he's feeling. He walks over to me, 'Uncle Dennis, did you vote for Mitt Romney?' I said yes. 'Are you an extreme Republican?' I said, 'Well, maybe so. I am Republican and extremely committed to being Republican.' And then he says in front of his poor dad who I adore, 'My dad said that Romney would ruin the country.'
"So you can see the poor kid's wheels turning. He loves Uncle Dennis. He obviously loves his dad. It was a terrific lesson for him. His parents were completely supportive as I was that his parents and Uncle Dennis differ on politics but we're all good people. I believe this means he will end up conservative. If, from an early age, you believe that Republicans can be nice people, half the reason for being a Democrat is removed. Oh, you can be nice and a Republican? That means I'll listen to arguments and not just dismiss Republicans as bad. You've got to get your nieces and nephews to believe you're a nice person and half the battle is won."
"My most touching, no, the most dramatic example of this was the Jewish woman [Tamara Shayne Kagel] I had on the show because I write a column for the Jewish Journal of Los Angeles and this woman was writing at the time a column, an attractive 28 year old I think she was, she wrote about her nightmare because I had her on the show after her article, and she wrote that my nightmare has been fulfilled, I'm in love with a Republican. It was very honest of her. She said I was taught to regard Republicans as heartless and I meet this man and he's kind and loving and sweet and a Republican. It shattered my whole liberal upbringing. She's still a liberal by the way. I just sent her an email a year later -- how are things going? She's still dating. They're still seriously involved. She hasn't moved politically. He hasn't moved religiously. She says, if we have children, they'll be both Democrats and Republicans. That means they'll be Republicans. I don't want to hurt her but as soon as there is any chink in the liberal armor, it means it's over... But she was very disturbed and I loved her for her honesty."
Hilda Prager 1919 - 2009
“I gave a high holiday lecture on honor your father and mother [on the first night of Rosh Hashanah] on the night that I knew my mom wouldn’t be with us long. She in fact died that night.” (Dec. 21, 2010)
Dennis Prager’s mother Hilda died at home surrounded by loved ones on Rosh Hashanah, Sept. 19, 2009. In his column about her death, Dennis wrote: “From my late teens onward, the relationship between my mother and me improved steadily. As the years progressed, I enjoyed her more and, yes, loved her more.”
From the DennisPrager.com blog Sept. 22, 2009:
Dennis’s mother, Hilda, passed away this weekend. Blessed with good health her entire life, she had been struggling with health issues for the past few months. Recently, things took a turn for the worse and the end came quickly.On September 29, 2009, Dennis devoted his weekly column to the death of his mom:
Many of you might have heard the hour last year when Dennis interviewed his mother on her birthday. If you did, you know that she was a charming, vibrant woman who was very proud of her son. She will be deeply missed by all who knew her.
Dennis will be observing the traditional seven day Jewish mourning period. That means he won’t be on the air this week. When he returns a week from Tuesday, he’ll be full of thoughts about his mother, about life and death and, of course, about world events.
No matter how I felt at any given time, I always abided by the commandment to “Honor your father and mother.” Not only was it good for me and for my parents in life, it is particularly good now after my mother’s death. Because I was a good son, I have no guilt to work through. There are many reasons to honor one’s parents, and how one will deal with a parent’s death is one of the most compelling.Mar. 26, 2010, Dennis said he had been urging his father to get a cat. His dad refused.
…I knew I would observe the age-old Jewish practice of sitting “shiva” (“Shiva” is Hebrew for seven) — i.e., mourning for seven days. But I had no idea if I would come to value or loathe it. I found it invaluable. I took a week out of my life to do nothing but receive visitors — at my brother’s home in New Jersey and in my home in California — and mourn my mother. She deserved it, and I needed it.
…Over 300 people came to my mother’s funeral in Englewood, N.J.
…My mother was universally adored — even her pharmacists and hair stylist paid a call during “Shiva” — for three reasons, as I learned from everyone to whom I spoke: She was always happy; she treated everyone as if they were the most special person in her life; she carried herself with class and dignity. If you want to be widely loved, there’s the recipe.
May 7, 2010, Dennis said it was eery to contemplate mother’s day without a mother. “I feel like I have nothing to do.”
“My mother got a lot of pleasure from me. I have to say. Allen [Estrin] is nodding. Why wouldn’t she? I was a good son. I’m fun. I’m even somewhat famous, which brought her immense pleasure. I’d call her up before I’d go on national TV. It was like a ritual. I’d say, ‘Ma, I’ll be on CNN in five minutes.’ Or, ‘I’ll be on Fox’, or I’ll be on whatever. She just went nuts. She went crazy. She loved it. Till the end of her life.
“I’ve literally given over 2,000 lectures. To the end, she would ask, where are you? Because I’m always on the road. I’d say wherever I am. What are you doing? I gave a speech. The next question — did they applaud? Till the last day, she was just tickled pink that they applauded her son. I would always answer, ‘No, they booed, ma.’ We had these rituals. I don’t think she ever heard me.
“I moved out of my parent’s house at 21 and [every conversation] she would always ask me if I needed anything. That too became a joke in our lives. She meant it seriously. And I’d say, ‘Yeah, ma, I need cue tips.’ But she never sent them. I don’t think she heard me.”
Said Dennis: “They lived for each other. I remember as an adult being so grateful that their happiness did not depend on me. It’s true that if you walked into my mother’s house, it looked like a shrine to Dennis. The largest picture ever taken of me takes up the wall of a whole room. It’s almost embarrassing because that’s the room I slept in when I visited her. I would wake up and see me. It was a little much, but I knew they were happy with each other.”
“It’s the first time I’ve seen my father cry.”
Said Dennis in an October 2009 lecture on the moral case for conservatism: “The purpose of family is to learn to relate to people you can’t stand.”
“You didn’t choose family. So how could you like all of them?
“I’ve asked audiences of a thousand — how many of you would choose a relative if you had to choose someone [of the same sex] to spend a month on an island with, not a spouse?
“I asked my brother. I was recently back in New Jersey to sit shiva for my brother. I haven’t spoken to my brother this much since we were children living in my parent’s home.
“I knew it wasn’t me. I wasn’t hurt.”
On Nov. 27, 2013, Dennis said: "I never tell my relatives, 'Did you hear my show?' If they listen, that's great, and if they don't listen, it's probably greater [because almost all of them are on the left]."
On October 22, 2013, Dennis said: "My dad is 95. His brain is as sharp as ever, as philosophical as ever... My brother and I say, 'My father has led a life walking between the raindrops.' He's been blessed in every arena -- health, a marriage of 69 years that was like it was made in heaven, two wonderful kids... Happy. Never a rich man, but comfortable. Loved life. Traveled.
"Now as a result of a surgery that went awry two years ago, he's paralyzed from the waist down. He said to me, 'I had it so good that God wants me in these ending years of my life to know what it is like to suffer.' He makes zero complaint."
Chabad
Though not a Lubavitcher, Dennis has a close relationship with the Chabad movement. Dennis is on the board of directors of Chabad’s Conejo Valley Jewish day school. I’ve met Chabad rabbis who boasted about having Dennis’s phone number on their speed dial.
At a Chabad banquet in June 2011, Dennis said: “My first encounter with Chabad took place here in California. Not in Brooklyn where I grew up. And on my first encounter, I was very suspicious. Orthodox Jews who don’t judge you on your halachic observance? Come on. I was raised in the typical yeshiva world where that was exactly how you judge. It was quantitative Judaism. As if you really know. It is easy to know if a guy drives on Shabbos but how do you know if a guy honors his parents? Who are we to judge?”
“It took some major Jewish figure (the Rebbe Menachem Schneerson) to say — don’t judge your fellow Jew. This alone would set Chabad and the rebbe’s message as a seminal event changing Jewish history.” (Relayed by Dennis at COTV Chabad Banquet Gala 2011, uploaded to YouTube June 25, 2011)
Dennis wrote Aug. 4, 2009:
Years ago driving home from synagogue, both my sons and I were wearing yarmulkes, or skull caps. A convertible car filled with young boys sped past me and yelled into the car “F— you” and called my wife a “b—ch.”
I then said to my family, “I have finally experienced anti-Semitism in America.”
I decided to follow the car and, to my shock, they screamed the same obscenities at other cars, none of whose occupants were discernibly Jewish.
It turned out that the event was not what I was certain, and had every reason to believe, was an example of anti-Semitism, but just an example of young thugs acting thuggish.
After a speech to Chabad of Conejo Valley on Jan. 13, 2009, Dennis was asked about anti-Israel demonstrations on Wilshire Blvd that gathered ten times as many people as the counter pro-Israel demonstrations.
Dennis said: “Most people who have a life don’t demonstrate… I started my public life at Soviet Jewry demonstrations, so I know their importance, but it is harder to gather people who have a constructive life than people who have destructive lives. Everybody here probably has a family to take care of and most of you are gainfully employed and are involved in community life. Do you think people shouting ‘Death to Israel’ are involved in anything constructive? They go from here to the Salvation Army?”
On May 1, 2012, Dennis said: "I have a dream. I take it from two groups I know well -- Mormons and Chabad Hasidim. To go out into the world with your young people and take your message. Imagine if we were to send out two million young people a year to go out into the world and speak about liberty, y pluribus unum and 'In God We Trust'."
Three Back Surgeries
Dennis has suffered from sciatica since he was 21. He was due for back surgery in 2007, but found a controversial drug (Bextra) that enabled him to delay the operation.
“Bextra is now illegal [since 2005],” said Dennis March 25, 2010. “I can’t get it anywhere on earth. I would risk the heart attack to get rid of my sciatica pain because otherwise I have to take steroids, which is a helluva lot worse. You can’t take that for long. Of course you can get surgery, but that’s my last desire in this matter.”
For the first six months of 2010, Dennis was forced to give all of his speeches sitting down. He frequently (more than a dozen times) alluded to his sciatica on his radio show.
I’ve had this terrible sciatica recur. It’s very bad right now. It’s where you have a disc from your spine bulging out and touching nerves, the sciatic nerve goes down the back of your leg to your ankle. There’s nothing you can do about the pain because nerves are nerves. I’ll probably end up with surgery (his first time in a hospital since his birth, according to Dennis 6/20/13). It’s a routine surgery. Don’t send me all the solutions. I’ve tried most of them and they worked for most of the time but now it is too much of a disc bulge, it is nine millimeters. It’s huge.On June 11, 2010, he had surgery to fix the problem.I should be rolling across airports. When I went to Denver this past weekend to speak with Sarah Palin and Hugh Hewitt, I was wheeled around in a wheelchair. I could walk but not far. It was too painful.
I was in a wheelchair and I had never been in a wheelchair before. It’s a different way of looking at the world.
When you encounter someone in a wheelchair in an elevator, who’s the one to break the ice?
I decided that when I was wheeled around, I would act as I act when I walk around. I found that people reacted the same way. I am very sensitive to human reaction. Once the wheelchair person did the everything is OK, everything is normal, everyone is happy. I kidded around with kids, with adults. Same reaction.
Maybe it is the handicapped who need to put the non-handicapped at ease as much as the non-handicapped need to put the handicapped at ease. We are such a pity-based compassion-based culture that we don’t make any demands on people upon whom we have compassion — the poor, the minority, the handicapped. We hurt these people.
To say that society must do all the work is terrible advice.
I say to the handicapped, you are as responsible for how you are perceived as the non-handicapped.
The minority is as responsible for making the majority feel comfortable as vice-versa. You act like you are persecuted, you’ll feel persecuted. You act normal, you’ll be treated normal.
“As I’m lying as the devices are being placed in me, someone walks over to me and says, ‘Dennis Prager! I love your show!’ I’m just about to enter an anesthetic slumber.”
“I’m not complaining. I thought it was adorable. When you have a public persona, that is what happens and no circumstance changes that.” (Mar. 8, 2011)
June 14, 2010, Dennis said: “The last six months I have been in agony. At the age of 21, I played volleyball and fell terribly on my back. It was on concrete. When I went up to spike the ball at the net. So I’ve had a disc coming out of my spinal cord between the vertebrate touching a nerve, which gives you terrible pain down the sciatic nerve which runs down the back of your legs. I’ve had it on and off my whole life. I’ve played racquetball much of my life, tennis, functioned fine, but it would recur about every ten years and get worse each time. This time it came back six months ago and got worse and worse to the point where I was wheelchaired through airports. I say with some pride that I didn’t miss one speech.
“I have been functionally unable to walk any distance because the pain was so severe. Those of you who were on the cruise with me knew that I had to give talks sitting down.
“I have a lot of interesting things to say about the problem of pain. I learned a great deal about it. I didn’t talk about it at all on the radio. We adjusted seats here. You have no idea. The only thing I did on my own was to go to the men’s room. Everything else, I was helped.”
“You try everything before surgery. I was getting emails from me urging me to try different things before surgery… People have theories on everything and they get beliefs that are very strong. I don’t. I have strong beliefs about moral values and smaller government and goodness and confronting evil, but when it comes to practical things in life, I believe that before you get cut up, you try other things. But folks, what this man did for me on Friday, I wish I had done six months earlier.”
“The disc that was out of my vertebrate was stuck. It could not go back in. It was calcified. It was cemented in place. I could’ve hung upside down for the rest of my life and it would not go back in.”
On June 25, 2010, Dennis said he may need more surgery. His sciatica problem has shifted to his other leg. In July, Dennis had further back surgery.
On May 9, 2011, Dennis had spinal fusion surgery at USC Medical Center.
The anesthesiologist said to Dennis before putting him under: “I have to pull aside your vocal chords. You don’t make a living with your voice, do you?”
Dennis: “They may have been the worst words I’ve heard in my life. The last words I remember saying before going under were, ‘Well, in fact, I do.’” (Relayed by Dennis at COTV Chabad Banquet Gala 2011)
On April 11, 2013, Dennis said: "I had a surgery that was very serious on my upper back that was totally successful. The surgeon told me that after six hours, it was so difficult, the bones in my upper spine, I wanted to give up, but I didn't."
On May 15, 2011, Dennis posted to Facebook:
Hello Everybody!Dennis has a rod up the back of his neck. (Mar. 10, 2012)
I finally have the strength to personally write about my situation.
In 28 years of broadcasting I think I missed more than two consecutive days due to illness only once. So for me to miss a week or more is a huge deal. But the truth is I have been through a huge deal – considerably bigger than I realized in advance.
I don’t want to bore you – but on the other hand, I assume anyone following me on Facebook has more than a passing interest in my life. So here goes in brief detail.
Last year I had two surgeries to remove the parts of two discs from my lower back that were protruding onto nerves and causing terrible pain in my sciatic nerve, the nerve running from the spine to the foot. Those surgeries allowed me to leave the hospital the same day and go back to work two days later.
But both before and after the sciatica problem, I had pain in my upper back and lower neck. As it went away about a year and half ago after a serious stretching regimen, I was hopeful that it be might gone forever. But it returned a few months ago worse than before, and a month ago I ceased being able to lift my left arm from the shoulder. It became obvious that without surgery, I could permanently damage nerves to that shoulder and never be able to raise that arm (preventing me, for example from ever conducting again – not to mention do daily things like shampooing with both hands). The MRI, meanwhile, showed degenerated discs in my upper back, which along with growths on the vertebrae, were contributing to compression on my nerves. I even learned that I was born with a narrow spinal canal. That made the other factors much more likely to cause pain, immobility, and nerve damage, resulting in the need for surgery.
So my excellent neurosurgeon at the excellent USC University Hospital explained to me that my only choice was to operate immediately (because of the likely nerve damage) and to remove three disks from vertebrae in my upper back and fuse those three levels with titanium to hold the vertebrae in place. They fuse, incidentally, with specially processed human bone – here I have benefited from something I have long advocated — registering as an organ donor in case of fatal accident.
The surgery lasted seven hours and was performed – to my initial surprise — through the front of my body. Access to the spinal column is much easier through the front but it comes with a price – the patient’s esophagus, vocal cords, and trachea are all pulled aside for the length of the operation. They are likely to become inflamed, and in fact did become inflamed — my vocal cords as well, making normal speech, not to mention the especially energetic three hours of talk radio speech, impossible at this time.
You could say that I feel beaten up. I am. My body devotes all its efforts to healing.
So that is the briefest I can be to explain why I am not returning on Monday. Wednesday is the earliest, and I will keep you up date.
My general attitude is quite upbeat. I am doing well, all things considered. And I never assumed I would live a life free from pain – whether emotional or physical—so this is not a shock to my emotions or psyche. It is a shock to my body, however. But I remain as grateful as ever for all my blessings.
Those blessings include living in a time and a place where such sophisticated healing is available, the love and support of my family and friends and, not least, your support, which I read with immense gratitude.
Sleep Apnea
In 2012, Dennis Prager found himself wanting to close his eyes while driving. He took a sleep test and found he was waking up 71 times an hour to gasp for breath. So he got an Auto Titration CPAP machine recommended by Dr. Avi Ishaaya.
From the radio show April 18, 2012:
Dennis: "Dr Avi Avishaaya has had an impact on my life so extraordinary that I asked him to come on."
"People laugh at it [sleep apnea]. Oh, so I snore... The issue is that you are affected by the oxygen that goes to your brain. You wake up constantly.""I realized something was happening when I, who have a massive amount of energy, my eyes were starting to shut while I was driving. I realized something was awry here. I knew it had something to do with this."
"I took Dr. Avishaaya's test at home. I'd already done it at some other place. They gave me a CPAP machine. I thought I was being water-boarded. I took the machine off and left the place at 4 a.m. I said I'd rather have sleep apnea than this torture device."
"This man has invented a device that is effortless. The moment I put it on, I felt terrific because it [Auto Titration CPAP machine] works according to your own breathing. And now I sleep like a baby."
"I'd gasp for air 71 times an hour. The test is at home. This is another genius thing this man has invented."
"Wherever I go in the world, a few weeks ago I went to Australia, and I did it on the airplane. I plugged it in."
"I never yawn now and I only get five-and-a-half hours to six hours sleep."
"I kept waking up at night but now I never wake up."
"I don't easily get scared. This is worth worrying about. I can't use a regular CPAP machine. I was even thinking of jaw surgery."
"The quality of your life changes. People wake up so often because they can't breathe right."
"I use this thing every night. The first night I had this thing on my nose, I was so quiet, my wife got up in the middle of the night... and she bent over to see if I was living. Happily, she would sleep through my breathing obstructions and snoring, but if she got up, she heard it.""Dr, what causes this?"
Dr Avishaaya: "About 70-80% of patients with sleep apnea are obese.""Your airway get constricted so that your throat gets constricted as you gain weight."
Dennis: "My bad luck. I'm not obese and I still got it."
"It didn't affect my work but it did affect times of non-work and when I started to see my eyes closing while driving, obviously nothing happened, I would catch myself, luckily I knew of this man, I took the home test, and he solved it in one night."
Role In Popular Culture
Dennis Prager wondered on air in 2010 if his ideas about dating for same-sex friends inspired the movie I Love You, Man.
Prager provided the inspiration for the voice of a bumbling character on South Park. According to the book by the same title, "Officer Barbrady (voiced by Trey Parker) is a South Park city police officer who is extremely incompetent... Parker's voice for Officer Barbrady was inspired by Dennis Prager...who Parker and Stone liked to make fun of for his 'big, bombastic and stupid voice.'"
Trey Parker directed For Goodness Sake 2 for Dennis in 1996.
Dennis wrote March 31, 2009 about a Broadway play:
Aside from my lifelong interest in altruism and especially in understanding the motivations of rescuers of Jews during the Holocaust, I had an unwitting role in the making of “Irena’s Vow.” According to the playwright, [Dan] Gordon, the play came about because he heard Opdyke on my radio show 20 years ago. He immediately contacted her, they became friends, and the rest is history.We never know all the good (or bad) we have done. So Gordon’s attribution of the genesis of his play to me is very gratifying. If there was a dry eye on opening night this past Sunday when I attended, it surely wasn’t near my seat.
Misc
* "I may have been the last holdout [to say 'nigger' on the radio] but then I got a directive [to say instead 'the n-word']." (Dec. 23, 2013)
* "I know every single prominent conservative and they would laugh at the idea that the rules they advocate do not apply to them." (June 5, 2023)
* Until the 1990s, Dennis supported a higher minimum wage. (Apr. 17, 2014)
* When Dennis visits friends, family and relatives, he prefers to stay in a hotel. "I can't imagine sleeping at my son's house. But when they come to me, I'm happy for them to stay with me."
"When I visited my parents, until ten years ago, I stayed with them. Then I realized I had a choice. A hotel was more comfortable." (Dec. 23, 2013)
* Into his early '90s, Max Prager did Dennis's taxes.
* “There’s nothing like clarity in life… I feel that about everything, even my hobbies. The clearer the photo, the better I like it. The clearer my music, the better I like it. But I especially love it in the realm of ideas and ideals.” (Apr. 6, 2011)
* "Out of 100 things that bother me, air quality in Los Angeles is number 100." (Nov. 17, 2011)
* “I love High Noon and The Magnificent Seven. I love movies of moral clarity and I love that the bad guys are shot.” (May 5, 2011)
* For decades, Dennis has been the most booked speaker for Jewish organizations along with Elie Wiesel, said Dennis Jan. 21, 2011.
* “I have as much energy as I had at 20.” (Jan. 21, 2011)
* Feb. 25, 2011, Dennis said: “I don’t recall in my life having been offended… I am sure I have but my mindset was never such as to be easily or routinely let alone regularly offended.”
* On July 8, 2011, Dennis said: “Ninety nine point nine nine percent of the time when I have guests, I do not speak to them before the interview, during the interview [commercial breaks] or after the interview. I don’t want a personal relationship in any way to form with these people. I want to be able to conduct the interview as dispassionately and honestly as possible. Also, if I talk to them, some of their best lines will be given to me during the break and then they won’t repeat them on air.”
“The same thing holds true when I am on television shows. We don’t talk during the breaks.”
"The longer I live, the more I like country music." (Mar. 25, 2011)
* “Rav Kook could be my Jewish theological hero of the 20th Century.” (1995 lecture on Exodus 13)
* “I do not believe in the Documentary Hypothesis. I do believe there is a unified structure to the Torah.” (Last lecture on Exodus, circa 1998)
* “Torah Hebrew is almost as comfortable to me as English. I’ve been studying it since I was five years old and I know a great deal of it by heart.” (Exodus 34: 1-7 in 1998)
* “I have published a million words in my lifetime and you can’t find anything that is SIXHRB (Sexist, Intolerant, Xenophobic, Homophobic, Racist, Bigoted).” (Nov. 15, 2010)
* “When they heckle during a lecture of mine, I stop the lecture and point out, ‘I just want to point out that this is not done by my side when their side lectures, so when I say the left has a totalitarian streak, you are seeing it now. Then they start booing these people because they realize what a threat to freedom.” (Apr. 15, 2011)
* “I have a file called morons. It is my cathartic way of doing things without sending hatemail back. I drag the letter with a mouse to the morons file. On the other hand, not everyone who sends me an angry letter is totally off the wall. I do care. I don’t go into my show thinking, do people like me? But I never go into it thinking, I don’t care what people think.” (Lecture on Numbers 31-33, circa 2003)
* “I have a particularly small small number of awards.” (Dec. 13, 2010)
* “People say I’m addicted to cigars. I just came back from two-and-a-half weeks away [on vacation]. I did not smoke one cigar. Didn’t miss it.” (Feb. 22, 2011)
* "I've never been in a 12-step program. I've been blessed to not be addicted to anything. I've known so many people who have been in these programs and gained wisdom. I wish everyone would be in a 12-step program." (April 2, 2012)
* "I don't love my laugh. I try to control it." (Dec. 13, 2013)
* “Every year I go to the pipe show in Los Angeles.” (Feb. 28, 2011)
* “I’ll buy $200 pipes.” (Aug. 23, 2011)
* “We need heroes… We have torn down so many. Because of media knowledge, the ability of the smaller to tear down the bigger is great.”
“I don’t [want to be thought well of in the mainstream media]. If the New York Times wrote something positive about me, I would rethink my position.” (Nov. 17, 2010)
* “I would love for God to destroy the worst 1% of humanity… That’s 60 million people. It would leave the Middle East empty. Who would pump oil?” (Lecture on Korach found at the end of Prager’s sixth lecture on Leviticus.)
* “Tone is very important. The thing that I am told the most by people who listen to this show is the tone. Just not yelling at people was a major advantage of this program.” (Nov. 18, 2010)
* “I have never lost a friend,” said Dennis Oct. 1, 2010.
* “There is only one thing that people can say to me that hurts me, that angers me, and that is, ‘Prager didn’t tell the truth.’” (March 24, 2011)
* “A girl I grew up with just died of breast cancer. She was as close as I’ve had to a sister.” (Nov. 2, 2010)
* “I beat myself up for my lack of self-discipline regularly but my free-spirit comes with that price.” (Oct. 22, 2010)
* “I have a coffee every day. I have a latte every day… I just like the taste. And it fills me up.” (Nov. 11, 2010)
* "The amount of time I have spent in the kitchen in my life would not add up to a day. I can make [scrambled eggs with cheese]. The last time was in college." (Nov. 26, 2013)
* “I have never gone into a book store without buying something. I just do it to keep them [in business].” (Dec. 16, 2010)
* Dennis tells Ann Coulter that she is “one of my favorite writers in the country… You are under-rated as a thinker.” (June 15, 2011)
* “I own about 4,500 books. I love everything about the book… I even love the smell of a new book. I check the paper on new books. In my own contract with Harper Collins who will be publishing my next book on the great conflict for the future of humanity between America, socialism and Islam, I have it in my contract that I want a say in the paper they use. I don’t like cheap paper in books. It’s disrespectful to the reader and the author.” (Mar. 8, 2011)
* “I wear a size fifteen shoe.” (Mar. 8, 2011)
* Dennis Prager bowled frequently with his youngest son Aaron. “I’m the only Leviticus teacher who owns his own bowling ball,” said Dennis in a 2007 lecture on Leviticus 1.
* “I cease to function under heat,” said Dennis as he began teaching the book of Deuteronomy in 2003. “It’s my only idiosyncrasy.”
Dennis keeps his radio studio much cooler than most people would like.
* “I am the only male I know of who’s transfixed by the different types of shampoos,” said Dennis Jan. 12, 2010.
On Mar. 22, 2013, a caller told Dennis, "Your hair is always so flawlessly beautiful."
Dennis replied, "I'm blessed with my mother's hair."
* "Having not drunk a sugared beverage since childhood, I think any overweight person who drinks regular soda is making a big mistake. But I would prefer to live in a country of obese citizens who are free than in a country of thin citizens who are not." (Jun. 27, 2012)
* "Can you think of anything made in Germany that is not a good product?" (Jun. 18, 2012).
* Dennis Prager enjoys getting his teeth cleaned (April 2, 2010).
* Dennis is almost libertarian on how society should regulate sex. Mar. 29, 2012, Dennis said: "I said 15 years ago that here should be a part of the internet that [porn] exists in but it should have a different name at the end. It's not a dot com. It's a dot xxx. Like a red light district on the internet."
* On his Feb. 8, 2010, Dennis said: “If the environmentalist could run society, you saw your future in that ad [by Audi mocking green rules]. They are as committed to environmentalism as the Iranian regime is to their version of Islam and they would arrest people for exactly those things — ‘Are you using styrofoam cups sir? Please step out of the car’. ‘Could we come in and check the temperature in your house? We’re coming in.’“They’ve already passed these sorts of things where they want to monitor the temperature in people’s homes. In California, no new house can have a fire place. That’s reason 84436 not to move to this state. I say it even though it hurts me because my real estate value will decline if you don’t move here.”
“I can not think of a good reason, given what the left has done to California, for you to move here. I have a dear friend who would love to move here but he won’t because of the taxes compared to the state he now lives in. You can’t build a house with a fire place? Is that sick?
“Maybe that will increase the value of my place because I have a lot of fireplaces.”
In a speech for Chabad of Beach Cities Jan. 22, 2009, Dennis said: “I was one of the responsible citizens who got hurt because I did put 20% down [on his purchase of a home around Glendale circa 2006] and I didn’t take more than I could pay in mortgage payments. I got clobbered because I bought during the height and lost everything I put plus more. I’m not standing before you lamenting life. I’m as happy as I was before.”
“I stay in California because this is where the people I am closest to live.”
* Dennis said that sometimes universities provide him with bodyguards. (June 15, 2010)
* Dennis said that he has never experienced anti-Semitism in America. (April 29, 2010)
* On Jan. 17, 2011, Martin Luther King day, Dennis said: “I got a texting ticket at a red light. If there’s a ticket, I’ve gotten it. It was for about $25. I thought I would get a notice in the mail. Sure enough, I did after a month. For not showing up in court, your bill is $850. And there’s a warrant out for my arrest. There may be a letter from LA County jail from Dennis Prager.”
* “I don’t have any airs,” said Dennis Aug. 10, 2010. “I don’t have them on the show. I don’t have them off the show. I don’t think of myself as a celebrity.”
On Sept. 1, 2010, Dennis Prager said he was not high maintenance.
Ralph called from Manhattan: “Dennis, I would think it would be impossible for you to not be high maintenance because of what you do for a living. You’re seeking the approval of others.”
Dennis: “That’s not true. I don’t. I seek the respect of others and that’s a very big difference.”
Ralph: “I’m an actor and I know that I’m high maintenance.”
Dennis: “Well, actors do seek approval. You seek applause. I don’t. That is a big difference. It’s something I’ve thought through very carefully.”
Ralph: “If you didn’t get that constant reinforcement from listeners who often open their calls with saying you’re wonderful. I listen to you every day.”
Dennis: “It was not that way. I’ve been on for 28 years. That began to happen after perhaps 15 or 20 [years]. I am deeply appreciative of that but it is not what sustains me.
“What sustains me in terms of listeners is — you changed my thinking. You changed the way I raise my kids. You changed my marriage. You made it better. I think differently now in political and social issues. That does give me a kick. Not in ego, but because I have a real sense of mission.”
* June 10, 2014, Dennis said: "I've never owned a black car before. I always used to think that people chose black to make a statement and I've never liked to make a statement. I've never gotten initials on my clothing. My third car was a burgundy Puegot. My first two cars were Saabs. Then a Buick. And then an Oldsmobile."
* Pompous. “That’s the last thing I am or want to be.” (Aug. 15, 2011)
* Here are some of the famous people Dennis Prager has described as friends: Richard Riordan, Natan Sharansky.
* In a 2010 lecture on Leviticus 25, Dennis said: “My son David has a very fine mind for ideas. He’s in finance. Leave it to a Prager to go into finance in the worst recession since the Great Depression. I told him he’ll be the first wealthy Prager in the history of the Prager family.
“He loves this idea [of the Sabbatical and Jubilee years] because it tells everyone that no matter how well you are doing, know economically there will be a depression. So plan for it. You can’t do anything with the land the seventh year. You have to save.”
* "Goodness is rewarded [by happiness]. Good people are happier. When you're at your happiest, you're at your goodest." (May 11, 2012)
* “I was invited once. It was not George Burns. Another household name superstar of the 20th Century invited me to his home. He was so superstarish, it was simply curiosity. He invited me to his home because he liked hearing me on the radio. He’s no longer with us. The entire evening, he only talked about himself. I sat there. It was a phenomenon. I had never encountered this in my life.” (2003 lecture on Deut. 8:11 – 9:7)
* On the radio in the 1980s and early 1990s, Dennis said he was agnostic about a second shooter in JFK's assassination, aside from Lee Harvey Oswald. After reading and interviewing Gerald Posner (in 1993?) and Vincent Bugliosi in 2007, Prager concluded the president was killed by Oswald acting alone. On Nov. 18, 2013, Dennis said: "I've believed [that Oswald acted alone] since high school."
* Jan. 15, 2011, Dennis said: “I don’t recommend you abolish TV in your home. I recommend you have real limitations on quantity and quality.
“When my son David was at summer camp, this kid came over to him and was clearly hostile. The kid explained to my son, ‘It’s not your fault, but I want you to know that your father is responsible for us not having any television in our house.’
“My son, who’s the best raconteur I know, said to the kid, ‘We have satellite TV and three video screens.’”
* Dec. 7, 2012, Dennis said: "I write notes [with a fountain pen] for my every speech on the back of a business card and then after the speech, I throw the card away because I want every speech to be fresh."
Top RabbisDennis wrote in the Jewish Journal March 28, 2013:
The [annual Newsweek list of America's top rabbis] actually accomplishes something very rare: it has no redeeming values, yet does great damage. It weakens an already somewhat fragile institution: the rabbinate. And it applies Hollywood values to a profession that least needs them — religion. Rabbis should not be regarded as stars.This is no reflection on the rabbis who made the list. On the contrary, my beloved friend since high school, Rabbi Joseph Telushkin, with whom I wrote my first two books, was on the list five times. And I am honored to count some of the Los Angeles rabbis in the top tier as friends for decades. Rabbi David Wolpe was one of the few non-family members in my home 20 years ago for my second son’s bris. I delight in his well-deserved success. So, too, I have often worked with Rabbi Marvin Hier since he came to Los Angeles; and I’ve known his colleague on the list, Rabbi Abraham Cooper, since we were both children in Brooklyn. As a member of a boys choir that sang at my parents’ Orthodox synagogue on the High Holy Days, he slept in our home on Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur.
But as much as some of the rabbis on the list deserve being so honored, the list is degrading to the rabbinate. It is nothing more than a function of the contemporary preoccupation with celebrity over substance, of fame over significance.
For President
By the mid 1970s, Dennis Prager was getting asked when he was going to run for political office.
Since the 1980s, Dennis has said that he would only run for president.
July 31, 2009, Dennis was asked why he didn’t run for president. He replied: “Number one, I have no personal desire to run for public office. I have however an idealistic desire because…I am certain that I can articulate conservative values better than almost anyone in the Republican party… It is very distressing to me that the finest values do not have the finest spokesmen. That is what draws me to the idea of running for any public office.
“However, in the United States at this time, for example, US Senate in California, entails a minimum of $40 million. I could raise $40 million if Democrats and some Republicans did not sign a bill limiting the amount of money people could give. Now all you can do is spend all your life, unless you’re a multi-billionaire, is to raise money from tens of thousands of people and I would not have my job to live on.”
Dec. 14, 2009, Dennis said: “When I see some of these people on TV, there’s no doubt in my mind, I’m sorry if this sounds self-serving, that I would have a more entertaining, let alone more intelligent TV show, than the vast majority of those who have them today, but I don’t come with the correct perspective.”
On Prager’s radio show, Dec. 21, 2009, a man calls. “I’m the one who always pulls you aside and tells you you should be president of the United States.”
Dennis: “I agree with you right now. It’s the first time. I don’t know what I’ve said in the past, but I agree with you, only because the Republicans don’t have somebody who can articulate American values well enough right now, or at least I don’t know who he is. It’s something I’ll talk to my listeners about. It’s been in my mind.”
In his 13th lecture on Deuteronomy (in 2003), Dennis said: “Any success I’ve had in my field is because I’ve always tried to ask myself, what does God want me to do? If I lost that, I think that I would fail in my profession overnight. That is entirely what gives me the strength to do what I do every day.
“God gave me the ability to speak. What did I do for it? I took one speech course in college. I got a C. She said, you speak well but you’re a lousy listener. That’s because I fell asleep. I couldn’t fake it. I’ve got ADD for boring people."
On May 27, 2011, Dennis said: “The ideal candidate would have at least two things — a conservative aka American-values-based system. Understands that small government is a moral good, not just an economic good. Two. Be able to articulate it with great clarity.”
“Three. The person has to have gravitas. President Obama has gravitas. He exudes seriousness of purpose. I don’t want politicians to decide to be just like the people when they talk to the people.”
“When you’re a candidate, you already look less presidential than the president of the United States.”
On Jun. 21, 2011, Dennis Prager said: "If I ran for president, and if I had the money, I would, I would be attacked as a kook. Right-wing nut case.
"The dismissal is in direct proportion to how much one understands the injurious nature of the left."
“Michelle Bachman threatens the left. She’s an attractive, bright, knowledgeable woman. She knows exactly why this country is in danger — it is in danger because of the left. Anyone who believes that is attacked as a kook."
In a 2010 appearance at Stephen S. Wise temple, Dennis said to interviewer David Woznica: “I have zero desire to have any power over anybody. You know this is a fact because even on the tiny tiny scale of my running Brandeis-Bardin, all I wanted was terrific other people and to share power. I just wanted to make sure that the values were what I thought the values should be.”
“The only reason I thought of running for senate was would it give me a bigger forum to offer the values I care about. I ultimately concluded that to get a bigger forum than a national radio show, you have to be president of the United States. I thought of that too. I have thought about running in the primaries starting in Iowa. I would not expect to win.”
“I would like to be in those debates… I can’t run because I don’t have the money to run… Because of campaign finance reform, only rich people can run for office… There are many rich people who would support. One of the heads of Best Buy said he listened to my show every day and any way I can help you. But he can’t help me. He can only give me $4,000.”
By force of his personality, Dennis Prager has largely set the terms for how the world relates to him. He towers above his challengers and most of them look bad when they take him on. The major journalistic profiles of him have echoed his understanding of himself as a moralist with a mission to teach humanity right and wrong.
Feb. 1, 2012, Dennis Prager said: "Republicans are looking for a serious person with the right ideas who understands what is at stake in November of 2012. The reason Mitch Daniels is not running for president is family related. He does not want the damage the media will do to candidates, especially Republican candidates. I don't blame him.
"Many people are willing to die for this country but are not willing to have their name ruined for this country."
"There is only one answer. The private lives of major people in the media must be revealed. Those who have money to spare in Republican life might want to consider starting a fund with millions of dollars to have muckrakers publish the life and sexual habits of the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Chicago Tribune, etc...
"If your claim is that we need to know everything of a public figure because of the influence they wield, then because of the influence you wield, we need to know this much about you."
Sept. 19, 2012, Dennis said: "I may regret saying this... If Mitt Romney loses, I'm running for president...."
On Sept. 24, 2012, Dennis said about Barack Obama's appearance on 60 Minutes: "What struck me more than anything was how much Barack Obama has aged in four years. Not only the grey hair but the lines on the face. It really does show that aggravation, tension, have a physical effect. I guess I haven't had my share of aggravation in life. I think he has more lines than I do and I'm older than him. It was really dramatic because of the clarity of the picture on my HD screen. He almost seemed a bit weary."
For six months prior to the Nov. 6, 2012 election, Dennis predicted a Mitt Romney victory. With the exception of Frank Luntz, his guests (such as Dick Morris, Michael Barone, William Kristol, Jonah Goldberg) predicted a Mitt Romney victory. When Mitt Romney lost, it came as a shock to Dennis. He called it a "catastrophe" and "a bad day" and "a dark moment" for the United States.
Nov. 8, 2012, Dennis said that immigration was the one message the Republicans have to change. Dennis appeared to support Republicans getting behind a path to citizenship for people who are in the United States illegally (so that Republicans could win a higher percentage of Latino votes) and that Republicans need to present themselves as the pro-immigrant party.
"Ours is more complex. You have to answer demagoguery much more... Republicans don't have to change. Those who didn't vote for us have to change. Hispanics? You made a bad choice for you and for America. Blacks? You made a bad choice for you and for America... And here's why."
On November 14, 2012, Dennis said: "I wake up worrying about America."
"If we fail, it is over. Where will hope come from? Russia? China? Western Europe?"
Returning home from a two week cruise, Dennis said Jan. 21, 2013: "It was the first trip in my lifetime where I thought that places are doing better than America in some important arenas. It's a sad little thought. I didn't share with anybody. I'm worried about America."
"This was my first return in 42 years, every year I've gone abroad at least once, that I didn't come back thinking, wow, how fortunate I am because it is so different. America is deteriorating because it is becoming like other countries. The left wants us to become like other countries. The left has been in power for the last four years and now four more years. How could it not be more like other countries? The number of Americans who are given money and benefits from the state who should not be getting money and benefits from the state are entering European levels."
Mar. 8, 2013, Dennis said: "The Republican leadership lives in as much as a hermetically sealed bubble as the Democractic leadership. This is a catastrophe for the country. We have two parties -- the damaging and the stupid, and I am a member of the stupid party. Why Republican candidates who don't tap into those of us in talk radio who make the arguments for a living or we have to get another job is one of the great riddles that would stump the sphinx of Egypt.
"New York and Washington are bubbles. We are there to provide money and votes. Ideas come from New York and Washington. That's why they are so lousy... The Republican leadership astonishes me."
"I know Mitt Romney. Mitt Romney knows me. I was at a fundraiser for him at a private home two months before the election. Someone even said, 'Dennis Prager is here. Why don't you have him write some speeches?' And Mitt smiled and made some sweet comment about me but he might as well have suggested that he learn Sanskrit before the election. It was a non-ideological battle. I wrote about that. I couldn't be too severe because I wanted him to win. Jobs, jobs, jobs. It's all about jobs. That's what the brilliant advisors to Mitt Romney decided, that you're Mr. Fix It, and you can fix the economy better than Barack Obama. Remember how I said that Barack Obama is not the issue, [it is leftism]. The issue is ideas. Left-wing ideas ruin a country. Let's say that. At least you'll have clarity. Most Americans don't understand that it is leftism vs Americanism."
On Oct. 25, 2013, Dennis said: "I would love a TV show and I don't quite fully, well, the biggest reason I don't have one is that I live on the West Coast and not in New York or Washington..."
On May 30, 2013, Dennis said: "He [Obama] is irrelevant to me. He is of no interest to me. He is simply the president. Leftism is destroying the country, not Obama. Biden would destroy the country and Hillary would destroy the country and a whole bunch of senators on the left, the editors of the New York Times would destroy the country... I don't care about Obama... Obama is nothing. He's a leftist with power. The day he is out of power, he will be of total irrelevance to this society. Leftism is ruining America. Obama is a leftist. That is all that is significant about Obama."
"I don't think about Obama more than five minutes a day. I think about leftism constantly -- what it does to the arts, what it does to children, what it does to families, what it does to education."
Apr. 18, 2014, Dennis said: "I have reluctantly concluded that for me the political ship has sailed..."
Virtually You: The Dangerous Powers of the E-Personality
Many people like Dennis the person but can't stand Dennis the pundit. Dr. Aboujaoude explained in his 2011 book:
Unfettered by old rules of behaving, social exchange, etiquette, or even netiquette, this virtual personality is more assertive, less restrained, a little bit on the dark side, and decidedly sexier. Its advantages cannot be underestimated: This “e-personality” can act as a liberating force for the real-life individual, allowing the person to transcend debilitating shyness, let go of stultifying inhibitions, and forge connections and friendships that would be impossible otherwise. Seen under the best possible light, it is bolder, stronger, and more efficient than the real-life original. It is what makes voicing an unpopular point of view and organizing against an injustice easier to do over instant messaging and on social networking sites. It spurs action and confers bravery......the flip side of enhanced productivity, expediency, and courage can be confusion, pain, and disorientation in the real world. That is so because the online self is also dangerous and irresponsible, running roughshod over our caution and self-control. It can encourage us to pursue unrealistic or unhealthy goals; it can make us feel smarter and more knowledgeable than is warranted; and it can encourage us to behave more selfishly and recklessly.
Is Diversity Our Strength?
A man wrote to Lawrence Auster Nov. 20, 2012:
Back in the 1990s, Dennis Prager made a comment on his show one day that is so engraved in my memory I can quote it, I believe, verbatim, even after all these years: “When I see millions of Mexicans coming to this country, I don’t feel concerned. I feel complimented.” Prager believed that Mexicans, by the very act of coming here, were symbolically taking some sort of vow that they renounced The Mexican Way (including its native tribalism) and were now eager to embrace his superior European-American values and culture with open arms. Some years later, when three million illegal aliens poured into the streets of Los Angeles waving Mexican flags and signs that declared things like, “Go back to Europe. This is our territory now,” Prager came on the air and in this whiny, disillusioned voice lamented, “Couldn’t there be just ONE sign that said, “Thank you Americans, for allowing us into your great country?”Another reader wrote:
Prager is also baffled that Christians do not have telethons and raise private armies to fight the persecution of brother Christians across the globe, in contrast to Jews’ rallying support of Soviet Jewry, Ethiopians, and whatnot. I am baffled that Prager, a member of a race that calls itself “The Tribe,” is outright blind to the difference between the religions: Judaism is rooted in blood, Christianity in hearts and minds. Obviously, the tribal ties are bound tighter.
Aug. 23, 2022, Dennis said: "One of the many lies of the Left is that diversity is our strength. If diversity were our strength, why would Finland, Norway, Sweden and Denmark always be voted the happiest countries."
Banging On
Much of Dennis Prager's radio show engenders rage against the left for cheating (in the war of ideas and in elections), and much of that rage is unfounded because it relies on shaky sources such as the New York Post.
* "Every nightmare I've had about the left taking over the country is actually happening," said Dennis Nov. 25, 2013 after Obama's deal with Iran over nukes.
In a 2014 essay, John Measheimer pointed out: "Nor is it clear that Tehran is pursuing nuclear weapons. The consensus opinion in the American intelligence community is that it is not. But even if that judgment proves wrong and Iran acquires a nuclear arsenal, it could not use that capability to dominate the Persian Gulf. Nuclear weapons provide states with little offensive capability and thus are ill suited for spreading Iran’s influence in its neighborhood. Furthermore, both Israel and the United States have nuclear weapons and would never tolerate Iran achieving regional hegemony. Nor would Saudi Arabia or any other Arab state, which means Iran would face a formidable balancing coalition if it tried to rule the Gulf."Reading the Drudgereport.com most mornings, I can usually predict much of what Dennis will talk about on his show. He finds irresistible the stories about MSM bias and left-wing corruption.
* On Nov. 20, 2013, Dennis said: "According to a New York Post writer, 'Census Faked 2012 Election Jobs Report.'
"...If you are on the left and you were forced to bet all of your savings, would you bet the numbers were accurate or manipulated on behalf of the Obama administration? I know that the answer is that all of you would bet that they were manipulated."
"The use of the government to defraud, to lie, the [Obama] administration, I tell you, these are new frontiers."This Slate article rebuts the Post report.
As someone who has since 1989 largely sided with Prager's Republican politics, I find that the primary emotion his show has elicited in me (and I suspect in most listeners) since it went daily in 1993 is anger. Prager conforms to the template of right-wing talk radio of instilling a sense of victimhood in his listeners. Like most successful talk radio hosts, Prager excels at infuriating people. When you enrage, you engage and you rate.
Aug. 26, 2014, Dennis said in his second hour: "If you didn't hear the first hour, I really got angry. The story out of Vermont. It's a good reason for you to hear all three hours and the best way is through Pragertopia.com. The taking down of the bacon ad in Vermont and then the dishonesty in addressing it, we're in trouble. Not because of the woman who made the request but because they honored the request."
Political scientist James Joyner wrote Feb. 21, 2021:The Lund Talk Radio Stylebook
...talk show hosts...are popular and powerful because they appeal to a segment of the population that feels disenfranchised and even victimized by the media. These people believe the media are predominantly staffed by and consistently reflect the views of social liberals. This view is by now so long-held and deep-rooted, it has evolved into part of virtually every conservative’s DNA.
To succeed, a talk show host must perpetuate the notion that his or her listeners are victims, and the host is the vehicle by which they can become empowered. The host frames virtually every issue in us-versus-them terms. There has to be a bad guy against whom the host will emphatically defend those loyal listeners.
The enemy can be a politician -- either a Democratic officeholder or, in rare cases where no Democrat is convenient to blame, it can be a "RINO" (a "Republican In Name Only," who is deemed not conservative enough. It can be the cold cruel government bureaucracy. More often than not, however, the enemy is the "mainstream media..."
In the talk radio business, this concept, which must be mastered to be successful, is called “differentiating” yourself from the rest of the media. It is a brilliant marketing tactic that has also helped Fox News Channel thrive. “We report, you decide” and “Fair and Balanced” are more than just savvy slogans. They are code words signaling that only Fox will report the news in a way conservatives see as objective and truthful.Forget any notion, however, that radio talk shows are supposed to be fair, evenhanded discussions featuring a diversity of opinions. The Fairness Doctrine, which required this, was repealed 20 years ago. So talk shows can be, and are, all about the host's opinions, analyses and general worldview. Programmers learned long ago that benign conversations led by hosts who present all sides of an issue don't attract large audiences.
One entire group that rarely gets on the air are the elderly callers – unless they have something extraordinary to say. Sadly, that doesn’t happen often. The theory is that old-sounding callers help produce old-skewing audiences. The target demo is 25 to 54, not 65 and older…Talk show fans are not stupid. They will detect an obvious phony. The best hosts sincerely believe everything they say. Their passion is real. Their arguments have been carefully crafted in a manner they know will be meaningful to the audience, and that validates the views these folks were already thinking.
A smart talk show host will, from time to time, disagree publicly with a Republican president, the Republican Party, or some conservative doctrine. (President Bush’s disastrous choice of Harriet Miers for the Supreme Court was one such example.) But these disagreements are strategically chosen to prove the host is an independent thinker, without appreciably harming the president or party. This is not to suggest that hosts don’t genuinely disagree with the conservative line at times. They do, more often than you might think. But they usually keep it to themselves.
If you lack compelling arguments in favor of your candidate or point of view, attack the other side. These attacks often rely on two key rhetorical devices, which I call You Know What Would Happen If and The Preemptive Strike.
Using the first strategy, a host will describe something a liberal has said or done that conservatives disagree with, but for which the liberal has not been widely criticized, and then say, “You know what would happen if a conservative had said (or done) that? He (or she) would have been filleted by the ‘liberal media.’ ” This is particularly effective because it’s a two-fer, simultaneously reinforcing the notion that conservatives are victims and that “liberals” are the enemy.
The second strategy, The Preemptive Strike, is used when a host knows that news reflecting poorly on conservative dogma is about to break or become more widespread. When news of the alleged massacre at Haditha first trickled out in the summer of 2006, not even Iraq War chest-thumper Charlie Sykes would defend the U.S. Marines accused of killing innocent civilians in the Iraqi village. So he spent lots of air time criticizing how the “mainstream media” was sure to sensationalize the story in the coming weeks. Charlie would kill the messengers before any message had even been delivered.
Good talk show hosts can get their listeners so lathered up that they truly can change public policy. They can inspire like-minded folks to flood the phone lines and e-mail inboxes of aldermen, county supervisors, legislators and federal lawmakers. They can inspire their followers to vote for candidates the hosts prefer. How? By pounding away on an issue or candidate, hour after hour, day after day. Hosts will extol the virtues of the favored candidate or, more likely, exploit whatever Achilles heel the other candidate might have. Influencing elections is more likely to occur at the local rather than national level, but that still gives talk radio power.
By the way, here’s a way to prognosticate elections just by listening to talk shows: Except in presidential elections, when they will always carry water for the Republican nominee, conservative hosts won’t hurt their credibility by backing candidates they think can’t win. So if they’re uncharacteristically tepid, or even silent, about a particular race, that means the Democrat has a good chance of winning. Nor will hosts spend their credibility on an issue where they know they disagree with listeners.
...This brings us to perhaps the most ironic thing about most talk show hosts. Though they may savage politicians and others they oppose, they fear criticism or critiques of any kind. They can dish it out, but they can’t take it.
...But the key reason talk radio succeeds is because its hosts can exploit the fears and perceived victimization of a large swath of conservative-leaning listeners. And they feel victimized because many liberals and moderates have ignored or trivialized their concerns and have stereotyped these Americans as uncaring curmudgeons.
Because of that, there will always be listeners who believe that [they] are the only members of the media who truly care about them.
[Rush] Limbaugh’s schtick ultimately transformed the conservative movement in destructive ways because it showed how lucrative playing to the predudices of an aggrieved base can be... ...[A] business model that depends on keeping people riled up and feeding their belief system will inevitably become mean-spirited and dishonest. Discussions of nuanced differences of emphasis—which is where politics in a democracy should naturally gravitate—aren’t enough to get millions to tune in for three hours a day, every day. No, the opposition must be monsters out to destroy all that the Good People hold dear.Like most talk show hosts, Dennis Prager spends a lot of time talking about things he knows little about. Here are some more examples:
* Mar. 24, 2014, Dennis said about e-cigarettes "all they are is water vapor."
The New York Times reported Mar. 23, 2014:
Selling a Poison by the Barrel: Liquid Nicotine for E-Cigarettes* In the run-up to and the aftermath of Republican Ken Cuccinelli's loss in the Virginia governor's race in November of 2013, Dennis Prager spent about an hour of his show over various days bemoaning the Libertarian candidate (Robert Sarvis) taking votes away from Cuccinelli. Dennis said Nov. 6, 2013: "There were two big reasons Terry Mcauliffe won -- the Libertarian candidate and an utterly lying deceitful ad in Spanish to the Latino community in northern Virginia."A dangerous new form of a powerful stimulant is hitting markets nationwide, for sale by the vial, the gallon and even the barrel.
The drug is nicotine, in its potent, liquid form — extracted from tobacco and tinctured with a cocktail of flavorings, colorings and assorted chemicals to feed the fast-growing electronic cigarette industry.These “e-liquids,” the key ingredients in e-cigarettes, are powerful neurotoxins. Tiny amounts, whether ingested or absorbed through the skin, can cause vomiting and seizures and even be lethal. A teaspoon of even highly diluted e-liquid can kill a small child.
As John Fund told Prager on air Nov. 6, 2013, and Michael Barone told him Nov. 7 and as the Washington Post reported Nov. 7, Sarvis did not cost Cuccinelli the election. Prager talks as though libertarians are right-wing and naturally belong in the Republican party because they are for small government when in truth, libertarians are no more right-wing than left-wing and they are no more naturally Republicans than they are Democrats.
* On May 8, 2013, Prager's topic was: "Who wants to argue with their spouse? So what do couples argue about? Topics that come up are: in-laws, money, and children."
Dennis showed no awareness that arguments with loved ones are not usually about the ostensible topic but are ways of checking to see if the person still cares about you, is available to you, and will come help you if needed.
* On Nov. 19, 2013, Dennis wrote: "Millions of Africans have died of malaria because of the environmentalist-induced bans on DDT." Most scientists in this area would dispute the claim.* Jan. 6, 2014, Dennis said: "The United States has decided under the Obama administration to leave the Middle East. The only thing they are engaged in is to try to force Israel into an agreement with the Palestinians. I don't know if the world will survive...the injury the Obama administration has done."
"The problem is not American intervention. It's America leaving. The right has to take ownership of the invasion of Iraq (along with the Democrats who voted for it) and the left has to take ownership of America leaving."
"To leave Afghanistan is to say that the people who jumped out of the World Trade Center are forgotten."
While Dennis describes President Obama as the most left-wing president ever (with the possible exception of FDR), elite political scientists conclude in late 2013: "We find that President Obama is the most ideologically moderate Democratic president in the post-war period..."
Chris Cilizza, an objective reporter at the Washington Post, writes Nov. 25, 2013: "Looking back then at his near-decade in federal office, the numbers would suggest that Obama is slightly more liberal than his former Senate colleagues but less liberal than many of his Democratic predecessors in the White House."
On Aug. 27, 2013, Dennis wrote a point he's made a thousand times that is not in fact true: "The essence of the American right, after all, is less government..." Dennis never provides evidence for this assertion.
We have abundant evidence of what happens when the right comes to power (such as presidents Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan and the two Bushes), in the US and elsewhere, and it no more tends to smaller government than does the left. The right talks about smaller government more than the left does but it rarely does anything more about it. The right prefers to spend on the military and the left prefers to spend on welfare, but spend they both like to do equally. And how do you define smaller government? As a percentage of GNP? As state power over federal power? As reduced intervention overseas? The left generally prefers less US intervention overseas while the right usually favors more.
Report: "Government spending at the start of the 20th century was less than 7 percent of GDP. It vaulted to almost 30 percent of GDP by the end of World War I, and then settled down to 10 percent of GDP in the 1920s. In the 1930s spending doubled to 20 percent of GDP. Defense spending in World War II drove overall government spending over 50 percent of GDP before declining to 22 percent of GDP in the late 1940s. The 1950s began a steady spending increase to about 36 percent of GDP by 1982. In the 1990s and 2000s government spending stayed about constant at 33-35 percent of GDP, but in the aftermath of the Crash of 2008 spending has jogged up to 40 percent of GDP."
This massive increase in government spending as a percentage of the GNP over 100 years has been little affected by the right or left orientation of the party in power.
Malcolm Gladwell
Dennis recognizes in huckster Malcolm Gladwell a kindred spirit. They met on the air Feb. 18, 2014, when Malcolm was promoting his new book -- David and Goliath: Underdogs, Misfits, and the Art of Battling Giants.
Dennis: "Your mind, I have a certain identification with it. You look at something and you find patterns. That's the way my mind works."Malcolm: "I think that people in the position we're in, doing the job we're doing, that's our value, right? Most people are information rich and theory poor. They don't have the time or the inclination to make sense of [life], to put patterns together."
Dennis: "But without patterns, you don't understand life."
Malcolm: "Yeah."
Dennis: "It's something you can train yourself to do, but it is also a gift. They asked Schubert, how did you come up with all these melodies? And he said, 'They just come into my brain.'"
"Thanks to you, I got to love the [story of] David and Goliath even more. It gives tremendous substance to the story in the Bible. All these little details, you make sense of."
"Just for that story alone, you have to read [his book] David and Goliath. It begins with a brilliant analysis of why the story is so telling in its details."
Malcolm: "Why are we so constantly fooled by things that don't matter?"
Dennis: "That's why I resonate to this theme of yours. At a very early age, I came to a conclusion I have never wavered from -- the staggering exaggerated importance given to brains and raw intelligence. I realized in high school that the ones with the finest brains were often the most confused, the least capable of dealing with life kids in the grade. I have learned from my listeners, who come from all walks of life, more than I learned from my professors at Columbia."
Malcolm: "Yeah. That does not surprise me. You talk to people in the business world, I'm always curious about hiring, and the good ones, that's all they talk about. They hire character."
Dennis: "I'm getting the chills. I raised my kids with that theme. I told them, 'I don't care about your grades. I care about your character.' And they got crappy grades. Character is king."
"I feel like a kindred spirit with you."
"Malcolm Gladwell teaches what isn't taught. He has an original mind. It is a joy to read him."
John Gray wrote Nov. 21, 2013 in The New Republic about Gladwell's latest book:
There is nothing remotely challenging, for most of Gladwell’s readers, in this story; it is the sort of uplift in which they already believe. The dominant narrative for the last three centuries has been one in which the power of elites and rulers is progressively overcome by the moral force of the common man and woman who sticks up for what is right. Far from being a forbidden truth, this is what everyone thinks. Here we can glimpse one of the secrets of Gladwell’s success. Pretending to present daringly counterintuitive views to his readers, he actually strengthens the hold on them of a view of things that they have long taken for granted. This is, perhaps, the essence of the genre that Gladwell has pioneered: while reinforcing beliefs that everyone avows, he evokes in the reader a satisfying sensation of intellectual non-conformity...Speaking to a time that prides itself on optimism and secretly suspects that nothing works, his books are analgesics for those who seek temporary relief from abiding anxiety. There is more of reality and wisdom in a Chinese fortune cookie than can be found anywhere in Gladwell’s pages. But then, it is not reality or wisdom that his readers are looking for.
Here are some Steve Sailer posts on Malcolm Gladwell: Here Here Here Here Here Here
Around April of 2022, a post to the Decoding the Gurus Reddit read:[Gladwell's] output is (sometimes) incredibly destructive.A reply to the post said: "You just described exactly what I dislike about TEDtalks in general."It all plays into the same style of thinking as the Nudge / Freakonomics school of technocratic solutions. Oh, here’s this one simple trick that will solve this hugely multi-variate and chaotic societal problem! Oh, here’s how everything you thought you knew about this historical event is wrong! Oh, here’s one simple analogistic explanation that reduces complex human behaviour into a predictive rule!
It’s all so smug and self satisfied, and so convinced of the veracity and insightfulness of its own analysis. And I’m convinced it has led to (or rather is at least a background part of the zeitgeist of) overconfident mainstream policymaking of exactly the sort that failed to see things like Brexit and Trump coming, and which thereby helped to cause or worsen their effects. He’s everything that is wrong with the superior, overly abstract, overly detached, overly intellectualised New York Times / Guardian worldview, with none of the normal redeeming features.
I think he shares many of the stylistic problems that other gurus do: creating overly reductive models and then mistaking his models for the part of the world they are supposed to describe; falling for his own sophistry; definite in-group identification, etc. The level of hot takery is unparalleled.
Another reply said:
He's certainly one of the many factors that helped establish the rise of the warrior cop. Pundits have used The Tipping Point as a casus belli for zero tolerance policing strategies, in spite of Gladwell's exaltation of broken windows theory having desperately shoddy (if any) grounding in any research on the famously steep decline of violent crime in 1990s NYC. Gladwell admits this, these days, for whatever that's worth.Another poster wrote: "It is absolutely true that he is part of a general framework of thinking that HAS been influential in policy circles, and disastrously so. The reason I mentioned “nudge” is that it was deeply popular with the Cameron government in the UK, and was a driving force behind the “Big Society” push to present laissez faire, minimalist social welfare government as some kind of moral communitarian approach. The height of what in the Ireland we tend to call “policy wonkery” - technocratic bullshit, in other words. And the through lines from that to Brexit are very very clear."I think Gladwell of today is mostly harmless, but that's the sort of shit that egotistical intellectual quick shots like him can bring you. For policy purposes, maybe it's for the best that most contemporary gurus are profoundly illiterate.
Another post: "There is something SO compelling (edit: misleadingly so) about people who are good with analogies. It’s a tool I used a huge amount in my former career, because I used to have to talk about a lot of quite technical abstract concepts, and analogies are really useful. But I maybe hit on 5-10 great ones in my ten year career, or whatever. As annoying as people like Weinstein E, Gladwell and Jordan Peterson are, they are very very good at reasoning by analogy."
The Bigger the Government, the Smaller the Citizen
In reaction to Barack Obama's expansion of the federal government, Dennis Prager in 2009 developed the saying, "The Bigger the Government, the Smaller the Citizen." He wrote Sept. 1, 2009:
Those of us who oppose a massive increase in the role the national government plays in health care ("ObamaCare") do so because we fear the immense and unsustainable national debt it would incur and because we are certain that medical care in America would deteriorate. But there is a bigger reason most of us oppose it: We believe that the bigger the government becomes, the smaller the individual citizen becomes.Republican politicians such as John Boehner, speaker of the House, and Congressman David Dreier took up the phrase....Not only does bigger government teach people not to take care of themselves, it teaches them not to take of others. Smaller government is the primary reason Americans give more charity and volunteer more time per capita than do Europeans living in welfare states. Why take care of your fellow citizen, or even your family, when the government will do it for you?
This preoccupation with self includes foreign policy: Why care about, let alone risk dying for, another country's liberty? That is the view of the world's left. That is why conservative governments are far more supportive of the war efforts in Iraq or Afghanistan than left-wing governments of the same country. The moment the socialists won in Spain, they withdrew all their forces from Iraq. The new center-left government in Japan has promised to stop helping the war effort in Afghanistan.
On July 25, 2011, Boehner responded to President Obama's nationwide speech on the budget deficit: "You know, I’ve always believed, the bigger government, the smaller the people. And right now, we have a government so big and so expensive it’s sapping the drive of our people and keeping our economy from running at full capacity."
In a May 14, 2012 three hour show with Dennis Prager, Hugh Hewitt said: "At the Baltimore retreat of the National Republican Congressional Committee [in 2009], Dennis gave this big speech. I had to follow him. I’ve now learned go before Dennis, don’t follow Dennis. And so he gave this big speech, standing ovation, he had turned around like Beethoven, couldn’t see that they were standing, I had to poke him and say turn around and look at the audience. And what brought them to their feet was the saying the bigger the government, the smaller the citizen..."
"I saw grown men…now the hardest-bitten, the most cynical, the toughest to reach audience in the world is an audience of radio program directors and general managers. They are absolutely cynical about talk show hosts, because that’s all they ever deal with. And most of them, not Dennis or me, are prima donnas, and they are very difficult to deal with. And so when you get a whole bunch of them, a hundred of them in a room, it’s a tough audience. It may be the toughest audience, because they’ve heard every shtick, they’ve seen us for years, there’s nothing we can do or say to get them to actually listen to us. They’re just ah, it’s Prager, it’s Hewitt, it’s Bennett, it’s Gallagher, it’s Medved. They just turn us…it’s Pastore, whatever. However, the last time we were together at a Salem general managers meeting, reduced to tears by my friend Dennis Prager, because he talked about why he is so much a fan of this radio network and of Christians..."
Is it true that the bigger the government, the smaller the citizen? For example, on March 13, 2023, the US Defense Department noted: "On March 9, 2023, the Biden-Harris Administration submitted to Congress a proposed Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 Budget request of $842 billion for the Department of Defense (DoD), an increase of $26 billion over FY 2023 levels and $100 billion more than FY 2022."
If the defense budget were half as much, would American citizens be bigger? If so, how? I don't see it. If the defense budget were twice as big, would American citizens be smaller? If so, how? I don't see it.
If the American government housed all of its citizens and insured that all of its streets were safe and clean, would Americans be diminished by that spending?
American states spent $538 billion on education in 2022. How would American citizens be smaller or bigger if the states spent half as much or twice as much?
Public restrooms in the United States tend to be poor, nasty, brutish and rare. If instead they were lavish and plentiful, would American citizens be smaller? If they provided thick luxurious toilet paper instead of the cheapest kind, how would American citizens be smaller? How are we enlarged as individuals by reduced spending on public infrastructure? If we spent twice as much on public parks or public roads, how would American citizens be smaller? If we had nicer airports, nicer public transport, how exactly would America citizens be smaller? If we spent more money to clean up our air and water, and made more government interventions into the economy to reduce pollution, how would Americans be made, on net, smaller by these increases in the size of government? If Americans had Medicare for all like all other first world countries, how would we be smaller? If we spent twice as much on law enforcement and had an accompanying rise in public safety, how would we be smaller? If we doubled prison sentences for violent crime, and therefore spent twice as much on such prisons, how would we be smaller? I have spent about 12 years of my life (as of 2023) in Australia, which has more lavish welfare spending than America. Australians don't seem to be smaller than Americans. They have different values. While Americans venerate freedom, Aussies venerate fairness. Why is one value inherently superior to the other?
As a conservative, I love the sound of Prager's maxim, but it doesn't stand up to examination.
Dennis wrote: "Those of us who oppose a massive increase in the role the national government plays in health care (“ObamaCare”) do so because we fear the immense and unsustainable national debt it would incur and because we are certain that medical care in America would deteriorate." Medical care in America has changed in America because of Obamacare, but has it deteriorated? Are Americans noticeably smaller because of Obamacare? Obamacare cost the federal government $1.683 trillion for the first ten years. If it had only cost $300 million, would Americans be bigger? If it had cost $4 trillion, would Americans be smaller? A 2020 academic analysis of the full cost of the 2003 Iraq invasion put the figure at $1.922 trillion. If the war had turned a profit, would Americans be bigger? If the war had cost twice as much, would Americans be smaller?
Dennis wrote in 2009: "Here are five reasons why bigger government makes less impressive people. 1. People who are able to take care of themselves and do so are generally better than people who are able to take care of themselves but rely on others."
We could hire our own police and build our own roads and privately raise funds for a national defense, but it is more efficient to do it through government. How are people worse because of government roads and defense? A man who does zero housework but earns a million dollars a year relies on other people to take care of many parts of his life for him. How is he worse for doing what he does best instead of vacuuming, shopping, and tending to children?
Dennis wrote: "Even if one believes, as the left does by definition, that the ideal society is one in which the state takes care of as many of our needs as possible, one must acknowledge that this has deleterious effects on many, if not most, citizens’ moral character. The moment one acknowledges that the more one takes care of oneself, the more developed is his or her character, one must acknowledge that a bigger state diminishes its citizens’ characters."
If you concentrate on doing the things you do best in life and rely on others to do things you comparatively do less well, how is your moral character diminished by that? If you rely on the state to provide parks, police, roads, and schools, how are you morally diminished? As is typical with his public pronouncements, Prager makes assertions but he does not propose testable hypotheses.
"The essence of good character is to care of oneself..." How is one not taking care of oneself if you leave much of life to government or to your spouse or to your community while you focus on other things?
"The more people come to rely on government, the more they develop a sense of entitlement..."
If you rely on police to enforce the law, instead of hiring your own police, are you bad? If you rely on the government to provide roads and parks, what bad things happen to you?
"First, the more one feels entitled, the less one believes he has to work for anything. Why work hard if I can look to the state to give much of what I need, and, increasingly, much of what I want? Second, the more one feels entitled, the less grateful one feels. This is obvious: The more one expects to be given, the less one is grateful for what one is given. Third, the more entitled and the less grateful one feels, the angrier one becomes. The opposite of gratitude is not only ingratitude, it is anger. People who do not get what they think they are entitled to become angry."
If you feel entitled to roads or parks or defense, whether it comes from individuals, a community or the government, how does it follow that you don't need to do anything in exchange? If you make deals with people that in exchange for you providing X, they will provide Y, do you not need to work? If a society makes a collective deal that they will jointly provide certain goods and services, persons will have to work to fund that. If public goods and services are lavish or poor, how exactly are people made bigger or smaller by that? When I am in Australia, I notice that by and large, public facilities are cleaner and nicer than they are in America. Australians aren't noticeably angrier than Americans, in fact, they seem to be happier.
"One of the effects of the welfare state on vast numbers of European citizens is disdain for work. This is in keeping with Marx’s view of utopia as a time when people will work very little and devote their large amount of non-working time writing poetry and engaging in other such lofty pursuits. Work is not regarded by the left as ennobling. It is highly ennobling in the American value system, however."
Americans, by and large, work longer hours than Europeans. How exactly are Americans ennobled by that? In my adult life, I've had periods where I worked longer than average hours and other times when I've worked fewer than average hours. To whatever extent hard work ennobled me, it is not exactly clear. I know many people who work hard and work long hours. I'm not clear on how they would be less noble if they devoted more time to friends and family.
"Along with disdain for work, one witnesses among Western Europeans a preoccupation with not working. Vacation time has become a moral value among many Europeans. There have been riots in countries like France merely over working hours. In Sweden and elsewhere, more and more workers take more and more time off from work, knowing they will be paid anyway. In Germany and elsewhere, it is against the law to keep one’s store open after a certain hour, lest that give that store owner an income advantage and thereby compel a competing store to stay open longer as well."
I see strengths and weaknesses in the various approaches to life. I don't see how it is clear that the American way is inherently and universally superior. How are citizens rendered smaller or bigger by government regulations about shop hours and minimum vacation times? Australians all get a minimum of a month holiday a year. How are they made smaller by that?
"Not only does bigger government teach people not to take care of themselves, it teaches them not to take of others. Smaller government is the primary reason Americans give more charity and volunteer more time per capita than do Europeans living in welfare states. Why take care of your fellow citizen, or even your family, when the government will do it for you?"
If you vote for government to tax you more to provide social services instead of your giving charity and volunteering, why is that inferior?
"This preoccupation with self includes foreign policy: Why care about, let alone risk dying for, another country’s liberty? That is the view of the world’s left. That is why conservative governments are far more supportive of the war efforts in Iraq or Afghanistan than left-wing governments of the same country. The moment the socialists won in Spain, they withdrew all their forces from Iraq. The new center-left government in Japan has promised to stop helping the war effort in Afghanistan."
From the perspective of 2023, it seems like those who wanted out of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars were more right than those who wanted to stay in.
"Of course, there are fine idealistic individuals on the left, and selfish individuals on the right. But as a rule, bigger government increases the number of angry, ungrateful, lazy, spoiled and self-centered individuals. Which is why some of us believe that increased nationalization of health care is worth shouting about. And even crying over."
According to Wikipedia (checked on April 20, 2023, the following governments spent the lowest percentage of their GDP (the following list is in ascending spending order): Somalia, Turkmenistan, Haiti, Venezuela, Sudan, Iran, Equatorial Guinea, Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Yemen, Guinea, Nigeria, Guatemala. How many Americans wish their country operated more like these countries? How many Americans would think citizens of these countries are so much bigger and more impressive than Americans?
The only first world countries that have distinctly lower government spending than the US that Americans might like are Singapore, Taiwan, and Ireland. How many Americans would consider these countries dramatically superior to their own?
Here are countries that spend more on government as a percentage of GDP than the United States, listed in ascending order of government spending as a percentage of GDP: Norway, Latvia, Cyprus, Estonia, Malta, Canada, Maldives, Montenegro, New Zealand, Brazil, Luxembourg, Serbia, Japan, Poland, Slovakia, Netherlands, Vanuatu, Czech Republic, United Kingdom, Croatia, Portugal, Tonga, Iceland, Slovenia, Sweden, Spain, Denmark, Germany, Hungary, Austria, Belgium, Finland, Greece, Italy, France, Ukraine.
According to the 2023 World Happiness Report, the ten happiest countries are, in descending order: Finland, Denmark, Iceland, Israel, Netherlands, Sweden, Norway, Switzerland, Luxembourg, and New Zealand. All of them have bigger governments than the United States.
On their Aug. 2, 2022 show, Prager's Youtube cohost inadvertently gave a good rebuttal to his claim that the bigger the government, the smaller the citizen. Julie Hartman said, "I was driving up to Starbucks and I thought... that the road is paved and I don't have to worry about getting shot, I can go to a Starbucks and I don't have to worry that my drink is contaminated, every step we take, we are so lucky."
On his November 14, 2022 Youtube show with Julie Hartman, Dennis said: "I'm not looking for great lines to make a better living and get a bigger audience. I'm looking for important points to touch people's lives."
Like Deepok Chopra, Dave Rubin, and Gwyneth Paltrow, Prager undoubtedly touches lives. He says many things that sound profound. In the final analysis, though, many of his crowd-pleasing points are epistemic sabotage.
Failing
On Prager's show May 17, 2012, Arthur Brooks, head of the American Enterprise Institute, said to Dennis: "Do you know how much good you are doing for America?"
Dennis: "No, I don't. All I think about is how much I'm failing."
"When I look at elections, I think, did I have any impact?"
Mar. 28, 2014, Dennis said: "I will not have achieved my major goals."
"I desire to be president of the United States but I do not expect it."
June 28, 2012, Dennis Prager said:
In [Supreme Court Chief Justice] John Roberts, we have someone who was more concerned in this decision with the reputation of the Court than with doing the right thing.
To have gone against the obvious understanding to uphold something [Obamacare] he acknowledges as unconstitutional as written, so he will understand it as something else [a tax], there must be another concern. And there is -- the reputation of the court.
Once you worry about your reputation, you will be liberal. That is a rule of American life. If you worry about your reputation, you will vote liberal, you will talk liberal and if you are a judge, you will rule liberal, because the Left wrote contemporary history.
One day in an autobiographical mood, I will tell you how it is has affected me and a decision I made early on, that if I wanted to say what I believed, I would have to withstand the opinions of entire communities that I was affiliated with.
July 6, 2012, Dennis said: "This president will say or do anything he can get away with to retain the presidency."
Obamacare
Mar. 22, 2010, Dennis said: “For the last year, I expected this… There was no time when I thought this wouldn’t pass…
“This is the Left. The Left will get this done. I know the Left better than almost every American. I don’t say that to boast, I say that to cry…
“Psychologically, I am preparing myself to battle the rest of my life to keep America American. I don’t want a heart attack. I want to be strong for the next 30 years to help lead this battle. If I just get angry, it will eat me up and it will accomplish nothing. I don’t believe in catharsis. I believe in effectiveness.”
“The distinction between American values and left-wing values, that is what my mission will be until this is repealed or I leave this planet.”
“On the day after the darkest day in my lifetime. Obviously 9/11 was so dark in pure human tragedy, but it didn’t weaken America. In terms of weakening America, yesterday was by far the darkest day as we retreat from the American ideal of a smaller government and a freer citizen.
“I actually feel a little different today. When it passed, I started feeling a little more European… I felt it. I’ve lived in Europe. I just came back again from Europe a couple of weeks ago. There’s a deadening element because as the state gets bigger in your life, you get less excited about life. What is there to get excited about in Europe? You can’t really make more money. The government tells you when you open your shop and when you close it. You can’t educate your own children if you want [for instance, home schooling is banned in Germany]. The state does everything for you… You exist to make love. They are apparently quite good at that in Europe. There’s more focus on cuisine and on sex, the only areas where government hasn’t intruded. It inevitably makes the human more of a hedonist. There’s nothing noble to do in Europe. The government has taken over noble works.”
Said Dennis July 15, 2010: “I’ve earned the self-esteem that enables me to sit here for 28 years. I worked my tail off. I didn’t have high self-esteem as a kid. That’s part of the reason I worked so hard because I knew I better work my tail off because nothing will come to me. If I don’t work very hard, I’ll be a nothing.”
Baseball, Dennis & the French (2011)
From BaseballDennisandtheFrench.com:
Baseball, Dennis & the French tells the true story of Paul Croshaw, longtime liberal activist and connoisseur of French films, who amazed his family, friends and himself by becoming a churchgoing, conservative Christian after years of listening to nationally syndicated radio host Dennis Prager.Max Prager 1918-2014The film's background story is a miracle on a baseball field when Paul was 12. Through archival film footage, photos, home movies and re-enactments, this unique feature documentary recreates Paul's story as a dramatic counterpoint to Dennis's forceful, on-camera words giving the rational arguments for a God and the consequences to America if we become a secularized Country.
The film traces Dennis' influence on Paul's journey from the ball field to his career as a liberal activist and skeptic, then to belief in God and in a Judeo-Christian America, and finally to faith in a personal God. The final act portrays the logical end of Paul's quest as he parts with Dennis to discover, on his own, the culmination of the Bible's plan of salvation. And Dennis, "thrilled that this Jew has helped Paul find his Christian faith," steps aside with his most poignant observation: "Only in America!"
Dennis's dad died Aug. 16, 2014. When he returned to the air Aug. 20, Dennis devoted three hours of his show to Max.
Dennis: "Until my mother died [near] 90, he was unbelievably energetic and independent. Two and a half years after that, my father had surgery and came out of the surgery paralyzed from the waist down. He said to his sons, 'I have lived a blessed life. Now God wants me to experience what the rest of the world experiences'."
"There was a strong ethical component to his life. He was a CPA to many businesses. He was the accountant to some nursing homes. They told him to fudge figures and he told them to shove it. And those executives stayed out of prison because of him."
"He was an Orthodox Jew and very worldly. He was a very free spirit in the sexual realm."
"My father decided it was time to die. The last time I had him on, July 18, he said in very matter of fact tones in the middle of the interview, and it shocked me that he said it on radio, that he wanted to die... All of us in the family respected him saying that. I visited him with my wife and younger son and step-son last Wednesday to New Jersey and he died on Saturday. There are some in the family who are adamant that that gave him permission to go. It was understood to be a goodbye. He had the stroke two days later. He signalled to my brother with his hand up to Heaven, I want to go up now. Why would one not honor a person's wish? He kept saying to me last Wednesday, 'I've had such a great life, Dennis.'"
"My father smoked cigars up to four months from dying. He gave me my first cigar in my teens. He loved Scotch. He drank Scotch with the ease that most mortals drink orange juice. He was never inebriated."
"He said that in the Navy, you had two choices -- alcohol or prostitutes. He was married so he chose alcohol.
"He always had a view. If he had a radio show, he would have been off the air within three days for berating callers."
Dennis used much of his speaking opportunity at his father's funeral to instruct:
If there is a God, there is an afterlife... I wrote about this in high school. Before you two [brother Kenny and his wife] were reading my essays on the afterlife...By contrast with Dennis, Kenny's eulogy for Max is more traditional, more orthodox, and more in Hebrew.
We speak a great deal about naches from children. It is strange we never talk about naches from parents. You can make a case that bad behavior by parents has a more destructive effect than bad behavior by children... I have always had naches from my parents. I was always proud to introduce them at my speeches and to my friends...
Sometime before 1976, after he gave a speech, I was in my apartment and my phone rang and to my shock it was my father calling. He never called me before that call and he never called me since. He said he was calling to ask me a question: "Dennis, I saw you speak today and I was wondering, where did you get all of that self-confidence from? Not from mom and me." And he was right.
Aaron is not here. He had every intention of coming today. We had a family vote it was unanimous that he stay home. He is working very hard to get work. He had an interview today...
I would always ask what would my father do and say. He played this [role] in Aaron's life...
Thank you for your complete support during my two divorces.
Prager University
In 2009, Dennis Prager created Prager University (it was his producer Allen Estrin's idea), a website offering five minute videos making the conservative argument on dozens of issues ranging from happiness to the war in Vietnam.
Dennis often talks on his radio show about how many views his Youtube videos get (frequently when fundraising for Prager University), but when you click on the statistic button for these videos and then click on daily views, you see that for weeks on end, the videos get very few views and then for a couple of days they get tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands of views and then just as suddenly, the views stop coming. This indicates that many of the views are bought.
How do you spot fake Youtube views? You can Google "how can you tell if youtube views are fake."
Dennis said Aug. 25, 2014: "We teach what isn't taught. I'm asking you to help us help America. I feel like a doctor or scientist who has discovered a cure for major cancers and the only the only issue is lack of funds to market it. We can cure so much of what is wrong by changing minds five minutes at a time. I don't know anything that is doing this as effectively... Ten million hits just this year. I don't know anyone [doing this to change minds in the conservative direction]."
Aug. 26, 2014, Dennis said: "It is not unreasonable to assume that 30 million people have seen our videos just this year."
Aug. 29, 2014, Dennis said: "This is the last day of fundraising for Prager University. At every level, it means a lot to us making these videos. We have become the biggest disseminator of non-left-wing video in the world. It means a lot to have your backing, psychologically."
I wonder how donors to Prager University feel about their money going to buying fake views and subverting Youtube's terms of service
PragerUniversity.com offers many opportunities to donate including this: "Marketing Sponsorship: $5,000".
Marketing = buying views.
Prager and Prager University's pundit Julie Hartman condemn this sort of thing for other people. In an April 3, 2023 video with Dennis Prager, she said: "Certainly among people my age, people buy likes and followers on Instagram. It's obvious. They have thousands of followers but only three comments on their post. They know that it is obvious to the rest of the world that they buy followers, but they still do it because they are showing that they are playing the game."
Dennis: "So the issue is winning. It doesn't matter at what and it doesn't matter how you got there."
On the March 27, 2023 show, Dennis said: "I have a dignity problem [with asking people to like and subscribe]."
The Daily Signal Nov. 4, 2015:
Radio host Dennis Prager and his business partner Allen Estrin had a big problem on their hands.It was October, 2013. Several years earlier, the duo—friends for decades—co-founded PragerU, a small digital university for conservatives with a modest audience. Now, a stranger was suing them.
The man, a photographer in Ireland, alleged through a Houston lawyer that PragerU had used one of his photographs in an online educational video without his consent.
Estrin, a former Hollywood screenwriter with little experience navigating the intricacies of digital copyright issues, calls the episode “traumatic.”
“We had a visual style that used photographs, and someone really almost out of nowhere sued us for the use of a photo,” Estrin recalls in an interview with The Daily Signal. “As a result of being sued, we did a lot of investigation into [how you can] use photos on the Internet, and the copyright ramifications of photos, and what to do going forward.”
What Estrin and Prager did was overhaul their entire visual video aesthetic to a streamlined, animation-based model, abandoning four years of work and 80 educational videos.
“And in one of those things that doesn’t happen very much in life but I’m happy to say I’ve experienced, this very traumatic experience was the best thing that could have possibly happened to us,” Estrin says.
“This year we will have more than 50 million views as confirmed by YouTube and Facebook,” Prager says in an email to The Daily Signal, adding that “the largest single demographic of our videos are people under 35 years of age.”
Mark Oppenheimer wrote for the March/April 2018 issue of Mother Jones:
At PragerU, police are not biased against black men, and man-made climate change is debatable. You’ll find takes on animal rights (against), the $15 minimum wage (against), the gender wage gap (doesn’t exist), and why the South turned Republican (nothing to do with race). Prager has hosted a few dozen videos himself, including “Just Say ‘Merry Christmas,'” his take on the “war on Christmas” genre, and “He Wants You,” an apologia for men who ogle women. He personally approves every item, edits every script, and courts “faculty,” including heavy hitters such as Dinesh D’Souza, Steve Forbes, and former White House press secretary Dana Perino. Some presenters, like Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz, are credentialed. Others, like comedian Adam Carolla, merely speak with the confidence of people who are....a dedicated viewer might walk away with the consistently conservative outlook of a charming, curmudgeonly 69-year-old radio personality who lacks the ratings of his blustery peers—the Sean Hannitys and Mark Levins and Alex Joneses—but boasts a more reassuring disposition. Despite his chosen profession and Brooklyn upbringing, Prager is no yeller. He welcomes guests with whom he disagrees and is respectful to all callers. “There was a time there when Dennis Prager and Bill Bennett represented to me what talk radio could become, which would be focusing on ideas and intelligent conversation,” says fellow conservative talker Charlie Sykes, who has guest-hosted Prager’s show.
...You vote for the guy who votes the way you would—character is secondary...
But his other line of reasoning on the subject is both irrational and apocalyptic: Prager is convinced that at this historical moment—not in 1976 when he voted for Jimmy Carter, nor in 2006 when he was a sanguine Bush supporter, but right now—our society is collapsing, and a liberal Supreme Court nominee could portend the final flood. Last summer, he tweeted that Western media outlets “pose a far greater danger to Western civilization than Russia does.” Prager explained to me that because “the universities have all but shut down, not to mention demonized, nonleft ideas,” and the media “are not far behind,” it is his duty to provide a conservative take “on things that matter—economics, good and evil, America, Israel, religion, God, etc.” His goal is to imbue young people with “the principles on which America was founded,” and to demonstrate “why Western society will not survive the death of Judeo-Christian values.”These instincts—Prager the Genial Radio Host and Prager the Gloomy Prophet—merge in PragerU, whose videos are too gentle in tone for the Infowars crowd and too conservative for committed liberals. Rather, they are engineered to sway those in the mushy middle, especially young people trying to figure out what they stand for. Prager’s radio show has about 2 million weekly listeners (to Rush Limbaugh’s 14 million), but PragerU’s appeal goes well beyond the graying talk-radio audience. More than 60 percent of its viewers are younger than 35, according to YouTube analytics...
PragerU presenters receive a $1,000 stipend, but the bigger payoff may be in publicity and increased book sales....But “Happiness Hour,” during which he poses questions to callers such as “What is your 90 minutes of happiness?” may be the most Prager thing Prager does. His ability to pivot—after an ad break for Blinds.com or MyPillow—from an hour of defending Trump to an hour of Oprah-lite chatter demonstrates a self-image not of a partisan warrior but rather of a socially ambidextrous everyman: a Jew who’s popular on conservative Christian campuses, an East Coaster gone native in Southern California, a civility maven who thinks our runaway train of a president is terrific. He’s untortured by these contradictions—indeed, he denies they are contradictions. Although he professes that our civilization is in imminent danger, Prager can be disdainful of big policy ideas, as if what matters most are small things, like a hug or a good song.
Prager takes calls during “Happiness Hour,” but mostly he talks, offering innocuous bromides along the lines of “Bad moods should be regarded as bad breath—you have to brush them away.” The day of my visit, he’s clad in shirt and tie, his rangy 6-foot-4 frame occupying a good chunk of the small studio’s real estate. Estrin, similarly dressed, sits across from Prager, juggling production matters. The semiformality, combined with the simplicity of the messages, brings to mind a hangout session with Mr. Rogers—albeit one with the remnants of a Brooklyn accent. “The left is where hatred thrives,” Prager had told the previous hour’s listeners. Now he’s bantering with Austin from Nashville about “learning how to handle disappointment when your expectations aren’t met.” On both topics Prager sounds unflappable yet encouraging, as if surely we all can agree on at least this much!
...Between takes, on the plush sofas of Carolla’s man-cavey digs, Prager informs me, with the rehearsed certainty of a guru who has given this talk many times, that he didn’t leave liberalism—liberalism left him. “My politics are exactly what they were when I was a liberal and a Democrat, but that’s now considered conservative,” he says. Prager seems to think he has the soul of a hawkish Democrat from an era before Roe v. Wade was a battleground issue, and when white people didn’t lose sleep over racial inequality—1960 maybe? When a man could speak his mind without worrying about being politically correct, women expressed little need for feminism, and few people questioned the Judeo-Christian civic order. It’s hard to pin down precisely, but this worldview is key to Prager’s self-image as a non-ideologue—not postpartisan but prepartisan....Conor Friedersdorf, a staff writer at The Atlantic who tracks conservative talk radio, is baffled by Prager’s shift. “Dennis Prager is smarter than Sean Hannity,” Friedersdorf says. “He is less insecure than Rush Limbaugh, and he is more civil than Mark Levin. In fact, his commitment to civility and reasoned discourse distinguishes him from other talk-radio hosts in tone and substance.” But Prager’s Trump enthusiasm makes Friedersdorf wonder, “Does he really believe in those things, or is he ultimately just another partisan Republican or anti-leftist who will pull the lever next to ‘R’ and support the Republican president rhetorically for that reason?”
“I think he got caught up in this notion that all politics is this ultimate binary choice, this belief that the left was poised to destroy America,” says Sykes, Prager’s occasional guest host. “As someone who has dealt so seriously with ethical issues—and he is a serious ethicist, I think—that came as a real shock to me.”
Evan Halper wrote for the Los Angeles Times August 23, 2019:
WASHINGTON — Earlier this summer, as Donald Trump assembled online activists at the White House to thank them for their role in getting him to the Oval Office and – Trump predicted – keeping him there, one guest didn’t rush to claim credit.Los Angeles-based Prager University, a registered charity, is legally prohibited from politicking. It isn’t truly a university and doesn’t have a campus. But the digital empire created by Dennis Prager, a 71-year-old conservative radio host and erstwhile Never Trumper, is having more success rallying young people to Trump’s side than many campaign committees aligned with the president.
The concise videos PragerU launches onto the internet every week to indoctrinate and motivate conservatives have been watched more than 2 billion times, according to the group’s own count. Independent analysis done for The Times by Tubular Labs, a video measurement company, largely backs up that claim. PragerU consistently spends more on Facebook advertising than major political campaigns and national advocacy groups. It ranks among the top 10 biggest political spenders on the platform...
“It is a sophisticated campaign to indoctrinate young people,” said Tara McGowan, chief executive of Acronym, a nonprofit that advises progressives on digital campaigning. “The amount of money they are putting behind it is alarming and significant. They seem to have created a savvy way to push an ideology onto an audience and get a tax break in the process.”
Prager himself has limited affection for Trump. He compares his support for the president to the alliance President Franklin D. Roosevelt brokered with Joseph Stalin in World War II –- a move born of necessity in the face of what he sees as a bigger evil (in this case, the left).
The Southern Poverty Law Center warns that several PragerU videos, such as one arguing black Americans are coddled by society, “function as dog whistles to the extreme right.” The Weather Channel branded PragerU’s challenges to global warming “a course in climate misinformation.” After watching a few PragerU videos, Princeton University historian Kevin Kruse tweeted that they were “utterly wrong on the facts.”
“The YouTube and Facebook algorithms like what they produce,” said Ramesh Srinivasan, a professor of information studies at UCLA whose upcoming book “Beyond the Valley” focuses on the relationships between technology and politics. “They predict it will capture people’s attention. It is not surprising they have grown to the extent they have.”
The polarizing nature of PragerU’s messages, along with the large social media followings of the presenters, take full advantage of the business model of the platforms, Srinivasan said.
“It is much more effective than the version of this content available on the liberal side,” he said, citing as an example the short presentations posted online by former Labor Secretary Robert Reich, which are popular among liberals but aren’t complemented by an array of other voices and content similar to what PragerU offers.
To amplify that content, the group has an annual budget of nearly $23 million, fueled in part by donations from religious conservatives, including $800,000 last year from Texan Lee Roy Mitchell, owner of a global movie theater chain and ally of the conservative Koch brothers. Other big donors include GOP medagonor Sheldon Adelson’s Maccabee Task Force, and the foundation of Adelson’s top deputy, Michael Leven...
While the group relies on big-dollar conservative donors, however, 40% of its budget comes from almost 130,000 online donors. PragerU has more donors than some prominent Democrats running for president...
The site’s growth has been lucrative for Prager, who last year started collecting fees for his work with the charity. Tax filings show $237,500 went to Dennis Prager’s consulting firm. An additional $155,700 went to Prager’s son for help with fundraising.
Forbes reported March 30, 2020: "Prager U's continued focus on attractive short videos is paying huge dividends. While their closest competitors are not growing, PragerU continues to expand its following on Facebook and Twitter. They rank first in all categories except web traffic, as most are attracted to their videos through Google or YouTube searches rather than going through their website. Except for LinkedIn, PragerU scores better than think tanks in all categories."
Paul Gottfried said January 28, 2020: “I think [Prager's] an intellectual vulgarian of a kind I have rarely encountered in this world. He has said such ridiculous things about history, fascism, democracy and so forth that it is hard for me to bestow any respect on his intellectual accomplishments.”
Paul Gottfried writes Dec. 17, 2017:Right-wing Celebrities Play Fast and Loose With HistoryForget Trump---Goldberg, Prager, and D’Souza muddle facts to sell books all the time.
...Perhaps one of the most ludicrous examples of the conservative movement’s recent attempt at being sophisticated was an exchange of equally uninformed views by talk show host Dennis Prager and Dinesh D’Souza, on the subject of the fascist worldview. The question was whether one could prove that fascism was a leftist ideology by examining the thought of Mussolini’s court philosopher Giovanni Gentile (1875-1944). Gentile defined the “fascist idea” in his political writings while serving as minister of education in fascist Italy. He was also not incidentally one of the greatest philosophers of the 20th century; and in works like General Theory of the Spirit as Pure Act, adapts the thought of Hegel to his own theory of evolving national identity. It would be hard to summarize Gentile’s thought in a few pithy sentences; and, not surprisingly, the Canadian historian of philosophy H.S. Harris devotes a book of many hundreds of pages trying to explain his complex philosophical speculation.
Hey, but that’s no big deal for such priests of the GOP church as Prager and D’Souza. They zoom to the heart of Gentile’s neo-Hegelian worldview in thirty seconds and state with absolute certainty that he was a “leftist.” We have to assume that Prager, D’Souza and the rest of their crowd know this intuitively, inasmuch they give no indication of having ever read a word of Gentile’s thought, perhaps outside of a few phrases that they extracted from his Doctrine of Fascism. Their judgment also clashes with that of almost all scholars of Gentile’s work, from across the political spectrum, who view him, as I do in my study of fascism, as the most distinguished intellectual of the revolutionary right.
According to our two stars in what has been laughably named “Prager University,” Gentile proves that “fascism bears a deep kinship to today’s Left.” After all, “Democrat progressives, in full agreement with Gentile, love and push for a centralized state, which manifests itself in stuff like recent state expansion into the private sector.” Among the questions that are left begging are these: “Do the modern Left and Gentile agree on the purpose and functions of the state?” “Would Gentile and Mussolini, who glorified Roman manliness, have rallied to the present Left in its support of feminism and gay marriage?” Did Gentile back in the 1920s favor the kind of “the stuff’ the administrative state is pushing right now?” The answer to all these questions, which of course wouldn’t be acceptable at Prager University, is an emphatic “no.” Control of the national economy by the Italian fascist state, down until its German-puppet version was established as the Italian Social Republic in September 1943, was about the equivalent of that of New Deal America.
The New York Times reported Jan. 4, 2020:
Last year PragerU videos racked up more than one billion views, the company said. The Prager empire now has a fleet of 6,500 high school and college student promoters, known as the PragerForce, who host on-campus meetings and gather at least once a year for conventions. And this year, the company is expanding its scope. PragerU executives are signing stars of the young new right to host made-for-the-internet shows to fuel 2020 content, including a book club and a show geared to Hispanics called Americanos.Two academics at the University of Sussex posted an essay September 6, 2022:The goal of the people behind all of this — Dennis Prager, the conservative talk show host and impresario of this digital empire, and the venture’s billionaire funders — seems simple: more Will Witts in the world. More pride in American history (and less panic over racism), more religion (specifically in the “Judeo-Christian” tradition), less illegal immigration, more young people laughing at people on the left rather than joining them.
PragerU started to spend on marketing on Facebook and YouTube.
“We just kept throwing more coal into the furnace,” Mr. Estrin said. “And we realized that we had created a distribution platform.”
In 2019, PragerU raised $22 million; next year, it estimates it will raise $25 million. Its budget comes almost entirely from donor contributions.
...Former fans of Mr. Prager’s work say they are confused by his Trumpist turn.
“In terms of ‘Invasion of the Body Snatchers’ of watching people become more Trumpian, these moral icons becoming shills, he is way up there,” said Charlie Sykes, the author of “How the Right Lost Its Mind,” and a former radio host who used to occasionally substitute on Mr. Prager’s show. “Now you have to put PragerU in the category of other very successful meme machines and low-rent conservative grifting.”
Mr. Prager’s desk is stacked with items including a refrigerated lunchbox, open and showing a slice of lemon cake, but he cannot eat it. He often fasts 20 hours a day. His back is bad, and he is in considerable physical pain as he moves through the world.
As he prepared to leave, he unzipped a large rolling suitcase. It was almost entirely full of old newspapers. He added the day’s Wall Street Journal and headed to the airport. He does not want to do an interview in person. He wants to email, and so he does. His answers are long and lucid and full of biblical references.
With an annual budget of nearly fifty million dollars and over five billion views on social media, PragerU is a central node in the production of misinformation and radicalization in the United States today. Despite this, it has received little-to-no attention in contemporary scholarship....Wikipedia says (retrieved May 28, 2023):...we have both been exposed to algorithmically selected adverts for PragerU videos in our day-to-day use of Youtube in our personal, rather than research capacity...
A key element to the threat PragerU poses is its massive and ever-increasing revenues. PragerU is rapidly rising among the most well-funded media organizations in the American right-wing. Its revenue has accelerated since its founding, especially in recent years, from $5,336,708 in 2016 up to $23,807,760 in 2019, as reported in their IRS 990 forms. Their 2021 Biannual Report notes their new budget goal is $50 million... With a large portion (40%) of revenue coming from small individual contributions...
The 2020 PragerU Annual Report states that 39% of expenditure is spent on marketing. In 2019, PragerU spent $8,403,871 on advertising - 35% of total 2019 expenditure. In comparison, the 2020 Annual Report lists video production as 11% of expenditures, and Salaries and Compensation as only 15% of expenditures in 2019.
PragerU claims the cultural capital from this consistent, institutional branding as a university. This can be broken down into two components. Firstly, and quite simply, it looks the part; and secondly, it appropriates the societal prestige of accredited academic institutions. With regards to the former, PragerU generates cultural capital from the production values of its output. Their videos employ design language that remains consistent across platforms and presenters, which reinforces the idea of PragerU as an institution in itself, rather than simply a YouTube channel. Moreover, the videos are well-animated and scripted, which increases their standing as an organization of means, and thus authority. These high production values aim to inculcate an idea of PragerU as a premier brand, in a similar vein to Apple’s advertising as a premium product. For example, PragerU videos and advertizements deploy the same quick cuts, matte colours and smooth curves that have come to typify an Apple advert. This approach to copywriting is demonstrably effective on YouTube in particular, with other immensely popular educational channels, such as KhanAcademy and TEDTalks, pioneering the use of the style. By deploying a similar style, viewers are ‘primed’ [to use PragerU’s own terminology] to accept PragerU material as trustworthy educational content.... PragerU attempts to cast Nazism as a left-wing ideology...
PragerU carefully curates the language it uses in its videos to resonate with its American audience. First, it makes numerous references to freedom - perhaps America’s most sacred concept - as can be seen in its slogan Free Videos, Free Minds...
A third, final and more subtle attempt to situate itself in the legitimate political tradition, is the series named Fireside Chat,94 which appropriates Franklin Roosevelt’s addresses to a nation in crisis, in an attempt to borrow his presidential authority and legitimacy.
This section has shown that PragerU attempts to disguise itself as a moderate, centrist “educational” institution, appropriating the imagery and discourses of genuine academic institutions to legitimize, normalize and disseminate its radical right-wing politics – and therefore begin the process of radicalising the viewer.
The two [Estrin and Prager] originally considered making it a brick-and-mortar university, but the idea was revised into a digital product to save money. PragerU is based in the San Fernando Valley of Los Angeles, California, and it had around 50 employees as of January 2020. Marissa Streit is the CEO and has presented some of its videos. PragerU encourages students to join "PragerFORCE", an international student organisation to promote PragerU's videos and ideology, about 6,500 college and high school students promoted its videos as of 2020. Despite the name, PragerU is not an academic institution and does not hold classes, does not grant certifications or diplomas, and is not accredited by any recognized body.The organization depends on donations to produce its content. Much of PragerU's early funding came from hydraulic fracturing billionaires Dan and Farris Wilks. Two members of the Wilks family sit on PragerU's board. The next-largest donor is the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation. Other donors include the Morgan Family Foundation, Fidelity Charitable Gift Fund, Donors Trust, the late Republican megadonor Sheldon Adelson, Lee Roy Mitchell, and the Minnesota-based Sid and Carol Verdoorn Foundation, led by former C.H. Robinson CEO Sid Verdoorn.
As of 2018, the organization reportedly had a $10 million annual budget, of which it spent more than 40% on marketing. In 2019, 40% of its budget came from almost 130,000 online donors; the Los Angeles Times noted that PragerU attracted more donors than some Democratic presidential primary contenders had at the time. In 2020, PragerU reported to have received about $28 million in revenues, most of it from donations, and reported approximately $28 million in expenditures, with 39% going into marketing. PragerU consistently spends more on Facebook advertising than major political campaigns and national advocacy groups. In 2019, it ranked among the 10 biggest political spenders on the platform.
In 2020, PragerU received $704,057 in COVID-19 relief loans from the Paycheck Protection Program; this debt was later forgiven in full.
By 2015, PragerU developed two partnership programs to promote its views, including religious material, in public and private schools. PragerU's Educator Program, with 3,000 sign-ups reported as of 2015, supplies teachers with lesson plans and study guides that accompany videos. Secondary school teachers and college professors can register their classes through PragerU's Academic Partnership program, which lets students sign up and allows teachers to monitor their students' progress.
Among topics covered, PragerU videos have argued against a $15 minimum wage, against increased gun control, and in support of capitalism. Although topical, PragerU videos largely avoided mentioning Donald Trump during his presidency... PragerU videos also promote the Electoral College, arguing that it thwarts voter fraud and that "pure democracies do not work".
Dave Rubin stated in a video that "racism, bigotry, xenophobia, homophobia, and Islamophobia" are "meaningless buzzwords". In a video about the alt-right, Michael Knowles argued that it has nothing in common with conservatism and instead is close to leftism, except the left is much larger.
Over a dozen videos promote fossil fuels and dispute the scientific consensus on climate change. According to the non-profit think tank InfluenceMap, targeted ads posted on Facebook included misleading material that cast doubt on science, framed climatic concerns as ideological and hysteria, and promoted a conspiracy theory that "big government control" is the real motivation behind energy policies to reduce gas emissions.
Historians and political scientists have also heavily criticized PragerU's videos for containing misleading claims about topics such as slavery and racism in the USA, immigration, and the history of fascism.
In 2021, YouTube took down two anti-trans videos featuring Candace Owens for violating their policy on hate speech, wherein being transgender was likened to schizophrenia and disease...
On race, Pam Nilan, in her 2021 book Young People and the Far Right, says that PragerU "pretends to sidestep" white supremacy, but that "the message is always that white culture is better than other cultures.
Jews and Christians
In a column published May 8, 2013, Dennis compared Jews and Christians:
1. The most obvious and perhaps most important difference concerns how an individual attains what Christianity refers to as salvation, or what Judaism calls the rewards of the hereafter. Judaism believes that the only way to achieve heavenly reward is through good works...2. Judaism allows for divorce much more readily than either Catholicism — which never does — or traditional Protestantism, which rarely does.
3. Christians tend to place greater emphasis on sins of thought than does Judaism.
4. Many Protestant Christians believe that all sins are equal in God’s eyes.
5. Many Catholic and Protestant Christians — whether traditional or liberal in their theology and politics — believe that it is their Christian duty to forgive all sinners of all sins whether or not the sinner repents and no matter who the sinner hurts.
6. Most believing Christians have a more personal relationship with God/Jesus than most religious Jews have with God.
7. With regard to prayer, Jews almost exclusively rely on reciting prayers written for them, and Christians rely more on spontaneous prayer.
8. Christians tend to accept suffering with fewer complaints in general and fewer complaints against God. Christians tend to view their suffering as little compared to the suffering of Christ, or even as being Christ-like. Jews tend to regard suffering as a flaw in God’s order that must be alleviated.
April 25, 2010, Dennis Prager spoke in Minneapolis to CUFI (Christians United For Israel).
A minute into his talk, Dennis puts on his yarmulke to say a shehecheyanu. “I always get choked up when I do this. I make a little prayer to God that I will not cry at CUFI event.”
“The shehecheyanu prayer is — Blessed are you God, King of the universe, who has kept us alive and brought us to this moment.”
Finishing the blessing in Hebrew, Dennis removes his yarmulke and puts it in his pocket. “It’s a powerful prayer. Jews say it only on special occasions.
“Nothing is as powerful as Jews and Christians working together.
“It’s thousands of years late, but it’s here.”
“I was asked to speak many years ago by an Israeli group in Los Angeles. I remember taking the evening because I wanted to practice my Hebrew. They interviewed me in Hebrew. They asked me what do you consider yourself first — a Jew or an American? “I said, I have two fathers — Abraham and George Washington. I am twice blessed.”
“This will help you understand why there is resistance in Jewish life to your magnificent outreach to the Jewish community. Jews don’t trust anybody. I do but most Jews don’t. There’s a voice in most Jews when they meet a Christian — if there were another Holocaust, would this person be a persecutor, a bystander or a rescuer?
“They don’t tell you this. They won’t tell you this. It sounds sick. It’s not sick.
“Whenever I’m in your company, I believe I’m with rescuers.”
Like his fellow gurus Deepok Chopra, Malcolm Gladwell, Oprah Winfrey, Dave Rubin, Bret and Eric Weinstein, Bill Maher, Konstantin Kisin, Daniel Schmachtenberger, Jamie Wheal, Jordan Hall, Alex Jones, John Vervaeke, Sun Myung Moon, Jordan Peterson, Mikhaila Peterson, Lex Fridman, Tim Pool, James Lindsay, Michael O'Fallon, Robert Malone, Peter McCullough, Joe Rogan, Brene Brown, Gad Saad, Gwyneth Paltrow, Nassim N. Taleb, Douglas Murray, Scott Adams, Russell Brand, J.P. Sears, Robin DiAngelo, and QAnon, Dennis says many things that sound amazing but fall apart upon inspection. His idea that Jews don't trust anybody is against all evidence (most Jews in America, for example, marry non-Jews). His idea that Jews walk around wondering about Christians -- would this person persecute or rescue me or just stand by -- is without evidence.
You can't predict from normal interactions how someone would behave in an abnormal situation. As philosopher John M. Doris noted in his 2005 book, Lack of Character: Personality and Moral Behavior:
Behavior is – contra the old saw about character and destiny – extraordinarily sensitive to variation in circumstance. Numerous studies have demonstrated that minor situational variations have powerful effects on helping behavior: hurried passersby step over a stricken person in their path, while unhurried passersby stop to help…The experimental record suggests that situational factors are often better predictors of behavior than personal factors, and this impression is reinforced by careful examination of behavior outside the confines of the laboratory. In very many situations it looks as though personality is less than robustly determinative of behavior. To put things crudely, people typically lack character.
As the academics behind the Decoding the Gurus podcast put it:
The most concise definition of a guru is “someone who spouts pseudo-profound bullshit”, with bullshit being speech that is persuasive without any regard for the truth. Thus, all these properties relate to people who produce ersatz wisdom: a corrupt epistemics that creates the appearance of useful knowledge, but has none of the substance.As historian Peter Novick wrote in his 1999 book, The Holocaust in American Life:
The qualifications for certification as a Righteous Gentile [by Yad Vashem] had little connection with the everyday meaning of "righteousness": following accepted moral norms and doing what people could reasonably be expected to do. The criteria were to have risked one's life, and often the lives of the members of one's family as well, to save another; to have displayed self-sacrificing heroism of the highest and rarest order. At Yad Vashem nominees for Righteous Gentiles are carefully screened. Often the process takes many years, and the most rigorous standards are applied. (Thus fishermen who transported Danish Jews to Sweden in 1943 are not eligible because they were paid.)
The intention of most commemoration of the "righteous minority" has been to damn the vast "unrighteous majority." The article "Righteous among the Nations," in The Encyclopedia of the Holocaust, stresses that "the acts of those few show that aid and rescue were possible...had there been more high-minded people." The director of Yad Vashem's Department of the Righteous explained that "spicing" the history of the Holocaust with stories of rescuers were indispensable in showing the delinquency of European Christians "against the background of the righteous." In the United States, the head of the Anti-Defamation League discussed a book by the director of the ADL's Foundation for Christian Rescuers. He insisted that "what is important about the book is that the reader comes away understanding that rescue of Jews was a rare phenomenon. [The fact is] that 700 million people lived in Nazi-occupied Europe; to date 11,000 have been honored by Yad Vashem for rescuing Jews. The ratio of unrighteous to righteous gentiles -- thousands to one -- is repeatedly underlined by commentators. "For every righteous person," said Benjamin Meed, "there were thousands upon thousands who collaborated...or who, at best, stood idly by and did nothing."
Those who have written or spoken about gentile rescuers, for purposes other than underlining their rarity, report that they often receive a hostile reception from Jewish audiences.
...But the institutional use of the commemoration of Righteous Gentiles as "the exceptions that prove the rule" has usually been in the service of shoring up that mentality -- promoting a wary suspicion of gentiles... "When I move to a new town," writes a university teacher, "I give great thought to whom, among my gentile friends, I might entrust my children, should that ever become necessary." A prominent Jewish feminist: "Every conscious Jew longs to ask her or his non-Jewish friends, 'Would you hide me?' -- and suppresses the question for fear of hearing the sounds of silence." A professor of psychology:
"Many Jews report that the unspoken question they ask themselves when interacting with a non-Jew is, 'Would she or he have saved me from the Nazis?' I have asked myself this question innumerable times: sometimes I surprise myself by answering, 'I don't know,' when asking this question of a non-Jewish friend I had otherwise assumed was close to me. The answer is the ultimate standard by which to measure trust in a non-Jewish person."Hovering over all of this is the absurd maxim In extremis veritas -- that it is imagining the most desperate circumstances that one gains insight into what gentiles really think of Jews. To be preoccupied with the question of whether one could be sure that one would be saved by gentile friends if a holocaust came to America is to actively solicit anxiety and doubt, because who could ever be sure of such a thing? The asking of this pointless question seems to have become culturally approved, a sign that one has learned "the lesson of the Holocaust."
The Arab Spring
Almost alone in the media, Dennis Prager was pessimistic about the Arab Spring. He wrote Mar. 1, 2011:
From the moment the Tahrir Square demonstrations against Hosni Mubarak began, optimism has dominated American reporting and commentary on what is being called the Egyptian revolution.Still the Best Hope: Why the World Needs American Values to Triumph (2012)
I fervently hope I am wrong, but I find it hard to share this dominant view, even as I identify with all those Egyptians and other Arabs who yearn for freedom.
I offer eight good reasons for my pessimism:
1. Countries almost never go straight from dictatorship to liberty...
2. When pro-American dictators are overthrown, far more repressive anti-American tyrants usually replace them...
3. Islamists have a near-monopoly on passion in Egypt and elsewhere in the Arab world.
In politics, passion matters. That is why small impassioned groups can dominate a more passive majority of a country. And in Egypt, no group or cause has nearly the passion that the Islamists have.
4. Neither liberty nor tolerance has roots in the Arab world...
5. People have been trained to depend on the state...
Dennis wrote:
There are three ideologies [Leftism, Islamism, Americanism] competing for the allegiance of mankind. This competition shapes much of the present world, and the outcome will shape humanity’s future....
THE MOTTO OF AMERICA, E Pluribus Unum, is rare, if not unique as a governing principle or motto of a country. For good reason: No other nation is made out of as "many" as America is. In virtually every society in history, the national or group identity was correlated with its ethnic or racial identity. No other nation calls itself "a nation of immigrants," as Americans of all political persuasions routinely call America.At first the pluribus in E Pluribus Unum referred to the thirteen original colonies and the motto was adopted in order to help forge these many colonies into unum, one nation. But from the beginning, the phrase came to refer to the many peoples who made up America. That is why the motto was retained after America united as one country.
If you are Japanese, you are Japanese because you were born to Japanese parents. There is no other way to be considered Japanese (even if a non-Japanese could in some rare instance become a citizen of Japan). The same has held true for virtually all other groups, from tribes to countries, throughout history. America went against the human norm in adopting E Pluribus Unum. This motto ended any significance people attached to race, ethnicity, or blood, each of which has been among the most important values in all societies.
As a result, the American ability to assimilate people from every ethnic, national, and racial background has been unique. Non-Americans who are aware of it find it almost incredible. It runs entirely against the universal human predilection toward defining members of other races, ethnicities, and nationalities as the "other," an "other" who, moreover, cannot become "one of us."
This is even true for other Western democracies. European countries, in the second half of the twentieth century, began accepting large numbers of immigrants. However, it is very difficult, and often impossible, for immigrants of other races or ethnicities to be considered truly a member of a host European country. A third-generation Turk in Germany, born in Germany, fluent and accentless in German, is rarely considered a German by other Germans. In America, however, a first-generation Turk who is not fluent in English and speaks with a distinct accent is considered an American by other Americans. And the odds are that his children will not marry another Turkish-American but an American of some other background, quite possibly one of white Anglo-Saxon racial stock.
Anyone from anywhere and of any race or ethnicity can become an American in every sense of the word. This is one reason many of America's Founders asserted that a new type of person was being made in America. No longer would a man or woman be identified primarily by their ethnic, national, religious, or racial origins, but by their individual achievements and their willingness to identify as Americans.
Aside from its uniqueness, E Pluribus Unum is one of the reasons America developed so rapidly and achieved a level of prosperity that surpassed every other country.
How many people consider Americans a united people? United by what? A creed? Once you visit Australia or England or Ireland or France or Germany or Japan, you know that America has nothing like the sense of unity and trust that these nations enjoy.
The idea that the motto E Pluribus Unum "ended any significance people attached to race, ethnicity, or blood" is divorced from reality. Americans prefer to work, worship and live among their own race. Martin Luther King said, "11:00 on Sunday morning is the most segregated hour in America."
As far as "American ability to assimilate people from every ethnic, national, and racial background has been unique," this is not true. People assimilate on only the most superficial things like dress and manner. As far as life results, Mexican-Americans tend to have similar life results to their ancestors in Mexico, Japanese-Americans tend to have similar life results to their ancestors in Japan, and African-Americans tend to have similar life results to their ancestors in Africa.
Here are some excerpts from a 2008 book by two scholars from UCLA's Chicano Studies Research Center, Generations of Exclusion: Mexican Americans, Assimilation, and Race:Despite sixty years of political and legal battles to improve the education of Mexican Americans, they continue to have the lowest average education levels and the highest high school dropout rates among major ethnic and racial groups in the United States. … However, leading analysts, apparently believing in the universality of assimilation, argue that this is the result of a large first and second generation population still adjusting to American society. … These and other scholars predict that Mexican Americans will have the same levels of education and socioeconomic status as the dominant non-Hispanic white population by the fourth generation... Throughout this book, our statistical models have shown that the low education levels of Mexican Americans have impeded most other types of assimilation, thus reinforcing a range of ethnic boundaries between them and white Americans...Sadly and directly in contradistinction to assimilation theory, the fourth generation differs the most from whites, with a college completion rate of only 6 percent.
…the educational progress of Mexican Americans does not improve over the generations. At best, given the statistical margin of error, our data show no improvement in education over the generations-since-immigration and in some cases even suggest a decline...
…rather than improvements in education in subsequent generations-since-immigration, as assimilation theory predicts, we find quite the opposite. … Greater parental education, household income, social and cultural capital, and fewer children all contribute to more schooling. However, when these factors are held constant, the highest levels of schooling are for those who immigrated as children but were educated in the United States and the lowest for the grandchildren and the great-grandchildren of immigrants...Unlike European Americans, education gets worse as culture wears off—a potentially explosive combination.
Conservative Paul Gottfried wrote in 2007: "This claim to be for 'values'...has taken the place of standing for real historical groups."
James Kirkpatrick wrote in 2013:
...no nation, even one with a relatively progressive record like the United States, can possibly compete with an absolute dream that “all men are created equal.” The vision of perfect equality will defeat the national reality every time. After all, whatever the fantasies of contemporary “colorblind” conservatives, America was created by an ethnic core of White Anglo Saxon Protestant settlers—who did it, in the words of the U.S. Constitution’s Preamble, for “ourselves and our posterity.”The inside front flap reads: "In this visionary book, Dennis Prager, one of America's most original thinkers..." The inside back flap read: "Dennis Prager is one of the most listened to and respected media personalities in America." A few sentences later, Dennis calls himself a "true Renaissance man."
Nor can any real family hold together on the ground of ideology. We love our parents and our children because they are ours—not because we agree with their view of the Constitution. Conservatives (or their children) can only believe America is an exemplar for universal liberty and equality if they remain ignorant about our actual history... This shallow view can't stand up to a college education.
But if all conservatives can claim are “values” that drift Leftward at a slightly slower pace than the larger culture, they can hardly stop the process. They have essentially disarmed before the battle has even begun by accepting the Left's premise about America as a universal nation based in Enlightenment ideas. A real defense would mean explicitly describing the United States of America as a real country, founded by a real people, with a real history...As Pat Buchanan wrote in State of Emergency: "If America is an ideological nation grounded no deeper than in the sandy soil of abstract ideas, she will not survive the storms of this century any more than the Soviet Union survived the storms of the last."
Nor will families. After all, a nation, like a race, is in the end simply an extended family.
Throughout Still the Best Hope, the word "predicated" is used as a pretentious substitute for the simpler words "based" or "required" or "depends". A clumsy sentence on page 35 reads, "It is predicated on collecting money from today's workers in order to pay for those who paid in before them."
On May 14, 2012, Dennis appeared on Hugh Hewitt's radio show for three hours. Dennis said: "It was so overwhelming an undertaking that I thought you know what, maybe my next book should be on men and women, because I do an hour a week, and I have for years, and I’ve written and lectured, and I think I’ve helped a lot of marriages, partially because of my own travails in the marital arena. I’ve learned a great deal, and now I am extremely happily married, but it was… And so I have learned a lot, and I have tried to offer insights there. So I thought maybe I’d write on that. Maybe I’ll write another book on happiness. The first one was a bestseller. And then I thought wait a minute, let’s say, though this is a little dark, but let’s say I died. What would I want my last thing to have been? And I thought well, if I don’t make the case, and I think I can make it particularly well, for the best system ever made to make a good world, I will kick myself on the way to the grave."
"I write with no fat. Do you know that I also write with no adjectives? There are almost no adjectives in the book. The reader fills in adjectives. I don’t. Here are the data. Here is why the left believes what it believes. Here is why it is successful. Here is its moral record. Here is the Islamist moral record. Here is the American moral record. Compare them. Compare the systems. And I believe it’s pretty powerful."
"I always say there are tree people and forest people. And I’m a forest person. I don’t deal with the trees. I deal with the forest. Most people deal with trees. It’s not a negation. If your doctor does not deal with the minutiae of your body, you will die. But I am not a doctor. I am here for the large picture. The large picture is that America has a unique value system."A May 29, 2023 search of Google Scholar reveals that this book has 21 citations, none significant.
Philosopher Paul Gottfried wrote July 19, 2018:Yes, We Should Call Them ImperialistsNeoconservatives like Max Boot are fooling themselves if they think imposing 'values' on the rest of the world isn't a matter of empire.
Recently while reading a book by an Israeli scholar named Yoram Hazony with the provocative title The Virtue of Nationalism, I encountered a distinction drawn by the late Charles Krauthammer between empire building and American global democratic hegemony. Like the editors of the Weekly Standard, for which he periodically wrote, Krauthammer believed it was unfair to describe what he wanted to see done, which was having the U.S. actively spread its own form of government throughout the world, as “imperialism.” After all, Krauthammer said, he and those who think like him “do not hunger for new territory,” which makes it wrong to accuse them of “imperialism.”
Hazony responds with the obvious answer that control can be imposed on the unwilling even if the empire builders are not overtly annexing territory...
The belief that the U.S. is a supremely good nation founded on universal principles has consequences that go well beyond electoral politics. Dennis Prager, a nationally syndicated talk radio host...extols American exceptionalism, which he says springs from American values.
Those values have “universal applicability,” according to Prager, and are “eminently exportable.” Glenn Beck has taken up the same theme of “American exceptionalism” as an exportable “idea" that is meant for everyone on the planet. The “ideas” or “values” in question are variously defined by the neoconservative media as “human rights,” “universal equality,” or just making sure everyone lives like us. Whatever it is, we are told that to withhold it from the rest of the human race would be uncharitable. Our efforts to bring it to others therefore cannot be dismissed as “imperialism” any more than the Spanish government of the 16th century thought it was doing wrong by forcing its religion on indigenous people in the Americas.
Same-Sex Marriage
When President Obama came out for same-sex marriage, Dennis Prager responded May 10, 2012 in National Review:
1. Nothing as radical as redefining marriage to include members of the same sex has ever been publicly supported by a president of the United States.2. This reaffirms my conviction that Mr. Obama is by far the most left-wing person to ever hold the office of the American presidency...
4. The “inevitability” of same-sex marriage is activist propaganda — but only if Americans learn how to make the case for retaining the man-woman definition.
The Ten Commandments: Still The Best Moral Code (2015)
The back cover of Dennis Prager's book reads: "The Ten Commandments video series garnered over 6 million views on YouTube in its first three months, making it the most widely viewed biblical commentary in the world." Looking at the YouTube analytics of those videos, it is clear that most of the views were bought. The back cover also includes this quote from Jordan R.: "The work you do is an oasis in the midst of a desert of deceptions and lies over the internet."
Typos
May 1, 2023, Dennis said to his Youtube cohost Julie Hartman: "He [guys who use a lot of slang on a dating app] doesn't want to impress you. That's a bad sign. I review every text message, every email for typos. Every single one."
Julie: "You are a meticulous texter."
Dennis: "I want people who get something from me to [get something that] reflects me. You are making an impression. You are sending you. You are not just sending a text."
"A major part of my singles life, which ended at 32, was achievement to impress a woman. I had the belief that I had to earn a terrific woman."Julie, sounding sad: "I have never heard a man say that. You have no idea how little men my age think that. I'm depressed."
Dennis: "I remember one woman, I seduced her by playing Mozart on the piano. I've always loved classical music, but the major reason I learned to play the piano was to impress women."
Julie: "Is there any outfit a woman could wear on a date that would turn you off?"
Dennis: "Baggy."
A Day In The Life
Oct. 31, 2014, Dennis Prager said: "I get up perilously close the show time [which is 9 am, so Dennis Prager probably gets up about 8 am]. I do all my work at night, all my preparation for the show. After the show [which ends at noon], I will record ads. I used to play Hearts. I play Hearts at home now... I'll be home within an hour and a half of the show and then I will probably smoke a cigar and check mail, say hi to my wonderful wife, and then have lunch. That's my big meal about 3 or 4 o'clock. Then it's almost always with my wife. And then I will return for the evenings, writing and checking out. There's so much of interest on the internet. I am interested in so many subjects. I'll download some classical CDs. I have thousands. It is more fun of a day than it sounds."
Truth
On his Youtube show with Julie Hartman November 21, 2022: Dennis said: "I am so committed to always telling the truth to the best of my human ability, when I receive scripts from sponsors, if there is something in there that isn't true, and there almost always is, I omit it."
Six minutes later, he read this ad: "Focus & Recall is not a pill. It is a patent-pending gell with ultra-absorption of science-backed ingredients to help you immediately sharpen focus, concentrate longer and strengthen recall. Super charge your brain and see the difference. Go to healthycell.com. Use the limited time code Prager for 20% off your first order, risk free."
Decoding the Gurus notes: "...[G]urus may be surprisingly willing to undertake activities such as shilling health supplements, that would otherwise be a little surprising in an intellectual of their calibre."Donald Trump
On May 3, 2011, Dennis Prager wrote in his weekly column:The following comments were made in a public speech last week by a man considering running for president of the United States.On gas prices: “We have nobody in Washington that sits back and says, ‘You’re not going to raise that f***ing price.’”
On what he would say as president to China: “Listen, you mother f***ers, we’re going to tax you 25 percent.”
On Iraq: “We build a school, we build a road, they blow up the school, we build another school, we build another road, they blow them up, we build again. In the meantime we can’t get a f***ing school in Brooklyn.”
The man is Donald Trump. And the words render him unfit to be a presidential candidate, let alone president. They also evidence a need for some Republican-party soul-searching as to how a group of Republican women could laugh and cheer at such language coming from a would-be presidential candidate.
As Trump rose to become the Republican frontrunner during 2015, Dennis could not understand it. Nobody he knew supported Trump.
Dennis: "We have terrific people [running for the Republican nomination] and all this attention is being given to a man who has no Republican background, no conservative principles, and somehow has sucked out all the wind out of the Republican process. It's mind-boggling and very depressing. A very powerful piece on this by John Podhoretz, the editor of Commentary, one of the leading Conservative magazines."
Trump: The Case for Despairing About America by John PodhoretzTrump is something different. He is not a politician whose success has turned him into a megalomaniac, but a megalomaniac who has decided to play politician for a while the way he played being a reality television star for a while. He’s free to do this, of course.
The problem is not with him. The problem has to do with his reception. He is garnering support that may actually be real, and may actually change the course of the 2016 election — and, therefore, American history — through nothing more than blowhardism.
Efforts to figure out how to coopt him and his issues on the part of other Republicans are doomed to failure because it’s not the message that people are attracted to; it’s the messenger. Or, if it is the message, it is a message that cannot be coopted because it is little more than a vile expression of open hatred toward Mexicans in a country where people of Mexican descent make up 11 percent of the electorate. For those who want Trump because of it, anything less than his defamation will strike them as the castrated bleating of what they have started to call a “cuckservative.”
Dennis: "Yeah. That's all correct."
On another show in July of 2015, Dennis says: "Let's talk about Donald Trump here. I think I understand what is happening here. I have listened to and read his comments on John McCain. Some of the people I most respect in the world support Donald Trump's alarm-sounding about illegal immigration."
"Does [Trump] know anything about John McCain's story? If John McCain is not a hero, the word should be removed from the English language. He could have left. He was tortured. He revealed nothing and wouldn't allow himself to be released until all his fellow prisoners were and then Donald Trump has the moronic audacity to say that this man is not a hero because he was captured. Is he out of his mind? It's disgusting what he said."
"He is unworthy of being president. If you are not angry by what he said about John McCain, I'm disgusted."
"If you defend Donald Trump, it's Republican-first over morality, over decency. Some things have to elicit anger or it's over. Oh, it doesn't matter that he have this disgusting dismissal of a man who was tortured for years and this buffoon has the audacity not to apologize for it. And people laugh? McCain is entirely right that he owes an apology to the family of every POW. Is this the bushido ethic? Is that the Donald Trump ethic?"
On August 6, 2015, Dennis Prager tweeted: "Donald Trump's unwillingness to pledge not to run as an independent should immediately disqualify him in every Republican's eyes."
In August, after the first Republican debate, Dennis said: "I wonder if Trump has ever been booed by a room full of people before?"
"It's clear that support for Trump is emotional. Virtually every call has taken issue with me on Donald Trump."
"The left is enamored of Donald Trump because the more Donald Trump is in the headlines, the more people who might vote Republican are turned off. The New York Times story is a lie. Donald Trump did not steal the show, but the New York Times wants to promote him."
"Supporting Trump feels good. It doesn't do good. The New York Times is on your side if you support Trump."
"If you want to be intellectually honest, Cruz is your man if you are a Trump supporter."
"I love Rick Perry. He'd be a great president. Of that crew, I thought Carly Fiorina and Bobby Jindahl did best. Santorum did fine."
"Ronald Reagan didn't speak the way Donald Trump does."
"What is [Trump] saying that Ted Cruz is not saying? Where are his novel insights? I don't know that he is a conservative. He has taken a position on almost every issue that is the opposite of what he now has."
"There isn't Donald Trump thinking. There is Donald Trump emoting."
Caller: "Who would you rather have for president? A loony left-winger or Donald Trump?"
Dennis: "Donald Trump."
Caller: "If he gets the nod, will you contact him and offer him your help?"
Dennis: "Yes."
"Democrats are so damaging to this country that even Donald Trump would be better."
Dec. 15, 2015, Dennis tweeted: "Thus far, if I were a Democrat, I would most fear Marco Rubio."
In January of 2016, Dennis said, "To support Donald Trump, you have to say that how a man has lived his entire life is irrelevant."
Dennis Prager wrote Jan. 26, 2015:
National Review's special issue, "Against Trump" was courageous and important.There is no way to do good in this world without risking making enemies. That National Review was prepared to do that -- among its own readers, no less -- in this day of great financial challenges to newspapers, magazines, and news and opinion websites, was an act of courage.
In opposing Donald Trump for president -- which, it happens, I did in a column I wrote four years ago -- I face the same issue among some in my radio audience. I receive emails from listeners who say they can longer to listen my show because of my opposition to Trump (though I do regularly distinguish between Trump and his supporters).
Interestingly, the two issues -- one being the listeners and readers who will no longer listen to or read anti-Trump Republicans whom they have admired for decades and the other being an important reason Trump is unfit to be president -- are the same.
It is something vitally significant in life -- the concept of the moral bank account.
Every human being has one. The moral bank account is identical to a monetary bank account with the obvious exception that one measures moral activity while the other measures financial activity. We make deposits and withdrawals in each account...
In fact, conservatives who support Trump should do something else -- ask themselves why nearly every conservative they have admired for so long is opposed to Trump.
Finally, the moral bank account concept should also apply to the candidate himself. In terms of conservative values, the man either has no moral bank account or it is in the red. He has made very few conservative deposits, but has made a fair number of significant withdrawals (support for nationalized health care, support for the Clintons, support for partial birth abortion, opposition to free trade, personal defamation and mockery of political opponents, among others). For a Republican candidate, that is saying something.
Nor do I have confidence that he would nominate conservatives to the Supreme Court -- perhaps the most important thing the next president will do. Nevertheless, I will vote for Trump if he is nominated -- because I do not believe he will do nearly as much damage as another Democratic president. But he must not be nominated. Moral bank accounts matter.
By contrast, another Conservative pundit, Tucker Carlson, understood the Trump movement more clearly than did Dennis. On January 28, 2016, Tucker wrote for Politico:
Donald Trump Is Shocking, Vulgar and RightConsider the conservative nonprofit establishment, which seems to employ most right-of-center adults in Washington. Over the past 40 years, how much donated money have all those think tanks and foundations consumed? Billions, certainly. (Someone better at math and less prone to melancholy should probably figure out the precise number.) Has America become more conservative over that same period? Come on. Most of that cash went to self-perpetuation: Salaries, bonuses, retirement funds, medical, dental, lunches, car services, leases on high-end office space, retreats in Mexico, more fundraising. Unless you were the direct beneficiary of any of that, you’d have to consider it wasted.
Pretty embarrassing. And yet they’re not embarrassed. Many of those same overpaid, underperforming tax-exempt sinecure-holders are now demanding that Trump be stopped. Why? Because, as his critics have noted in a rising chorus of hysteria, Trump represents “an existential threat to conservatism.”
Let that sink in. Conservative voters are being scolded for supporting a candidate they consider conservative because it would be bad for conservatism? And by the way, the people doing the scolding? They’re the ones who’ve been advocating for open borders, and nation-building in countries whose populations hate us, and trade deals that eliminated jobs while enriching their donors, all while implicitly mocking the base for its worries about abortion and gay marriage and the pace of demographic change. Now they’re telling their voters to shut up and obey, and if they don’t, they’re liberal. It turns out the GOP wasn’t simply out of touch with its voters; the party had no idea who its voters were or what they believed. For decades, party leaders and intellectuals imagined that most Republicans were broadly libertarian on economics and basically neoconservative on foreign policy. That may sound absurd now, after Trump has attacked nearly the entire Republican catechism (he savaged the Iraq War and hedge fund managers in the same debate) and been greatly rewarded for it, but that was the assumption the GOP brain trust operated under. They had no way of knowing otherwise. The only Republicans they talked to read the Wall Street Journal too.
On immigration policy, party elders were caught completely by surprise. Even canny operators like Ted Cruz didn’t appreciate the depth of voter anger on the subject. And why would they? If you live in an affluent ZIP code, it’s hard to see a downside to mass low-wage immigration. Your kids don’t go to public school. You don’t take the bus or use the emergency room for health care. No immigrant is competing for your job. (The day Hondurans start getting hired as green energy lobbyists is the day my neighbors become nativists.) Plus, you get cheap servants, and get to feel welcoming and virtuous while paying them less per hour than your kids make at a summer job on Nantucket. It’s all good.
Apart from his line about Mexican rapists early in the campaign, Trump hasn’t said anything especially shocking about immigration. Control the border, deport lawbreakers, try not to admit violent criminals — these are the ravings of a Nazi? This is the “ghost of George Wallace” that a Politico piece described last August? A lot of Republican leaders think so. No wonder their voters are rebelling.
Dennis Prager wrote Mar. 1, 2016:
I have been a radio talk show host for 33 years, nationally syndicated for 18. I have never experienced anything similar to what I am experiencing now. Until recently, the only hate mail I ever received was from a small number people on the left. The major reason for this, I am convinced, is that I don't yell at callers and I treat callers who disagree with respect.Reading my emails these days is a brand new experience. I receive hate mail, sometimes laced with obscenities, from Republicans. Most come from Donald Trump supporters, even though whenever I explain my opposition to Trump, I also explain that I understand why so many people support him, and even though I ask anti-Trump listeners to respect these Trump supporters.
To show how widespread the hatred among Republicans is, here are excerpts from an email sent by a Ted Cruz supporter in Michigan. He was livid at my having suggested that Cruz consider announcing that he will now back Marco Rubio to give Republicans a unified opposition -- the only chance to stop Trump. I might add that I have said many times that if I could simply appoint a Republican president, it would be Cruz, since he is a true conservative and he doesn't care whether people love him. However, I believe that Rubio -- at least until this weekend and his imitation of Trump's high school level of personal insults -- has been the Republican with the best chance of defeating Hillary Clinton.
The listener's email read in part:
"Dennis, I can't tell you how pissed off I am at you for suggesting Cruz drop out in favor of the back stabbing, lying Rubio. You have compromised your own principles. ... Despicable! (people) like you ... lie about 'if I could appoint a president, it would be Cruz.' Screw you and all your Salem colleague's (sic) for pushing the false narrative 'Rubio is more electable.'... I am no longer a faithful listener and have switched back to Rush after many years. You have lied by obfuscation, and tried to manipulate your listeners, and for that, I despise you and the other Salem turncoats. You all can go f---yourselves!"
As noted, I have quite a few emails from Trump supporters who after years, even decades, of listening to my show, have decided that I am no longer worthy of being listened to. If one doesn't support Trump, they believe, one is a traitor to the cause.
It is important to point out that I have said over and over that I would vote for Trump if he were the nominee because it is difficult to conceive of even Trump being worse than four more years of a left-wing president and decades of a left-wing Supreme Court. But to more than a few Trump supporters, that is not enough: If you don't support Trump, you are the enemy.
In a nutshell, the hatred and contempt some of the Republican candidates have shown one another is reflected among rank and file Republicans. I understand why -- most Republicans view this election as the last chance to save America from becoming the opposite of what it was founded to be. The left has been eating away at America's foundational values for nearly a century, and it has been largely successful. Two examples: Seventy percent of college students do not believe in freedom of speech if the speech might hurt someone's feelings, and many young Americans support a democratic socialist for president.
Meanwhile, many Republicans believe that only their candidate can turn things around. Therefore, Republicans who oppose their man are regarded as no different from Democrats -- indeed, perhaps worse.
So this is where we stand today:
Many anti-Rubio Republicans regard Rubio as a traitor on the immigration issue and therefore have contempt for his supporters. Many anti-Cruz Republicans regard Cruz as an extremist conservative who is, moreover, a misanthrope, and therefore have contempt for his supporters. And many anti-Trump Republicans -- perhaps most -- regard Trump as a dangerous fraud, and therefore view his supporters with contempt.
Needless to say, with these attitudes, there is little chance any Republican can win.
After the first debate between Trump and Clinton, Dennis said Oct. 1, 2016 that "Trump came across as more real... He's almost too real."
On November 8, 2016, Dennis Prager wrote:
I wish to address those conservatives and Republicans who have declared themselves Never-Trumpers.Jan. 26, 2018, Breitbart reported:I was one of you in vigorously opposing Trump's nomination -- on my national radio show and in my syndicated column. And I paid a price, as you have, in losing longtime supporters -- in my case any number of listeners who supported Trump from the outset and found my strong opposition to him disappointing and worse.
Unlike you, however, I did say from the beginning that if he were to be the nominee, I would vote for him.
On this Election Day, I am more convinced than ever that this was the right position. I even have to believe that in the wee hours of the night -- when worrying about the current and future state of our beloved country keeps you awake -- many of you have at least wondered whether you have taken the right position.
Most of you are simply too intelligent, too idealistic and too self-questioning not to have at least on occasion had second thoughts. If you understand -- and I cannot believe that most of you don't -- how destructive another four years of any Democrat in the White House, let alone the truly corrupt Hillary Clinton, would be, it is inconceivable that you have never questioned your Never-Trump position. Never-Trump, after all, is not the same as Never-Question.
To prove my point, one of my favorite Never-Trumpers, Jonah Goldberg, wrote in May: "If the election were a perfect tie, and the vote fell to me and me alone, I'd probably vote for none other than Donald Trump."
In that moment of exquisite honesty, Jonah acknowledged one of the most important moral arguments to be made for voting for Trump -- the Lesser of Two Evils argument.
To which conservatives who won't vote for Trump often respond: "The lesser of two evils is still evil."
Now, forgive me, but that it is a complete non sequitur, morally and intellectually unworthy of any conservative, religious or secular, who makes it. The only relevant moral lesson here is not that the lesser of two evil is still evil; it is that choosing the lesser of two evils, by definition, increases good. Would you amputate your leg if it might save your life? Or would you say that because losing your life and losing your leg are both evils, you won't amputate your leg because the lesser of two evils is still evil?
Then there is the Never-Trump argument that Donald Trump isn't a conservative. I agree that he hasn't been his whole life, because he probably never gave the subject of the differences between left and right five of minutes of serious thought (nor, if we are to be honest, did Republican presidential nominee John McCain, whom I also worked hard to elect). But Trump and Mike Pence and his top political advisors are well to the right of Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party. As Victor Davis Hanson wrote last week, in his plea to Never-Trumpers:
"On the Supreme Court, Obamacare, the debt, rebuilding the military, the Second Amendment, school choice, abortion, reforming the tax code, re-examining regulation, energy exploration and production, illegal immigration, sanctuary cities, and a host of other issues, the Republican ticket is the antithesis of Clinton/Kaine -- and is recognized as such by nearly all progressives."
Why isn't all that enough to vote for Trump?
Dennis Prager: ‘My Opposition to Donald Trump Was Wrong,’ He Is a ‘Great President’“My opposition to Donald Trump was wrong,” said Dennis Prager, describing Donald Trump as a “great president” whose political successes are connected to a disregard for the left-wing and partisan Democrat news media narratives.
Prager’s comments came during Thursday’s [/1/25/18] episode of his eponymous radio show. While Prager has said that Trump was his last choice during the Republican primaries, he supported him vigorously in the general election against Hillary Clinton.
“The only way to govern [while advancing] the principles of conservatism,” said Prager, was to disregard left-wing and partisan Democrat agitation pushed across the news media landscape. Prager said:
"I was wrong. My opposition to Donald Trump was wrong, in retrospect. I was wrong. I had friends who supported him, and I didn’t understand them. I said, “Are you not aware of what he said about John McCain? Isn’t that enough to disqualify the guy?” They perceived in him what I did not perceive in him, that these over-the-top statements – as objectionable as the statements themselves may be, and none of them defended the statements – nevertheless, what they perceived was accurate: a man who doesn’t give a damn about what the press says about him. That is the only way to govern. It is the only way to advance the principles of conservatism in the United States is to not give a damn."
“[Donald Trump] is so much better a president than Mitt Romney would’ve made,” said Prager, describing Romney as “tepid” and concerned with appealing to news media outlets such as The New York Times.
A president’s actions are a more important metric of presidential success than a president’s demeanor, said Prager:
"Would I like Donald Trump to have Mitt Romney’s temperament, or for that matter Barack Obama’s temperament? Yeah. So what? I would like a whole host of things. People are packages. What a president does is more important to me than a president’s demeanor. He is so much better a president than Mitt Romney would’ve made. Mitt Romney would’ve awakened every day to read The New York Times editorial page to see how he’s covered. Mitt Romney gave us Romneycare in Massachusetts. I campaigned for Mitt Romney, he would’ve been a better president [than Barack Obama]. Any Republican is better than any Democrat, that’s just the way it is. Having said that, Romney would’ve been a tepid president. Nothing comparably conservative compared to Donald Trump."
Concerns with a president’s demeanor should be secondary to broader analyses of a president’s impact, said Prager.
“He has turned out to be a great president with big communication flaws, in the way he tweets and some of the things he says and his temperament,” said Prager. “My temperament is the opposite. I love dignity. I love understatement. Okay, so be it. So what? I’m not sure I’d be as good a president as he. How do you like that? That’s how good he’s been.”
In April of 2017, Prager invited ostensibly conservative NeverTrump news media figures to celebrate Trump’s presidency. “Do conservatives — or non-leftists, for that matter — appreciate just how terrific Donald Trump has been as president?” he asked. “And how lucky we are that he won the presidency?”
“What I do know is that they ought to be deeply appreciative of him, and deeply grateful for luck or providence, and certainly for Trump himself, that he was elected president,” continued Prager. “First, it is unlikely that any other Republican would have defeated Hillary Clinton. Second, he has not only surpassed many of our expectations but also thus far governed in a manner more consistent with conservative principles than any president since Ronald Reagan, and arguably Calvin Coolidge.”
Mar. 15, 2022, Dennis wrote: "If conservatism means “America First,” count me a conservative. But if conservatism means “America Only,” count me out."
Why Does Japan Have Such Low Rates Of Crime?
Paul Nachman writes for VDARE Mar. 16, 2017:
Conservative columnist and talk-radio host Dennis Prager has attracted attention here at VDARE.com a number of times. Most recently, I pointed out that Prager—who is Jewish and takes his religion seriously—has said (with dismay), “Of course there’s a war on Christmas!”However, regarding VDARE.com’s central subject of immigration, I’m unaware that Prager has ever shown much interest or concern. In fact, the late, greatly-lamented Terry Anderson, whose Sunday-evening talk-radio program in Los Angeles was laser-focused on illegal immigration, once told me that Prager had declined to meet with him, even though they shared the same “home” station, KRLA-AM.
But Prager looks to be having an awakening, which is much to be welcomed, as he’s a serious person with a substantial following. In his February 28 column, A Nation of Immigrants — Only If They Assimilate, Prager began:
I am writing this column in Japan, a country whose crime rate is the lowest among countries with large populations. I asked my Japanese translator, a middle-aged woman, what she thought.
“Why is there is so little crime in Japan?” I asked.
Without taking a moment to reflect, she responded, “Because we don’t allow immigration.”
Anyone who visits Japan is struck by the ethnic homogeneity of the nation. If you meet a Caucasian, a black or a Hispanic in Japan, you can be all but certain that the person is visiting or studying there, not a citizen.
Likewise in the United States, there is direct correlation between ethnic homogeneity and low levels of violence. According to 2016-2017 data, the four states with the lowest percentages of violence are:
- Vermont — where 95 percent of the population is one race (white).
- Maine — where 95 percent of the population is one race (white).
- Wyoming — where roughly 93 percent of the population is one race (white).
- New Hampshire — where roughly 94 percent of the population is one race (white).
Sweden, which for much of its modern history has had among the world’s lowest rates of violent crime, was almost always as homogenous as Japan. Now that it has admitted hundreds of thousands of immigrants from the Middle East and North Africa, it is no longer a homogenous country, and its levels of violence have increased dramatically.
All this leads to a particular rule, which is, in order to maintain a low crime rate and social stability, a country has only two choices: Do not allow immigrants into the country, or allow immigrants into the country, but be certain to assimilate them into the native population as quickly as possible....
If you want to understand the immigration crisis, just know that because the left has undone the second choice, it has made the first choice — Japan’s choice — look tenable to many for the first time in American history.
No Safe Spaces
According to NoSafeSpaces.com: "No Safe Spaces follows Adam Carolla and Dennis Prager as they explore the challenges to the First Amendment and freedom of thought faced in America today."
Michael Conklin, professor of Business Law, wrote in the 80th edition of the Pepperdine Law Review in 2019:
Unfortunately, the polarizing nature of the reviews largely fall along partisan political lines, with conservatives praising the film and liberals criticizing it. This partisan result could have likely been minimized if the film communicated a more bipartisan tone. To further complicate things, the film does not provide a clear thesis of what it is trying to promote. Rather, it seems to jump around from topic to topic, some of which are not even tangentially related to each other...
One major problem with the film is that it does not have a well-defined theme. Even the title illustrates this point. While much of the film could be summarized as “a warning of current free-speech suppression trends,” safe spaces are only tangentially related to free speech suppression. The creation of safe spaces on college campuses as a place for students to be protected from speech they perceive as offensive may be a bad idea, but it does not violate the First Amendment.
At one point in the film, Carolla lectures on the dangers of a welfare state. Elsewhere, there is an entire segment on how “white privilege” is not an accurate term. No attempt was made to relate these two issues with the other topics in the film...
The film does not contain in-depth discussions of nuanced First Amendment issues, which is to be expected by a popular-level documentary. But even some basic free-speech principles are presented in a highly misleading manner. At one point, free speech is described as people being able to say “whatever they want” without restrictions... Public and private censorship is conflated throughout the film...
There is even an anecdote provided where after a kid says something “stupid,” his friends tell him to “shut up,” to which the kid responds, “Hey, it’s a free country, man. There’s freedom of speech here.” Prager considers this anecdote and responds, “He’s right!” But this is incorrect. Freedom of speech does not protect someone from having his friends tell him to “shut up...
The film could have embodied a more bipartisan tone by presenting examples of people being censored for their liberal views, instead of focusing almost primarily on the censorship of conservative views.
Reuters: 'Google defeats conservative nonprofit's YouTube censorship appeal'
On February 26, 2020, Reuters reported:
Google persuaded a federal appeals court on Wednesday to reject claims that YouTube illegally censors conservative content.On August 8, 2019, John Samples published for the libertarian Cato Institute:In a 3-0 decision that could apply to platforms such as Facebook, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Seattle found that YouTube was not a public forum subject to First Amendment scrutiny by judges.
It upheld the dismissal of a lawsuit against Google and YouTube by Prager University, a conservative nonprofit run by radio talk show host Dennis Prager.
PragerU claimed that YouTube’s opposition to its political views led it to tag dozens of videos on such topics as abortion, gun rights, Islam and terrorism for its “Restricted Mode” setting, and block third parties from advertising on the videos.
Writing for the appeals court, however, Circuit Judge Margaret McKeown said YouTube was a private forum despite its “ubiquity” and public accessibility, and hosting videos did not make it a “state actor” for purposes of the First Amendment.
McKeown also dismissed PragerU’s false advertising claim, saying YouTube’s “braggadocio” about its commitment to free speech --such as “everyone deserves to have a voice, and [the] world is a better place when we listen, share and build community through our stories” -- were merely opinions.
Dennis Prager recently made a case for government management of social media in the Wall Street Journal. Prager is a conservative so it might seem odd to find him plumping for government control of private businesses. But he is a part of a new conservatism that rejects the older tradition of laissez‐faire that informed the right. What could justify Big Government regulation for tech companies? Prager argues that the companies have a legal obligation to moderate their platforms without political bias. He thinks they are biased and thus fail to meet their obligation. But the companies have no such obligation and to be charitable, it is far from clear that they are biased against conservative content...The law also empowers the platforms to restrict content that is “obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable.” Prager notices the obscenity part, but somehow misses the words “otherwise objectionable.” If YouTube decided Prager’s videos were neither violent nor obscene but were “otherwise objectionable,” the company could restrict access to them. In other words, the law empowers YouTube to be biased against Prager if they wish. And Prager thinks they do have it in for him and other conservatives. As you might have guessed by now, there is lot less to this claim than meets the eye.
Consider what Prager himself tells us: YouTube now hosts 320 Prager University videos that get a billion views a year. Indeed, a new video goes up every week. Not exactly the Gulag is it? He complains that 56 of those 320 videos are on YouTube’s “restricted list” which means (according to Prager) “any home, institution or individual using a filter to block pornography and violence cannot see those videos. Nor can any school or library.” In other words, YouTube has “restricted access” to materials on its site its managers consider “otherwise objectionable.”
Was YouTube biased against Prager and other conservatives? Prager himself notes leftwing sites also ended up on the restricted list. But that’s different, he says, because their videos are violent or obscene while his are not. Prager fails to mention that videos from The History Channel are restricted at twice the rate of his films. Hardly a bastion of left‐wing vulgarity, The History Channel’s videos often discuss historical atrocities and totalitarian regimes. While these clips may be educational, Google seems to believe that the 1.5% of YouTube users who voluntarily opt‐in to restricted mode wish to avoid even educational discussions of atrocity. Dennis Prager’s video about the Ten Commandments is restricted for similar discussions of the Nazi’s Godless regime.
It is far from unreasonable to allow parents to decide how their children are taught about such horrors. A reasonable conservative might even applaud such support for the family. Who gets to decide whether left wing videos or historical documentaries are different than Prager’s videos? The law says YouTube gets to decide.
Dennis Prager's Synagogue
Around 2016, Dennis Prager, Allen Estrin, and Stephen Marmer started their own synagogue as an off-shoot of the Mountaintop Minyan at Stephen S. Wise.
On the January 16, 2023 Youtube show, Prager's cohost Julie Hartman says: "I didn't realize how close you were with people at your synagogue."
Dennis: "They are the primary reason I stay in LA."
Feb. 7, 2023, Prager wrote:
In our synagogue, we pray for all leaders, Democrat and Republican. We prohibit political discussion during our Shabbat services just as it has been prohibited during the Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur services that I have led for 15 years. The Left’s politicizing of nearly all non-Orthodox Jewish synagogues and most mainstream Protestant and many Catholic churches has perverted much of Jewish and Christian life.Our congregation consists of people who have left other Los Angeles-area synagogues (and, via Zoom, people who have left synagogues all over the country) because their rabbis abandoned Judaism — and even liberalism — for leftism. Most non-Orthodox rabbis are far more likely to talk about climate change, American racism, gun control and the nonbinary nature of human sexuality than about how to lead a religious life, how to raise committed Jews, the perils of an overly secular society or even support for Israel.
The Rational Bible
In 2018, Prager released his commentary on the Book of Exodus. In 2019, came Genesis and in 2022, Deuteronomy. As of 4-21-23, these books received nearly perfect ratings on Amazon. No Prager book has been reviewed in the New York Times nor in the New York Review of Books. For the scholarly elite, Dennis Prager is nobody. Just as the Jews who know the most Torah have no interest in Dennis Prager (and the people who are the most enthusiastic about Prager's Bible commentaries tend to know the least about the Bible), so too scholars of the wider world are untroubled by him.
December 5, 2022, on his Youtube show with Julie Hartman, Dennis said: "I can't wait to write my autobiography. I am so idealistic that I am finishing my Bible commentary despite the fact that all of my passion right now is to write my autobiography."
Julie: "I don't know how you do it."
Dennis: "Somebody has to explain these Biblical texts or they will go further and further into oblivion."
Julie: "That's so true."
Dennis: "Julie, that you love the Rational Bible and the effect it has had on your life."
Julie: "It has revolutionized my life."
Dennis: "If all I did was affect you, it was worth writing."
Dennis has used that line on thousands of people. When I spoke to Dennis in person for the first time on January 29, 1994, in Tampa Bay, he said it gave him great comfort that if anything happened to him, I was there to carry on the battle for good values. I was overwhelmed.
Years later, I realize it was a line he'd used on dozens, if not hundreds, of people.
Julie: "When I was done reading it, I went from seeing the world in a secular way to seeing the world in a religious way. When I walk down the street and look around me, I feel more connected to life. I appreciate the every day more."
A New York friend said to me May 11, 2023: "Prager has a tough time in New York. Jews are not impressed with his pasteurized Torah for goyim. Prager realized what every Jew knows -- you make a fortune selling to goyim, you go broke selling to Jews. The goyim pay retail for Prager's deep value imitation product. A Jew goes to yeshiva and he's the leading Bible authority in LA within three months. I'm not impressed with guys who monetize a Yeshiva day school education to dazzle the goyim."
June 2, 2022, Dennis said the only airport he does not get stopped for selfies is Boston's.
May 9, 2023, Dennis Prager wrote:
I believe that I have brought more people to belief in God, to taking the Bible seriously, to Jews embracing Judaism, and to others embracing Christianity than perhaps any other living Jew or Christian.Jonathan Kirsch writes in the Jewish Journal May 16, 2018:I have almost exclusively argued for the necessity of God (the God of the Bible, not just God). The reason is that even when people come to believe there is a God, this belief often has no moral or religious significance. Most people who say they believe in God do not believe in the Bible or even in the God of the Bible. They believe that there is Something Out There, but this Something is rarely the morality-teaching, morally demanding and morally judging God of the Bible.
I have also shown people why, on purely rational grounds, without the God of the Bible, there is no objective good and evil, since without the biblical God, “good” and “evil” are purely subjective personal or societal opinions. And I have shown that without the God of the Bible, our lives and all human life have no ultimate significance, that our lives have no more ultimate meaning than some rock on some planet.
He insists that he is always deferential to the divine writ: “When I differ with the Torah, I think the Torah is right and I am wrong,” he quips. Yet the raison d’etre of Prager’s book, like every other work of scriptural exegesis since antiquity, is the effort to explain what the Torah actually says and means.
By way of example, when we read the biblical commandment to observe Pesach, Sukkot and Shavuot (which is described in Exodus 23:16 as “the Feast of the Harvest, of the first fruits of your work, of what you sow in the field”), Prager points out that Shavuot is the least widely observed of the three pilgrimage festivals. “One reason is it has the fewest rituals associated with it,” he explains. “We are physical beings living in a physical universe; physical expression — which is what ritual is — matters. And Passover and Succot are replete with rituals.” And he ventures the opinion that “moderns relate far more to the idea of freedom (Passover) than to a holiday celebrating the giving of the Torah.” Yet the association between Shavuot and the giving of the Law on Mount Sinai is nowhere explicitly mentioned in the Torah itself.
Fans of Prager’s contributions to the Jewish Journal when he served as a columnist may be surprised to find that his new book is entirely free of the sometimes harsh rhetoric that he deployed against Jews whom he characterizes as “leftists.” One reason for Prager’s kinder and gentler approach may be the providence of his new book. “Exodus” is published by Regnery Faith, a publishing house that is owned by Salem Media Group, which also produces and distributes Prager’s radio show; Salem targets “audiences interested in Christian and family-themed content and conservative values.”Dennis writes in his Genesis commentary:...Prager invites his readers to approach the ancient text from a place of reason — that’s why he calls his series “The Rational Bible” — and yet he insists that the reader also must embrace the article of faith that the Bible is the revealed word of God rather than the work of human hands and minds. For most of readers who pick up the book, embracing these two notions at the same time will not be a challenging experience. The nonbelievers whom Prager had in mind when he wrote the book, however, may feel that he is begging the question...
He seems to express a degree of compassion for adulterers: “No one knows what goes on in anyone else’s marriage. And if we did, we might often well understand why one or the other sought love outside the marriage.” But his bottom-line argument is that “no higher civilization can be created or can endure that condones adultery"...
Throughout history, there have been otherwise honorable men who have sinned in the sexual arena (and, remember, Judah was unmarried, he did not know the identity of the woman who posed as a prostitute, and he would have no reason to assume this “prostitute” was either betrothed or married). The Torah may be telling us not to be too quick to judge in this regard or, at the very least, not to assess a person’s honor on the basis of sexual sin alone. To cite one other biblical example, of all the inhabitants inhabitants of Canaan, it was a prostitute, Rahab, who hid the Israelite spies and thereby enabled the Israelites to enter the Promised Land... The rabbis, being male, understood how difficult it is for a man to resist a woman’s invitation to be with her. ...Would Joseph have said no to a single woman?
Epoch Times
On his December 5, 2022 Youtube show with Julie Hartman, Dennis said: "My wife and I so love Epoch Times, we not only spend our own money, we send them money. These are important and good guys."
According to Wikipedia (retrieved 4-21-23): "The Epoch Times has spread misinformation related to the COVID-19 pandemic in print and via social media including Facebook and YouTube. In 2022, Raquel Miguel of the European watchdog EU DisinfoLab said, "The Epoch Times has played a noticeable role in transmitting and amplifying many anti-vaccine narratives". According to Josef Holnburger of the Center for Monitoring, Analysis and Strategy, a German extremism monitoring agency, The Epoch Times's German edition has been the most shared outlet among Germany's COVID-skeptic movement... In March 2022, Angelo Carusone, the head of the watchdog group Media Matters for America, said that The Epoch Times "go[es] where the center for the strongest infrastructure or possibility of getting as much audience and influence and reach is", and added that this complexity makes it "radically different and hard to understand". According to Carusone, the metric of success for The Epoch Times is simply influence rather than money or a specific political agenda."
Hate Hoaxes
Sometimes Dennis Prager is the victim of other people's bad epistemics. He wrote May 17, 2022:
During a recent broadcast, I said that once Elon Musk takes control of Twitter, “Twitter will be flooded with hate, and a lot of it will come from people on the Left who want to show how hate-filled it is. It’s like their race-hoax industry. If you see a noose on a college dorm of a black student, the odds are overwhelming that the noose was put there by a black student. If you see the N-word on a dormitory building, the odds are overwhelming that a black student actually did that. We’re filled with race hoaxes.”One of the better-known self-proclaimed fact-checkers, PolitiFact, declared my claim “false.”
They offered no refutation of what I said and provided no examples of nooses or the N-word on campuses perpetrated by white supremacists. Instead, they made a self-defeating argument: “Experts who track hate crimes told PolitiFact that there isn’t even a nationwide data source that Prager could have used to pin down the number of incidents — real or fake — that specifically involved hanging a noose or scrawling the racist insult on college buildings or grounds.”
So, if there is no such database, how could PolitiFact declare what I said “false”?
...So, then, here are just a few examples of race hoaxes concerning graffiti and nooses on campuses over the last 15 years. If PolitiFact can show that these examples are not in fact hoaxes or, alternatively, provide an equal number of verified examples, PolitiFact’s assessment of my claim may be valid. If PolitiFact cannot do so, it lied.
In 2007, Madonna G. Constantine, a psychology and education professor at Teachers College, Columbia University, claimed she found a noose at her door. ABC News described her as “a respected professor at Columbia University Teachers College… This incident is the latest in a growing number of noose incidents in the United States, since the one that punctuated the racially charged controversy in Jena, LA.”
The subsequent investigation revealed that Constantine made it all up. And it also turned out that the racial controversy about a “noose incident” in Jena, Louisiana, had nothing to do with a noose.
In 2013, Oberlin College shut down classes after a series of purported hate crimes. According to The Oberlin Review… anti-black and anti-gay vandalism/”hate speech” have plagued the campus. “Whites Only” was written above a water fountain, “N—– Oven” was written inside the elevator, and “No N—–s” was written on a dormitory bathroom door. Activists implied the incidents were tied to Black History Month, as was a menacing person on campus who allegedly donned a “KKK hood and robe” near a black dormitory known as “Afrikan Heritage House.”
It was all a hoax. No one wore a KKK hood and robe. It was a woman wearing a coat. Cornell University law professor William Jacobson, who tracked the Oberlin story on his blog, Legal Insurrection, said the fraudulent incidents “may be the greatest race hoax since Tawana Brawley.”
In 2013, at Vassar College, messages such as “Avoid Being B—–s,” “F— N—–s,” and “Hey Tranny. Know Your Place” were all a hoax carried out by the left-wing leader of the school’s official “Bias Incident Response Team.”
In 2013, at the University of Iowa, a black student claimed he was beaten up at a bar, prompting massive campus outrage. But police later determined the alleged victim was actually “an active participant and even an instigator” in the bar brawl.
In 2013, at Clemson University, administrators accused white students of a “hate-crime” — banana peels hanging from a tree branch — they knew was a hoax. The incident was dubbed “bananagate.”
“Why are phony ‘hate crimes’ so common, especially on college campuses?” James Taranto asked in The Wall Street Journal on May 2, 2013. Why didn’t PolitiFact, which has been around since 2007, rate Taranto?
In 2014, a University of Chicago student who claimed his Facebook page was hacked and filled with racist and violent messages against him and another student faked the attack. He was a white leftist.
In 2015, a Muslim University of Texas student claimed she was stalked and threatened by an anti-Muslim man with a gun. She later confessed she made up the incident.
In 2015, University of Delaware students discovered three “nooses” near the hall where the Black Lives Matter group had protested conservative commentator Katie Pavlich the day before. It turned out the objects were “remnants of paper lanterns” leftover from a previous event.
In 2015, a bag of poop was found on the doorstep of Vanderbilt University’s Black Cultural Center. Most of the school initially believed it was put there due to racism. It turned out that a blind female student walking her dog could not find a trash can to throw away the guide dog’s excrement.
In 2015, at Kean University, the person behind the “i will kill every black male and female at kean university” tweet and other similar ones was a black female activist, a former president of its Pan-African Student Union.
In 2015, at Delta College in Michigan, a social media post read, “I’m going to shoot every black person I can on campus. Starting tomorrow morning.” It was posted by a black student...
PolitiFact is owned by the Poynter Institute, a left-wing organization funded in part by George Soros. The primary purpose of Poynter and PolitiFact is to malign conservatives, just as they did me.
More Sinned Against Than Sinning
April 26, 2022, Dennis wrote that "all the Left’s charges against me are lies."
Coronavirus
Dennis Prager was consistently awful with regard to the coronavirus.
In the Spring of 2020, Dennis had Covid minimalist Michael Fumento on his show five times saying that current concern about Covid was hysterical. Dennis agreed. Pragertopia.com noted for February 25: "Dennis talks to Michael Fumento, investigative reporter and science writer. What is going on with the coronavirus?… The Left fears everything…" March 2: "Fumento sees no need to change his original prognosis: this is a media-generated panic…" March 10: "Dennis has a hard time understanding why we are panicking about the coronavirus. Why is it so different than the regular flu? ...The virus is now past peak in both China and S Korea."
January 23, 2020, Fumento published an op/ed in the New York Post titled "Don’t buy the media hype over the new China virus". March 8, he published:
Coronavirus going to hit its peak and start falling sooner than you thinkA CNN reporter broadcasts from Wuhan, China, on the recent viral outbreak. There is nobody near who could possibly infect him — unless the cameraman has Guinness Book of Records coughs and sneezes. So why does he insist on wearing a blue surgical mask while talking?
It’s called “drama,” which is badly needed, because there appears to be nothing very special about this outbreak of the 2019-nCoV or Wuhan virus. It should actually be called the DvV, or Déjà vu Virus, because we have been through these hysterias before. Over and over. Heterosexual AIDS, Ebola repeatedly, the H1N1 swine flu that was actually vastly milder than the regular flu and, especially, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in 2003.
Once you start debunking mass hysteria over outbreaks, it gets easy, because the same patterns repeat themselves.
The best remedy for all epidemic hysteria is perspective. How is this new outbreak different and thus potentially more dangerous from other diseases we have dealt with in the past or are dealing with now?
Wuhan is repeatedly labeled “deadly” — but so is every other virus most people know about. But especially deadly? Nearly 600 cases have been confirmed with at least 17 reported deaths.
Pragertopia show notes for 2020 read: February 27: "The world is panicked over the coronavirus which has killed very few people outside of China. Why aren’t we panicked every year by the common flu?" March 2: "The world is consumed by the coronavirus fears. Are people who fear the world will end in 12 years from carbon emissions more likely to fear the virus than those who are skeptical about man-made global warming?" March 5: "Coronavirus panic has reached a fever pitch, even though you are remarkably more likely to die from the flu." March 6: "What if we reacted this way to the regular flu which kills tens of thousands in the US every year?" March 11: "Israel, Italy and soon other countries are shutting down because of coronavirus fears. Many universities and colleges are now shutting, too… Dennis had two speeches cancelled this week… 1000 coronavirus cases confirmed in the USA. That compares to 30 to 40 million annual flu cases…"
March 12: "Dennis compares the swine flu to the coronavirus. The swine flu was much worse, but the world didn’t shut down. Why are we shutting down now? ...Dennis returns to the public health panic of the century." March 13: "The country continues to shut down… Is this the right prescription? Or an over-reaction? Why weren’t we paralyzed during the swine flu in 2009? 60 million got it then. 25K people died." March 17: "There are harmful consequences to shutting down the US economy. Are we allowed to discuss this or is it now forbidden? We don’t know how many people have the virus, so there is no accurate way to measure the death rate… 90 or so people have died in the USA from the coronavirus. Right now, there seems to be no indication of imminent disaster." March 18: "Dennis and Victor [Davis Hanson] remain uneasy with the destruction of individual lives and the general economy over the coronavirus scare. Yes, it’s a serious issue, but what is the price we are paying by shutting down the economy?"
March 3, 2020, Dennis discussed the Corona Virus for the first time in his weekly column:
We Go From Hysteria to HysteriaIn his column March 17, Prager wrote: "If the government can order society to cease functioning, from restaurants and other businesses to schools, due to a possible health disaster, it is highly likely that a Democratic president and Congress will similarly declare emergency and assert authoritarian rule in order to prevent what they consider the even greater “existential threat” to human life posed by global warming."We now endure multiple hysterias at once.
The latest, of course, is COVID-19, better known as the coronavirus. In addition to China, where the virus originated, major cities in Italy and Japan are in lockdown mode, and Japan has closed all its schools. In the United States, where, as of this writing, six people — most, if not all, of whom were already ill — have died, the states of Washington (where all six deaths occurred) and Florida and the city of San Francisco have declared states of emergency...
Unless the coronavirus becomes a worldwide mass killer, it will be fair to say that the hysteria over coronavirus will cause much more suffering than the virus.
Pragertopia show notes for 2020 continue: March 19: "The President announces some good news: a drug therapy that helps those who have the virus… We need to keep perspective. There is no indication this is the Spanish flu of 1918... How can we know what the mortality rate is for the coronavirus when we don’t know how many people have it?… Dennis reiterates that we seem to be making good progress toward a coronavirus treatment. That’s much more important now than a vaccine." March 20: "California and New York are now closed for business. Do the numbers of deaths justify this drastic action? Dennis does not believe so. Neither does the Wall Street Journal." March 23: "Our lives are now dominated by the virus. All of life has cost and benefits. Are we calculating the cost of closing down society? Dennis talks to Aaron Ginn, Silicon Valley technologist. He’s done a deep data dive into virus stats… What price are we willing pay to stop the virus? Isn’t that a fair question?… Why have Italy and Iran been hit so hard? Look to their involvement with China…" March 24: "The President speaks more truth in ten minutes than the NYTimes, CNN et al do in a week… Why are those on the Left much more fearful of the virus than those on the Right? Dennis has theories."
Mar. 24, 2020, Dennis said: "If Andrew Cuomo were, or the Andrew Cuomo attitude prevailed, we wouldn't have fought the Nazis. We wouldn't have fought the Japanese fascists. We wouldn't have had -- that attitude that the only value is saving a life, that attitude leads to appeasement. It must. It leads to cowardice, it has to. No one can die? Then it's not a war."
Pragertopia: March 25: "An Israeli scientist says Trump is right. This virus will not lead to catastrophic death tolls… The same people who predicted a disaster with the swine flu are the same people predicting disaster for the coronavirus. They were wrong then. Are they wrong now?… Stanford scientists agree with the Israeli scientist re: death toll." March 26: "Sweden has not shut down. So far it’s doing fine… The Imperial College epidemiologist who made dire death predictions changes his mind… Dennis talks to Alex Berenson, former NY Times reporter." March 27: "Dennis has steeped himself in coronavirus research and reports… The Left/Right divide is clear on the corona virus as it is in all issues… Why isn’t everyone who has the virus given hydroxychloroquine? The virus crisis and the shutdown of the economy vindicate the themes of The Happiness Hour. Dennis explains." March 30: "The costs to the world economy and to individuals rises every day… The Left hates the President more than they love the American people… We will get over the coronavirus, but we won’t get over the moral sickness of the Left… Two Dem governors ban the use of hydroxychloroquine in their states… How much will the lonely and the depressed suffer from this shutdown? We will never know…" March 31: "Dennis talks to Thierry Baudet, member of the Dutch parliament and founder of the Forum for Democracy (FvD) party… Is it time for a second or third opinion on whether the cure is worse than the disease?… There is a big price to be paid for social isolation. Who’s thinking about that? Millions are suffering severe economic loss. Who is their enemy? Statistical models or the virus? Why is India in lockdown? The Left loves cities, but cities are where the virus is taking its biggest toll… Should everyone wear a mask?"
What does the evidence say about the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine? According to Wikipedia: "Hydroxychloroquine has been studied for an ability to prevent and treat coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‑19), but clinical trials found it ineffective for this purpose and a possible risk of dangerous side effects."
In his March 31, 2020 column, Prager wrote:
If there is one thing on which you’d think left and right could agree, it would be the proper response to the present coronavirus. After all, COVID-19 doesn’t distinguish between left and right: Conservatives and liberals are just as likely to contract and even die from it.Here are more Pragertopia show notes for 2020: April 2: "Dennis has lost some listeners because of his questioning stance on the virus. So be it… We are being ruled by scientists and experts who tell us how we are run society. They tell us what to do. And we do it…" April 3: "We have turned our fate over to experts… Dr. Fauci now says we can return to normal when there are no new cases and no deaths. If he really means it, it will months and months before we can come out of quarantine… The Swedes continue to go their own way. There’s more freedom there than the USA. ...should young people have any contact with older people; if we come to distrust models for the virus, should we distrust models for global warming." April 6: "More and more people (and “experts”) are questioning whether we are employing the right strategy, balancing the fight against the virus and saving the economy… The Left is adamant that we shut down everything… Why is there even a left/right divide on the virus?… FDR said all we have to fear is fear itself. If the President said that today, the media would say he was being irresponsible…"Yet, it’s amazing how consistently left and right differ on even this issue.
Virtually every opinion piece in The New York Times, The Washington Post and every other mainstream, i.e., left-wing, journal share two characteristics: a sense of foreboding (millions will die) and an unshakeable conviction that to prevent mass death, the world’s economy must be shut down.
Meanwhile, virtually every opinion piece in The Wall Street Journal and on just about every conservative website contains less foreboding and asks more questions about whether the cure may be worse than the disease. To cite some examples:
March 11: Ben Shapiro published a piece titled “Our Fears About Coronavirus Are Overblown.”
March 16: The Hoover Institution published a piece by Richard A. Epstein that’s thesis was: “I believe that the current dire models radically overestimate the ultimate death toll.”
March 16: City Journal published conservative thinker Victor Davis Hanson’s piece that’s thesis was: “Our response could prove as harmful as the virus itself.”
March 17: My column titled “Why the Remedy May Be Worse Than the Disease” appeared on many conservative sites
March 19: The lead Wall Street Journal editorial was titled “Rethinking the Coronavirus Shutdown.”
March 19: A column titled “Will the Costs of a Great Depression Outweigh the Risks of Coronavirus?” appeared on The Federalist’s website.
March 24: The Wall Street Journal published a column by two Stanford professors of medicine titled “Is the Coronavirus as Deadly as They Say?”
Meanwhile, the liberal and left-wing media published hundreds of articles warning us of millions of deaths if we don’t shut down the American economy.
Or take the example of President Donald Trump’s announcement at a press conference on March 19 that hydroxychloroquine had “shown really good promise” in helping to cure COVID-19.
Virtually every left-wing news medium mocked him for making that claim.
March 21: “AP FACT CHECK: Trump’s Breathless Takes on Drugs for Virus.”
...A particularly egregious example of the left-right divide on the coronavirus response appeared in The Washington Post on March 27. One of its columnists, Max Boot, wrote:
“Radio host Dennis Prager bemoaned our unwillingness to sacrifice lives as we did during World War II, saying ‘that attitude leads to appeasement’ and ‘cowardice.’ The United States lost 418,500 people in World War II … but it would be far worse to lose 2.2 million civilians — the worst-case estimate of the U.S. death toll if we let the novel coronavirus spread unimpeded.”
...hysteria is to the left what oxygen is to biological life. Leftists pride themselves on being rational. But the further left one goes, the more feelings displace reason.
A second reason is hatred of Trump. On the left, damaging Trump is more important than truth and more important than the welfare of the American people. If Trump believes hydroxychloroquine offers hope, let’s debunk its usefulness.
A third reason is leftists are afraid — of life and of death. Fear of life is why they build “safe spaces” on campuses for students who cannot handle a visiting speaker with whom they differ. And they are afraid of death. They undoubtedly find Patrick Henry’s famous cry, “Give me liberty, or give me death!” incomprehensible, if not downright foolish.
April 7: "We are losing our liberties in this crisis. It may be necessary in the short term. What happens in the long term? What dangerous precedents are being set? The Left hates the President more than they love the American people. The NYTimes has campaigned against the use of hydroxychloroquine even though many doctors have testified that it works. Why is the NYTimes against it? Because President Trump is for it." April 8: "Why is the Left waging war against hydroxychloroquine? Dennis talks to Pastor Rob McCoy. He recently resigned from the Thousand Oaks, CA city council after he refused to cancel his church service." April 10: "The Left doesn’t want the virus to end soon. Dr. Ezekiel Emmanuel, the architect of ObamaCare, says that we need to stay locked down for 18 months or until a cure is a found… why are we so quick to give up our freedoms; how many people die of flu every year; why do we trust experts." April 13: "Why does Florida have so many fewer deaths than New York? They started their lockdown 10 days after New York. Doctors and scientists have no more wisdom than third basemen… The virus panic has brought out the inner tyrant of many politicians. The first among the worst is Michigan governor, Gretchen Whitmer… When do we start rebelling against politicians who want to tell us how to live?"
April 14: "How do we balance the deaths from Covid-19 with the damage done to the economy, the child and spousal abuse, the suicides? Is that a permissible debate?… What gives governors and mayors the right to close down states and cities?… When can we all go back to work? When it’s safe? What is safe? The Democratic governors are having a field day acting out their authoritarian impulses. They will tell us what we can do and when?… Dennis talks to Dr. Simone Gold, emergency department physician and lawyer. She’s dealing with corona cases every day. Many of our liberties have been taken away during this virus crisis. Have we let them go too easily? Have we lost our love of liberty? Dennis has thoughts."
So who is show guest Dr. Simone Gold? And how credible is she? According to Wikipedia: "Simone Melissa Gold (née Tizes) is an American physician, attorney, author, and the founder of America's Frontline Doctors, an American right-wing political organization known for spreading misinformation about the COVID-19 pandemic. She gained notoriety when a video of an America's Frontline Doctors press conference in front of the US Supreme Court Building went viral in July 2020. She is known for speaking out against the COVID-19 vaccine, stating that "[w]e doctors are pro-vaccine, but this is not a vaccine." On January 5, 2021, Gold spoke at a rally in Washington D.C., telling attendees to refuse to be vaccinated for COVID-19 and the next day took part in the 2021 United States Capitol attack. She spoke from the rotunda of the Capitol and was later arrested for her participation in the storming..."
April 14, 2020, Dennis wrote in his weekly column: "Why are governments the world over rendering hundreds of millions of their citizens jobless, impoverishing at least a billion people, endangering the family life of millions (straining marriages, increasing child and spousal abuse, and further postponing marriage among young people), bankrupting vast numbers of business owners and workers living paycheck to paycheck, and increasing suicides?"
Here are more Pragertopia show notes: April 16: "Conservatives are saying it’s time to get back to work; Democrats, Liberals and Leftists are saying we have to make the quarantine even stronger… Glendale, CA tells its citizens that they must wear a mask to walk their dog… When is the push back going to come from free citizens? Weeks ago the idea was that masks did very little good or might be counter-productive; now they’re essential. What changed?… This is time to be proud to be a conservative…" April 17: "Would the entire country shut down if half the country’s death were in Montana or Iowa? This is a New York phenomenon. But that’s where the news media is… The governor of Michigan says that protestors of her draconian shutdown policies are right-wing radicals."
April 20: "The Mayor Los Angeles sets conditions to open up the city that can’t be met. So we open when?… When does “better safe than sorry” not work anymore?… Dennis talks to science writer and investigative reporter, Michael Fumento. The corona virus is following its predicted pattern." April 21: "Cities are using drones to track their citizens’ corona behavior… Oregon has barely been hit by the virus, but it is still locked down… The Left loves power over people…Science is not infallable. When it’s worshipped, it becomes a false god." April 22: "The suffering that will result from this worldwide economic shutdown will be unprecedented. The Left says they care about children. The children will suffer the most. Millions literally will not have food… The governor of Georgia plans to open up his state. He’s being vilified for it."
April 23: "People are dying because they’re not going to the hospital when they need to. They are more afraid of catching the virus than treating their real illness. Dennis reads about a young person in Israel who died making this tragic mistake… The media has spooked the world with their hysterical statements… Dennis talks to Aryeh Leifert, American-born Israel tour guide from Walking Israel Tours. Israel has been in a severe lockdown for a month. Tourism doesn’t exist. We’ve given up our freedoms and endangered the lives of millions to fight this virus. But there have been more deadly viruses than this one and we didn’t shut down for them. Why not?…Dennis talks to Tyson Langhoffer, senior counsel at Alliance Defending Freedom. Church-goers are being prohibited from meeting even in cities where there have been no deaths."
April 27: "Have we made the biggest mistake in human history by shutting down the economy to stop a virus? Dennis talks to Bill Bennett, former Secretary of Education and best-selling author. Time to open up the world. Patrick Henry would be seen as a kook now. Give me a liberty or give me death? Are you nuts, Pat? You mean give me security? Right?… More and more Americans who care about freedom are ignoring “stay-at-home” orders — going to beaches, opening their small businesses."
April 28: "Waiting until its safe means waiting until never… We are living through a dress rehearsal for a police state… Many small businesses will close as a result of the corona panic. Tragic… Do you want to live fully or do you want to be safe? Every day you must choose. It is cruel to not allow a loved one to be with a family member or friend who is dying. This is the situation at all nursing homes across the country… Why are religious people less consumed by the coronavirus hysteria than the non-religious? Dennis has his theories." April 29: "Dennis talks to Dr. Rob Steele, a cardiologist in Michigan, one of the Coronavirus hot spots. Based on his clinical experience and research, he thinks it’s time to end the lockdown and get back to work…"
April 30: "A health minister in Finland recognizes that they may have been shut down the country too early. They have had no chance to build up herd immunity. We are giving up our freedoms, one by one… We know who this disease fatally attacks: the old and infirm. This is true across the world… We are not following the science, we are following scientists… Dennis talks to Dr. Daniel Erikson, Emergency Physician in Bakersfield, CA. Co-Owner Accelerated Urgent Care. His video with his business partner and fellow doctor had 5 million views on YouTube before YouTube blocked it for violating “community guidelines.” We are all guinea pigs. Healthy people are being quarantined. We have no way of knowing if this experiment is working."
April 28, 2020, Dennis wrote: "People will argue that a temporary police state has been justified because of the allegedly unique threat to life posed by the new coronavirus. I do not believe the data will bear that out. Regardless, let us at least agree that we are closer to a police state than ever in American history."
April 28, 2020, Dennis said: "The lockdown is the greatest mistake in the history of humanity."
David Simon responded: "Never mind the burning of the library at Alexandria, European colonialism, the 1914 alliances that provoked the Great War, the Weimar left and center failing to unite against Hitler..."
Former U.S. Representative Joe Walsh: "I worked for the same conservative media co. @DennisPrager works for. Prager is no dummy. He can’t believe this. But this is what sucks about conservative media. You get rewarded for being outlandish, for enraging your audience. I did it at times too. It’s wrong. It’s dishonest."
Frank Luntz: "Galaxy Brain stuff from the University of Prager."
Jonah Goldberg: "Let’s assume it’s a mistake. The biggest in human history? The reparations on Germany after WWI? Sending Lenin back to Russia? Carve out for slavery in the US Constitution? The Fire of Alexandria? Canceling Firefly?"
Dennis wrote in his Genesis commentary: "It is often tempting...to use drama or exaggeration to make a point. It may work the first time and even on subsequent occasions. But once a person acquires a reputation for exaggeration or melodrama, his credibility is lost."Prager's producer Allen Estrin said about Dennis: "Through his radio show, his writing, and now PragerU, he changes the way you live – for the better. He makes you a better a person – a better father, a better son, a better mother, a better daughter. Name another public figure who does that."
Not all right-wing pundits were as wrong as Dennis Prager on Covid. For example, on April 21, 2020, The Wrap reported:
Counties where viewers of Fox News’ “Hannity” outnumbered “Tucker Carlson Tonight” were associated with a higher number of COVID-19 deaths in the early stages of the pandemic, according to a new study from the University of Chicago’s Becker Friedman Institute for Economics.On October 18, 2021, Dennis said on his show: "I'm broadcasting from my home because I'm not going into the station as I have COVID. I was tested positive last week and I have been steadily improving. At no point was I in danger of hospitalization. I have received monoclonal antibodies, that's Regeneron. I have, of course, for years — a year and a half, not years — been taking hydroxychloroquine from the beginning, with zinc. I've taken z-pack, azithromycin, as the Zelenko protocol would have it. I have taken ivermectin. I have done what a person should do if one is not going to get vaccinated.Although the two most-watched cable shows air on the same network, the study’s authors analyzed transcripts from each and concluded that “Carlson warned viewers about the threat posed by the coronavirus from early February, while Hannity originally dismissed the risks associated with the virus before gradually adjusting his position starting late February.”
...The study found that Hannity’s viewers changed their behaviors five days later than other Fox News viewers, while Carlson’s viewers changed their behaviors three days earlier than other Fox News viewers.
"It is infinitely preferable to have natural immunity than vaccine immunity and that is what I have hoped for the entire time. Hence, so, I have engaged with strangers, constantly hugging them, taking photos with them knowing that I was making myself very susceptible to getting COVID, which is, indeed, as bizarre as it sounded, what I wanted, in the hope that I would achieve natural immunity and be taken care of by therapeutics. That is exactly what has happened. It should have happened to the great majority of Americans.
"The number of deaths in this country owing to COVID is a scandal which one day will be clear to Americans. The opposition of therapeutics on the part of the CDC is owing to the corruption of the belief in the value of vaccine and only vaccine. Whether it is because of all the money that goes into the CDC from the pharmaceutical companies or a simple unquestioning faith in vaccines, or both, only God knows. So, I have walked the walk on this matter and here I am."
According to the FDA on September 3, 2021: "The FDA has not authorized or approved ivermectin for use in preventing or treating COVID-19 in humans or animals. Ivermectin is approved for human use to treat infections caused by some parasitic worms and head lice and skin conditions like rosacea. Currently available data do not show ivermectin is effective against COVID-19."
According to a November 1, 2021 news report: "Hasidic doctor Vladimir Zelenko [is] an outspoken critic of the COVID-19 vaccine, and gained notoriety for prescribing Ivermectin to his COVID patients."
How effective is azithromycin for Covid? This study released July 16, 2021 found it had no benefit.
Nov. 15, 2022, Dennis wrote:...if these therapeutics [ivermectin and hydroxychlroquine] were acknowledged to work, the vaccinations would be rendered largely unnecessary and Pfizer, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson would lose a great deal of money. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institutes of Health and state medical boards essentially work for Big Pharma.Based on the rule that those who censor are almost always lying, we must come to the frightening conclusion that the American medical establishment has been lying to us...
In its suppression of scientific dissent, the American medical establishment mimics the medieval Church’s treatment of Galileo.
On November 9, 2021, Dennis wrote his weekly column on why natural immunity to Covid is better than vaccine immunity. "Nor does the study warn that getting the vaccine may also induce harmful consequences. To its everlasting shame, that is a taboo subject in America’s medical community despite the fact that the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) website of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention lists over 700,000 cases of suspected injury and more than 17,000 otherwise unexpected deaths temporally associated with COVID-19 vaccines."
Anyone can make a report that they had a negative reaction to the Covid vaccine. That's hardly a convincing argument about the dangers of vaccines. And we have no evidence that Covid vaccines have killed anyone. Reuters noted April 2, 2021: "Of the 145 million COVID-19 vaccine doses administered in the United States from Dec. 14, 2020 through March 29, 2021, “VAERS received 2,509 reports of death (0.0017%) among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine.” Having reviewed “available clinical information including death certificates, autopsy, and medical records,” the CDC found “no evidence that vaccination contributed to patient deaths”."
With his love for Bible-based morality, Dennis Prager might have pointed out that social distancing is a tactic endorsed by the Torah. Notes Wikipedia:
Although the term “social distancing” was not introduced until the 21st century,[14] social-distancing measures date back to at least the 5th century BC. The Bible contains one of the earliest known references to the practice in the Book of Leviticus 13:46: “And the leper in whom the plague is… he shall dwell alone; [outside] the camp shall his habitation be.”
So where do public health officials get the right to shut us down? Prager might have learned from Michael Lewis's superb 2021 book, The Premonition: A Pandemic Story: "If there is the faintest possibility of a catastrophic disease, you should treat it as being a lot more likely than it seems. If your differential diagnosis leads to a list of ten possibilities, for instance, and the tenth and least likely thing on the list is Ebola, you should treat the patient as if she has Ebola, because the consequences of not doing so can be calamitous."
The prestigious Nature magazine published February 18, 2021: "The average years of life lost per [Covid] death is 16 years."
Dr. Jeremy Samuel Faust wrote April 28, 2020 for Scientific American:Comparing COVID-19 Deaths to Flu Deaths Is like Comparing Apples to Oranges — The former are actual numbers; the latter are inflated statistical estimatesSurgeon David Gorski wrote August 31, 2020 about the nonsense that only 6% of Covid deaths are solely from Covid:When reports about the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 began circulating earlier this year and questions were being raised about how the illness it causes, COVID-19, compared to the flu, it occurred to me that, in four years of emergency medicine residency and over three and a half years as an attending physician, I had almost never seen anyone die of the flu. I could only remember one tragic pediatric case.
Based on the CDC numbers though, I should have seen many, many more. In 2018, over 46,000 Americans died from opioid overdoses. Over 36,500 died in traffic accidents. Nearly 40,000 died from gun violence. I see those deaths all the time. Was I alone in noticing this discrepancy?
I decided to call colleagues around the country who work in other emergency departments and in intensive care units to ask a simple question: how many patients could they remember dying from the flu? Most of the physicians I surveyed couldn’t remember a single one over their careers. Some said they recalled a few. All of them seemed to be having the same light bulb moment I had already experienced: For too long, we have blindly accepted a statistic that does not match our clinical experience.
The 25,000 to 69,000 numbers that Trump cited do not represent counted flu deaths per year; they are estimates that the CDC produces by multiplying the number of flu death counts reported by various coefficients produced through complicated algorithms. These coefficients are based on assumptions of how many cases, hospitalizations, and deaths they believe went unreported. In the last six flu seasons, the CDC’s reported number of actual confirmed flu deaths—that is, counting flu deaths the way we are currently counting deaths from the coronavirus—has ranged from 3,448 to 15,620, which far lower than the numbers commonly repeated by public officials and even public health experts.
On the death certificate form, there is a space for the immediate cause of death and then several lines for underlying causes. In brief, death certificates are filled out by the medical certifier (who can be the physician who had treated the patient before death), who provides his best medical opinion regarding the cause of death. Part I of the death certificate includes the proximal cause of death, or what directly caused the death, and Part II lists conditions that contributed to the death...For example, if a patient dies of respiratory failure due to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), which was the result of pneumonia, which was the result of COVID-19, the proximal cause of death was the respiratory failure, but contributing causes were ARDS and COVID-19, with the one farthest up the chain being the underlying cause of death under Part I. If the patient had hypertension or asthma, that would go under Part II.
What is the true Covid death toll? The Economist magazine, using academic estimates that the true Covid death toll is multiples of the official death toll, as of May 11, 2023, estimates the true worldwide death toll at between 17 and 29.9 million.
...that question — “What is the price?” — was avoided by virtually every political leader in the world as well as the vast majority of epidemiologists and physicians, journalists and editors, college presidents, deans, professors and K-12 teachers.They never asked, “What is the price?” with regard to locking down businesses, schools and, in many cases, entire countries.
That is why so many political leaders, teachers, college presidents, doctors, epidemiologists and other scientists turned out to be fools.
The handful of scientists — and, of course, the even smaller number of academics or people in the mainstream media — who questioned the lockdowns were labeled purveyors of “misinformation” and “disinformation,” the terms used by the Left to describe all dissent....
Fools, led by universities — Harvard shut down in early March 2020, when there were 51 confirmed cases COVID-19 in the entire state of Massachusetts — and followed by virtually every teachers union, ruined countless young Americans’ lives.
This happened because teachers unions are led by fools and because virtually every public health authority is a fool. And because the overwhelming majority of American parents put their faith in fools — and thereby injured their own children.
"Every year of my life, except for 2020, I went to another country," said Dennis on his January 9, 2023 Youtube show.
On his December 12, 2022 show with Julie Hartman, Dennis said: "How do they [Julie's peers] decide what is true? By [expert] consensus. A consensus of scientists say that we have to stop all carbon emissions by X year. So they take a vote on what is true. The consensus was that masks had to go on two-year-olds [during Covid]. Now that is regarded as child abuse, which is how I regarded it during the time. I have been right on virtually every issue that I have differed with the majority on in my life."
Julie: "Especially on ivermechtin and hydroxychloroquine."
Dennis: "And lockdowns. I said the greatest international mistake in history. All you need to do is think and read. Science is based on consensus? Truth is based on consensus?"
"All these revelations are coming out about Twitter suppressing conservatives. My favorite insight of [2022] -- how do I know who's telling the truth? Whoever is suppressing speech is lying. We [conservatives] don't suppress speech." Holocaust deniers are true evil but I am not for suppressing their free speech. If truth is allowed out, there is no Left. And Twitter proved it."
Julie: "We've lost our ability to think clearly. I had a friend who was going to get vaccinated [against Covid] for the fourth or fifth time and I said to her please do not do this. There's all this evidence coming out that the vaccine causes harmful effects in young people... I sent her all these studies including Naomi Wolf on Substack that your wife Sue sent to me... My friend couldn't see what was really happening. She bought whatever excuse the Danish government is saying. A government isn't going to admit that we forced this vaccine on you citizens and now I feel bad about that it is harmful. "
Dennis: "Does your friend know about all the scientists who are now speaking about myocarditis in young people?"Julie: "I know about that because of your wife who spends all day investigating this stuff."
April 24, 2023, Dennis said: "People sacrifice their lives to the god of safety. We saw that during Covid. Preferring to have their children meet no other children for a year, two years, not go to school for safety, we're putting masks on two-year-olds on airplanes, getting a vaccine that was never properly tested."
October 3, 2022, Dennis said: "The lockdowns only did harm. They did no good... Will they acknowledge that the vaccines did a lot of harm? They may have done some good."
On his November 14, 2022 Youtube show with Julie Hartman, Dennis said: "Finally, I'm back to cruising with my listeners and viewers after two years of nonsense, lockdowns. We're going to the gems of Eastern Europe. Book today... Four private lectures with me and Allen Estrin. Nightly cocktail receptions, spacious state rooms... chefs table experience, beverages included. Champagne, select wines, beer and nightly specialty cocktails. Unlimited free wifi."
On his November 7, 2022 Youtube show with Julie Hartman, Dennis said: "An article in The Atlantic that just came out, we have to bury the hatchet, and no recriminations over mistakes made during two years of Covid. Like locking kids down for two years. Don't get angry at teachers. Everyone makes well-intentioned mistakes. It was evil what they did and it was done all over the world. Teachers hurt kids without giving a damn about them. They're hypochondriacs. And they're woke. I'm so angry at what they did. I'm so angry at what medicine did -- not allowing people to visit their dying relatives because of Covid. In the name of health, the amount of evil that is done in the name of health. More vile things have been done in the name of health than in any other name."
Julie: "I grew up thinking doctors, alongside teachers, were the most morally upstanding people... For a time, I didn't believe that doctors were wreaking that much havoc. I thought, maybe they truly believe the Covid vaccine is effective. Maybe they truly believe that lockdowns are effective. I look around now in our society and think who can I trust?"Dennis: "My heart breaks for your generation. I trusted every institution when I was growing up."
Julie: "I don't trust any."
Dennis: "You're right not to... The Atlantic says 'we need to forgive everyone for what we did and said when we were in the dark about Covid.' I wasn't in the dark about Covid. In April 2020, I headlined, tweeted, and wrote a column and broadcast that it is the greatest international mistake in human history. I said that it was vile what was being done to children. I said it was cruelty, sadism not allowing people to be with dying relatives. I wasn't in the dark and I'm not a doctor."
Julie: "What about the Department of Homeland Security working alongside Silicon Valley to suppress "misinformation"?
"What scares me is that so many of my friends totally trust these institutions and don't know how corrupt they are... When they take many doses of the Covid vaccine and something happens to their health, they're not going to be happy."
"One thing that amazes me is how little people know about what is truly going on in this country... I said to a 65-year old corporate lawyer. He was, in some ways, quite well read. He was talking about integrity. I said, do you think that what the Clintons did with the Russiagate scandal is morally upstanding? Are you aware of the Steele dossier? No. He had no idea. Are you aware of the special counsel John Durham investigation that has found that both James Comey and Robert Mueller lied about some very important things. No. Did you know that Mark Zuckerberg gave $450 million to privatize election procedures?"
"They laugh at me."
Dennis: "It's one of my mottos - we know what they don't know."
(Decoding the Gurus notes: "We’ve noticed that gurus tend to act in a manipulative fashion with their followers and potential allies. This often takes the form of excessive flattery, such as intimations that their followers are more perceptive, more morally worthy, and more interested in the pursuit of truth than outsiders... It is necessary that the orthodoxy, the establishment, the mainstream media, and the expert-consensus are always wrong, or at least blinkered and limited, and are generally incapable of grappling with the real issues.")Julie: "They laugh at me like I was on QAnon... Some of my more peripheral friends have this false notion that I've been radicalized. They truly believe that the things that I just mentioned to you, which are 100% true and shouldn't even be deemed right-wing beliefs because they are facts, they believe those things are conspiracy theories. They believe I have gone on to QAnon, whatever that is. They think I go on these crazy right-wing sites and come up with these conspiracy theories. There are really bad things going on and they think it is just made up. I get the sense that a lot of them want to distance themselves from me because they think I'm nuts."
Dennis: "I got a question from a young person on my Fireside Chat -- how do I know what to trust? How do I know what's true? I said, those who wish to censor others are usually lying. If you are telling the truth, you are OK with other people speaking their minds."That sounds great, but is there strong evidence for this? Many people on the Left want to censor "misinformation" about vaccines. Where is the evidence that they are lying? If you are a scientist who has devoted his life to virology and you believe you are telling the truth about the efficacy Covid vaccines, why would you be unbothered by people without expertise denigrating vaccines to millions of people? Many on the Left want to censor Nazi and ISIS propaganda because they claim it is dangerous. Where is the evidence that they are lying? Many on the Left want to censor racial slurs. Where is the evidence that they are lying? Prager's point sounds profound, but it falls apart upon examination.
October 24, 2022, Dennis said he believes that Covid vaccines for people under 50 do more harm than good.
Feb. 15, 2022, Dennis wrote: "In September 2021, for the 15th consecutive year (except for 2020), I led Jewish High Holiday Services for about 400 people — no masks required, and no vaccination necessary. Other synagogues could have done the same thing — but nearly all rabbis and synagogue boards were too scared and too obedient to do so. And of course, the same holds true for most churches, whether Catholic, Protestant or Mormon. Too scared. And too obedient to irrational dictates."
New York magazine leftist Jonathan Chait writes May 2, 2023:
Conservatives got COVID extremely wrong. Where is the accountability? Where is the course correction? The answer is that they don’t exist, because the conservative movement is incapable of engaging in them...July 12, 2022, Dennis wrote:Donald Trump threatened to fire Dr. Nancy Messonnier, a top CDC official, for telling reporters in February 2020 that the virus would likely spread to the United States. Trump insisted that month that China was “getting it under control more and more, that the United States had just 15 people [with COVID], and the 15 within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero.” He repeated over and over: “Just stay calm. It will go away.” (March 10). “It’s going to go away, hopefully at the end of the month. And, if not, hopefully it will be soon after that.” (March 31). “It is going to go away. It is going away.” (April 3). “I always say, even without it [a vaccine], it goes away.” (June 16). And on and on...
But even highly respectable conservative intellectuals made utterly absurd claims about the pandemic’s likely death toll. Hoover Institute scholar Richard Epstein predicted COVID would kill just 500 Americans, before correcting a small computational error and revising the prediction to 5,000 (still a gross underestimate, as more than a million Americans have perished from COVID-19).
In March 2020, the Journal ran an op-ed arguing that the standard models of the projected COVID death toll were “too high by orders of magnitude,” proposing the actual death toll would be 20,000 or perhaps 40,000. The prominent voodoo economist Kevin Hassett created a model that persuaded White House staff that COVID deaths would drop to zero by mid-May 2020.
The wishful delusion that COVID posed barely any serious health risk produced other delusions. Hydroxychloroquine would cure it! The vaccines were unnecessary or even harmful! These errors were the product of ingrained mental pathologies on the right, which is why a figure like Hassett is now merrily assuring Republicans that defaulting on the national debt would be no big deal.
Far from examining the epistemic bubble that produced these bizarre beliefs, conservatives have coalesced around them. Trump is now running away from Operation Warp Speed, because it constitutes a political liability for him. Ron DeSantis, the Journal’s preferred candidate, has turned the anti-vaccine movement into a powerful wedge against Trump. DeSantis has appeared with and promoted anti-vaxxers and recruited an idiosyncratic vaccine skeptic, Joseph Ladapo, to run his state’s health department. Florida is “affirmatively against” providing the COVID-19 vaccine to children, making it the only state to adopt such a position. Ladapo recently altered a study to exaggerate the risks of the vaccine.
You're A Scientist? So What?
Then there was the American medical community’s opposition to therapeutics, dismissing hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin (both used with zinc) as frauds despite the testimony of numerous physicians that they saved COVID-19 patients’ lives when used appropriately. State medical boards around the country threatened to revoke the medical license of any physician who prescribed these drugs to treat COVID-19 — despite these drugs being among the safest prescription drugs available.Medpagetoday.com reported Aug. 5, 2021:As early as July 2020, Harvey Risch, M.D., Ph.D., professor of epidemiology at the Yale School of Public Health, wrote in Newsweek:
“I myself know of two doctors who have saved the lives of hundreds of patients with these medications, but are now fighting state medical boards to save their licenses and reputations. The cases against them are completely without scientific merit.”
As a result of the American medical community’s opposition to therapeutics, Risch wrote, “tens of thousands of patients with COVID-19 are dying unnecessarily.”
Doctors throughout America were essentially telling COVID-19 patients, “Go home, get rest, and wait to see if your COVID-19 gets worse. If you can’t breathe, come to the hospital where we can put you on a ventilator.” Ventilators, it quickly became clear, were a virtual death sentence for COVID-19 patients. And then they died alone.
Yale Doc Backing HCQ Cites Questionable Data — Negative results from randomized trials not even acknowledgedAmerica's Frontline Doctors aren't the only physicians pushing hydroxychloroquine (HCQ); another expert frequently toeing that line is Harvey Risch, MD, PhD, an epidemiologist at Yale University in New Haven, Connecticut.
Risch authored a Newsweek editorial on July 23 calling on doctors to immediately start treating patients with HCQ.
Risch points readers to his review -- he is the only author -- published in late May in the American Journal of Epidemiology that cites five studies in support of HCQ, particularly when used early in the course of COVID-19.
None are randomized controlled trials. One is the heavily publicized and now discredited French study by Didier Raoult, MD, and colleagues in March that sparked initial hopes for HCQ. Two have no corresponding data or publications.
Risch asserts his own re-analysis of the French study suggests a stronger benefit for HCQ plus azithromycin when started earlier in the illness compared with standard of care. But researchers have called the original data involving only 42 patients "uninterpretable."
A second study from Raoult's group published in May involved 973 patients all of whom got HCQ; there was no randomization or control.
For his third study, Risch links to a two-page Google document by Vladimir Zelenko, MD, a doctor who cares for a large Orthodox Jewish population in Monsey, New York. Zelenko has made headlines for managing to catch the ear of FDA Commissioner Stephen Hahn, MD, to request help with access to HCQ for an outpatient trial.
Risch cites data from Zelenko on 405 outpatients who were treated with HCQ, azithromycin, and zinc, of whom six were hospitalized and two died. There was no control group, and the Google document doesn't provide more detail on the data.
The fourth citation is a controlled, but not randomized, study from Brazil with a total of 636 patients; 412 were treated with HCQ and azithromycin, with 224 who declined treatment serving as controls. Fewer of those on the drugs had to be hospitalized, but with no randomization, the treatment's role is uncertain.
Finally, Risch cites a small ongoing study in a long-term care facility on Long Island in New York that gave HCQ plus doxycycline to about 200 high-risk COVID patients, again with no control group. Only nine died, suggesting a treatment benefit, but Risch gave no source for the data nor other details.
Risch published a follow-up to that paper -- again in the American Journal of Epidemiology, on July 20, and again as sole author -- that outlined an additional seven studies that he said support HCQ early in disease. None appear to be large randomized controlled trials, though some have comparator groups. Some lack any citation at all. One study is additional data from Zelenko, on another 400 patients, but again unpublished and without full data.
In the Newsweek editorial and in the later journal submission, both of which were published following three highly publicized randomized trials that reported no benefit from HCQ, Risch did not address or even acknowledge them.
Just this week, about two dozen of Risch's Yale colleagues published an open letter on Medium, acknowledging his renown in cancer epidemiology but criticizing his "ardent advocacy" for HCQ. The letter notes that Risch is "not an expert in infectious disease epidemiology and he has not been swayed by the body of scientific evidence from rigorously conducted clinical trials which refute the plausibility of his belief and arguments."
July 26, 2022, Dennis wrote: "The average 12-year-old student at a yeshiva has more wisdom than almost any student at Harvard or most other universities."
The great thing about making such wisdom claims is that they cannot be falsified.
Dennis noted in his commentary on Genesis: "[I]f you value fame, you will devote your life to keeping it. And little is more pathetic than watching a person devote their life to trying to stay famous... The famous are rarely significant, and the significant are rarely famous."
Dennis Prager’s claim that it was ‘inconceivable’ that gay men were seen as ‘pariahs’ in the 1980s is extraordinarily inaccurate
The coronavirus pandemic has brought back discussion of an earlier pandemic: The AIDS crisis of the 1980s.From Rolling Stone, Nov. 23, 2021:Dennis Prager, a conservative commentator, said in a Nov. 8 interview with Newsmax that it was “inconceivable” that gay men would have been seen as “pariahs” during the AIDS crisis.
Prager said, “During the AIDS crisis, can you imagine if gay men and intravenous drug users … had they been pariahs the way the non-vaccinated are? But it would’ve been inconceivable.”
...we checked with multiple historians of the period and each was mystified by the characterization that the AIDS epidemic somehow spared gay men and intravenous drug users from being treated as outcasts. Gay men were pariahs in public opinion, under the law, in the media, and among government officials. Prager’s comment “is entirely ahistorical and inconceivably upside down,” said David France, a filmmaker and author of the book, “How to Survive a Plague: The Story of How Activists and Scientists Tamed AIDS.”
“Willfully ignorant,” said Eric Marcus, who addressed the first dozen years of the AIDS crisis in his audio memoir, MakingGayHistory.org.
“Utterly ridiculous,” said Lillian Faderman, author of the 2016 book, “The Gay Revolution: The Story of the Struggle.”
Let’s walk through the evidence of how gay men, as well as intravenous drug users, were treated as pariahs during the years after 1981, when the virus that causes AIDS was first identified...
Charles Kaiser, the author of “The Gay Metropolis: The Landmark History of Gay Life in America,” recalls the era as being “a period of absolute terror” for gay men. Kaiser said he was so worried about finding out that he might be infected that he refused to take a screening test for “several years.” Only when his physician ran a test on him surreptitiously did he learn that he was negative...
Legal restrictions on gay men and lesbians weren’t just preferred by a majority of Americans; they actually existed in most places in the United States.
In 1981, at the start of the AIDS crisis, “gay sex was illegal — sodomy laws were not federally overturned until 2003,” said Sarah Schulman, author of the 2021 book, “Let the Record Show: A Political History of ACT UP New York, 1987-1993.” Even in comparatively liberal New York City, gays and lesbians had few codified legal protections until 1986, Schulman said.
Also in 1986, the Supreme Court explicitly rejected the right to consensual homosexual sex in the case Bowers vs. Hardwick, meaning that “in the middle of a mass-death experience, laws against gay sex were upheld,” Schulman said.
Is Dennis Prager Conservative Media’s Biggest Covid Jackass?Time magazine, May 15, 2023:It's a lofty title, but his recent argument that the unvaccinated are the biggest American pariahs since slavery puts him in the running.
...Prager claimed last year that the disease is “not a killer” while continually drawing and erasing and re-drawing the line for when the U.S. should take real action to combat it. He even called the lockdown “the greatest mistake in the history of humanity.” He’s since touted a number of unproven therapeutics, including the “Zelenko Protocol,” a treatment plan developed by conspiracy theorist doctor and Jan. 6 rally attendee Vladimir Zelenko.
Prager is unvaccinated, of course, and during a recent even for Awaken Church felt compelled to play a game of Who’s the Biggest Pariah between the unvaccinated and “the gays … during the AIDS crisis.” It isn’t hard to guess who Prager thinks is more oppressed. “Were people with AIDS banned from travel? Were they banned from restaurants? Were they fired from their jobs? Were they deprived of a way of feeding their family?” he asked, neglecting to mention that anyone who is unvaccinated could have retained these things if they’d elected to take a live-saving shot, whereas people with AIDS were shamed and left to die in huge numbers by people who didn’t care about the disease because they didn’t care about the population it was killing.
Why stop with AIDS, though? Prager is well-versed in the history of humanity, remember?“The unvaccinated are the most hated group since slavery,” he added.
It’s worth noting here that Prager comparing his oppression to that of the slaves was in service of his point about how the left “has a monopoly on victimhood.”
...Some of Prager’s conservative radio brethren learned this the hard way. Five such hosts, at least who bashed the vaccine have died from complications stemming from Covid. Nashville radio host Phil Valentine posted a statement in July saying that he “regrets not being more vehemently ‘Pro-Vaccine'” before dying less than a month later...
“I have engaged with strangers, constantly hugging them, taking photos with them knowing that I was making myself very susceptible to getting covid,” the 73-year-old said on his radio show. “Which is — indeed, as bizarre as it sounded — what I wanted, in the hope I would achieve natural immunity and be taken care of by therapeutics.”
...Who isn’t lying to you? Prager, of course. He knows what he’s talking about because he’s done “a lot of homework” on Covid — unlike the scientific and medical communities, which want to kill you … or something … for some reason.
'What Price Was My Father's Life Worth?' Right-Wing Doctors Are Still Peddling Dubious COVID DrugsOct. 5, 2020, Dennis said: "I take zinc every day and I take hydroxychloroquine every week. The fact that the people feel intimidated is only because we have communists running medicine, just like we have running everything else. I never used this term before. I can't -- You prefer leftists? I'll use leftists. They shut you up. Free speech has never existed in anything that the left controls. Never. Whether it's the Soviet Union, China, Eastern Europe under communism, or the universities today in America."Moore’s father started watching online videos of doctors in white coats who claimed that alternative COVID treatments were being used effectively in India. He told his skeptical children that the studies they cited as evidence made sense. Soon after, he refused to get vaccinated for COVID-19. Instead, he paid $90 for a telemedicine appointment with America’s Frontline Doctors (AFLD), a right-wing anti-vaccine group that claimed the U.S. government was suppressing effective treatments, hospitals were killing COVID patients, and vaccines for the virus caused cancer. Moore’s father told his wife he trusted their credentials; President Donald Trump had praised the group as “very respected doctors.” A few days after the consultation, ivermectin and antibiotic pills arrived on his doorstep from a pharmacy in Alabama.
When Moore’s father contracted COVID in Dec. 2021, he didn’t initially go to the hospital as his symptoms worsened. He believed so strongly that ivermectin would cure the virus that he refused to seek medical help until it was too late. In his final days, Moore could only watch through the glass as her dad battled delirium, trying to tear off his oxygen mask in a panic. “The worst patients we’ve seen are the ones that delayed treatment because they were self-medicating through ivermectin,” Moore says a nurse told her. “You wouldn’t believe how many people we’ve treated who have done this.” When Moore asked if any of those patients left the hospital, the nurses shook their heads no.
The extent of what Moore calls her dad’s “death by deception” only became clear after he died. In his office, she found emails and documents from AFLD outlining their “COVID protocol”...
Dr. Simone Gold, a former emergency room physician who founded AFLD, has opened a new telemedicine practice in Florida, allegedly using millions raised by AFLD during the pandemic as startup capital. Other anti-vaccine groups have continued to capitalize on their online following by charging hundreds of dollars for ivermectin consultations, which they are now promoting as a cure for non-COVID illnesses.
...Jeremy’s immediate cause of death was “sudden death in the setting of therapeutic use of hydroxychloroquine”...
The previous summer, Jelena discovered, Jeremy had started following AFLD online after listening to podcasts that promoted conspiracies about COVID-19. At the time, the group was producing slick videos on social media, falsely claiming that U.S. health agencies were withholding life-saving treatments, and that doctors refusing to prescribe them were like “good Germans who allow the Nazis to kill the Jews.” Jeremy, who worked as an industrial sandblaster, became convinced that hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin were the only effective treatments for the virus.
Aug. 24, 2021, Dennis said: "Why should doctors be any better than lawyers, or professors, or any other group that has disgraced itself in American life? There's no reason. Doctors have the same degree of wisdom as gender studies professors. The issue isn't medical knowledge. The issue is wisdom and courage. There are plenty of doctors who have it. Read about The Great Barrington Declaration....Your doctor knows nothing about COVID, nothing. All they know is how the virus works, that's all they know. It is an amazing thing that listening to this show, of a non-doctor, you have learned more about COVID — more about masks — than your doctor probably knows. Not only is it not a boast, it is totally meant to be an attack on the medical profession. I should not know 10 times more than your doctor about all of the issues with therapeutics. And if your doctor thinks ivermectin is dangerous, change your doctor. And I mean it. Might be a nice guy — go golfing with him, or her — but check out another doctor."
Sep. 29, 2021, Dennis said: "Many doctors have killed patients because of their ignorance, obstinance, and arrogance. It is not odd that the Talmud -- the second holiest work in Judaism — stated 2,000 years ago that the best doctors go to hell. Doctors, even when they could do nothing 2,000 years ago, were known for their arrogance. There are some wonderful doctors in America — some, just for the record. Never said this in my life, my eyes have been opened in the darkness of the last two years. And they have been dark. Why haven't all Americans' eyes been opened? Like to teachers, and teachers unions, and colleges. Every student going back to college has to have a vaccine? Despite the fact that their age group is virtually untouched by this — untouched, I mean no fatalities. In fact, the more young people that get COVID the better it is for them and society, they have natural immunity. But your college doesn't accept natural immunity."
Jan. 10, 2022, Dennis said: "Robert F. Kennedy Jr., whom I had on the show with the publication of his book on Dr. Fauci, has gone from being regarded as a kook to being regarded as a very serious, very courageous man. That's very big. In a sense, the left has lost. They've lost half this country that believed them on these matters just two years ago. "
Epistemic Sabotage
People like Dennis Prager, in the words of Decoding The Gurus, "produce ersatz wisdom: a corrupt epistemics that creates the appearance of useful knowledge, but has none of the substance. ...the guru is highly motivated to undertake epistemic sabotage; to disparage authoritative and institutional sources of knowledge."
When I argue that someone like Dennis Prager engages in epistemic corruption, I claim that he manipulates knowledge for his personal, professional and monetary gain, and by so doing, he pollutes discourse.
Dennis Prager's March 7, 2023 column is a classic example of his habit of epistemic sabotage. The innumerate pundit normally disdains academic studies, but because he found one that he thought supported his point of view, he embraced it as a truth bomb against the Left without regard to what it actually said. To push his personal and ideological agenda, he treated truth like a used tampon.
Why the Left Is Pro-MaskCompare Prager's column with the essay of sociologist Zeynep Tufekci in the New York Times March 10, 2023:The world’s most trusted evaluator of medical studies, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, has just released as close to a conclusive report on the effectiveness of masks against respiratory viruses such as COVID-19 as we are likely to have for the foreseeable future. The report assessed data from 78 different studies, including 11 new randomized controlled trials involving 610,872 participants.
In the words of one of the authors, Dr. Tom Jefferson of Oxford University, Cochrane concluded, “There is just no evidence that they (masks) make any difference. Full stop.”
Among the reasons for that assessment was Cochrane’s conclusion that states and countries with mask mandates fared no better than states and countries without.
Moreover, Dr. Jefferson’s conclusions were not limited to cloth and surgical masks. Regarding N95 masks, Jefferson said, “Makes no difference — none of it.”
As for the early COVID-19 studies that policymakers cited to justify mandates for mask-wearing, Jefferson said: “They were convinced by nonrandomized studies, flawed observational studies.”
Here’s Why the Science Is Clear That Masks Work“Many commentators have claimed that a recently updated Cochrane review shows that ‘masks don’t work,’ which is an inaccurate and misleading interpretation,” Karla Soares-Weiser, the editor in chief of the Cochrane Library, said in a statement.
“The review examined whether interventions to promote mask wearing help to slow the spread of respiratory viruses,” Soares-Weiser said, adding, “Given the limitations in the primary evidence, the review is not able to address the question of whether mask wearing itself reduces people’s risk of contracting or spreading respiratory viruses.”
She said that “this wording was open to misinterpretation, for which we apologize,” and that Cochrane would revise the summary.
Soares-Weiser also said, though, that one of the lead authors of the review even more seriously misinterpreted its finding on masks by saying in an interview that it proved “there is just no evidence that they make any difference.” In fact, Soares-Weiser said, “that statement is not an accurate representation of what the review found.”
While the review assessed 78 studies, only 10 of those focused on what happens when people wear masks versus when they don’t, and a further five looked at how effective different types of masks were at blocking transmission, usually for health care workers. The remainder involved other measures aimed at lowering transmission, like hand washing or disinfection, while a few studies also considered masks in combination with other measures. Of those 10 studies that looked at masking, the two done since the start of the Covid pandemic both found that masks helped.
The calculations the review used to reach a conclusion were dominated by prepandemic studies that were not very informative about how well masks blocked the transmission of respiratory viruses...
Soares-Weiser told me the review should be seen as a call for more data, and said she worried that misinterpretations of it could undermine preparedness for future outbreaks...
Lab studies, many of which were done during the pandemic, show that masks, particularly N95 respirators, can block viral particles. Linsey Marr, an aerosol scientist who has long studied airborne viral transmission, told me even cloth masks that fit well and use appropriate materials can help...
David Lazer, a political scientist at Northeastern University, calculated that before vaccines were available, U.S. states without mask mandates had 30 percent higher Covid death rates than those with mandates...
So the evidence is relatively straightforward: Consistently wearing a mask, preferably a high-quality, well-fitting one, provides protection against the coronavirus...
Others have come to think mandates represent illogical rules. To be sure, we did have many illogical rules: mandating masks outdoors and even at beaches, or wearing them to enter a restaurant but not at the table, or requiring children as young as 2 to mask in day care but not during nap time (presumably, the virus also took a nap). Some mask proponents and public health authorities have also used weak studies to make overblown or imprecise claims about masks’ effectiveness...
It’s no surprise that Jefferson says he has no faith in masks’ ability to stop the spread of Covid.
In that interview, he said there is no basis to say the coronavirus is spread by airborne transmission — despite the fact that major public health agencies have long said otherwise. He has long doubted well-accepted claims about the virus. In an article he co-wrote in April 2020, Jefferson questioned whether the Covid outbreak was a pandemic at all, rather than just a long respiratory illness season. At that point, New York City schools had been closed for a month and Covid had killed thousands of New Yorkers. When New York was preparing “M*A*S*H”-like mobile hospitals in Central Park, he said there was no point in mitigations to slow the spread.
In an editorial accompanying a 2020 version of the review — the review is in its sixth update since 2006 — Soares-Weiser noted a lack of “robust, high-quality evidence for any behavioral measure or policy” and said that “when protecting the public from harm is the objective, public health officials must act in a precautionary manner to take action even when evidence is uncertain (or not of the highest quality).”
Which of the two authors above is more committed to truth? Prager or Tufekci? Due to his agenda, Prager took what he wanted out of the study, and then moved on, like a man dispensing with a whore.
Prager reminds me of the protagonist of the 1970 Paul Simon song The Boxer. "Still a man hears what he wants to hear/And disregards the rest"
In his commentary on the Book of Genesis, Dennis wrote:
...whether the lie is small or large, infrequent or frequent, told by an individual or told by masses of people—every person must ask himself whenever making any claim: Am I telling the truth? There is no more important question we can ask ourselves. Those who begin by justifying small lies—even just exaggerations—will, as the University College London study showed, end up telling bigger lies, and more and more often... Given the overwhelming importance of truth, it is no wonder the Talmud states, “God’s signature is truth.”
Justin Peters wrote for Slate Nov. 8, 2021:
Why Are Right-Wing Radio Hosts Still Being Such Jerks About COVID?In 2012, Rick Perlstein wrote:On Monday, Nov. 1, Dennis Prager began his popular radio show with a very strange boast. “I rarely say, ‘I did the following.’ It’s not my style,” the 73-year-old conservative host and YouTube culture war impresario said. “But I believe I am responsible for the CDC announcing the following: that if you have natural immunity you are less immune than if you have the vaccine.”
Prager was referring to a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention study, released on Friday, Oct. 29, which found, basically, that the immunity conferred by full vaccination with an mRNA COVID vaccine is more effective than the “natural immunity” gained by having had and recovered from COVID-19. Good news, right? Ha! If you welcomed the CDC’s findings, you are almost certainly not in Dennis Prager’s target demographic.
The CDC’s conclusions are broadly in line with the scientific consensus on the efficacy of the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines. And they directly contradict Prager’s contention, voiced over and again on his long-running, nationally syndicated show, that natural immunity to COVID-19 is superior to vaccinated immunity. To Prager, the CDC’s latest findings did not mean that he, Prager, was wrong—they meant that the liberal, corrupt health agency had ginned up a bogus study in order to cloud the debate and specifically silence his voice.
“All I did was open up to you, my audience,” Prager said, referring to his advocacy for natural immunity. “I had no idea that I would shake up the nest to the extent that I did.” Assuring his audience that he had done “a lot of homework on COVID,” and highlighting an Israeli study from August (even though it has not yet been peer reviewed and had certain limitations that ought to make any prudent person think twice before citing it as definitive), Prager weaved a fantastical counternarrative as a way of underscoring his central point: that the CDC study in question was a dirty, rotten lie. “To some of you, it is stunning to say the CDC is lying,” said Prager. “To me, it is like saying the sun shines brightly when there are no clouds.”
Huh? Why would the CDC rush out a false study—co-authored by more than 50 people—just to neutralize a random right-wing radio host? Why would Prager presume calumny and conspiracy in the agency’s motives? These fair questions naturally beget another fair question: Why are so many right-wing talk show hosts still being such dicks about COVID measures?...“I took ivermectin for the last year and a half as a prophylactic, believing, and I put my actions where my mouth was, believing that ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine and zinc, et cetera, over the course of time, that it would prevent COVID from being seriously injurious to me,” Prager said on that Nov. 1 show, railing against those fools in the media who dared to characterize ivermectin as a mere “horse dewormer.” As per the irrationalist imperative to willfully confuse correlation with causation, the host presented his victorious bout with COVID as clear evidence both of the merits of Dr. Prager’s Curative Elixirs and of the superfluity of the various vaccines. By ostensibly proving that his ivermectin use was what prevented him from dying from COVID, Prager hoped to demonstrate that he was once again privy to the “real truth” that the liberal establishment is determined to suppress.
For decades now, the most successful conservative broadcast media sources have sought to isolate their audiences by constantly sowing distrust of any news outlet or official entity that exists outside of the hard right. The unifying theme is the notion that there are no depths to which the deep state, liberal media, and elitist professoriate will not stoop in order to advance their godless, anti-American, and culturally transgressive agendas.
So for committed Pragerheads, it is perfectly rational to believe—even as 750,000 Americans have died due to COVID-19—that the media is still suppressing the real truth about ivermectin and that the CDC is basically SPECTRE, because right-wing media has literally spent decades convincing its audience that politics is as conspiratorial and simplistic as a James Bond movie. “It’s impossible, virtually impossible, to live in a right-wing bubble,” Prager said on his program on Wednesday, in a statement that is so un-self-aware as to be almost entirely self-aware. Prager surely understands how right-wing media works, even as he also surely understands that he can never, ever publicly admit it.
This cynical strategy, enervating enough in normal times, is especially frustrating in the midst of an ongoing public health crisis in which lots and lots of people are still dying in part thanks to the endemic misinformation being spread by dummies on the radio. Actually, dummies might not be the right word here. No matter what you might think of their politics, Prager and his nationally prominent peers are not stupid. You can tell this is true because they are so adept at dancing right up to the lies-and-lunacy line while almost never crossing it. The evening opinion hosts on Fox News, for example, rarely tell outright lies; instead, they draw false equivalencies, or cherry-pick outlying details and use them to inaccurately characterize the whole, or offer misleading narratives that can be explained away as matters of opinion.
Even Prager is not explicitly anti-vaccine. He does not say that the vaccines don’t work, or that they are actively harmful to those who take them. Instead, he disparages them via a boatload of logical fallacies that he presents as plain common sense. “I have never once told any of you or anyone not to take the vaccine; it is not my province to tell you what to do. But it is my province to tell you the truth, and the truth is that natural immunity is stronger,” said Prager on Nov. 1. “Alex Berenson wrote about this. He’s the guy who was with the New York Times until he started telling the truth.”
As always with right-wing anti–virtue signaling, deflection is the point here. Prager and his peers’ goal writ large is to get their audiences so hot and bothered about federal government overreach and the scurrilous rascals in the elitist media that those audiences do not stop to think critically about what these hosts are actually selling. When Prager threw his show to commercial break, his announcer reported that The Dennis Prager Show was broadcasting “live from the Relief Factor Pain-Free Studio.” The ad gave away the game.
As historian Rick Perlstein observed in his seminal Baffler essay “The Long Con,” and as anyone can observe by watching or listening to more than 20 minutes of conservative broadcast content, right-wing media is and has long been underwritten by billions of dollars of advertising for dubious curatives. While lots of reputable news sources also have some questionable advertisers, the practice is particularly pervasive on the right...
“The strategic alliance of snake-oil vendors and conservative true believers points up evidence of another successful long march, of tactics designed to corral fleeceable multitudes all in one place,” wrote Perlstein. “One weird trick”–style remedies, in a very real sense, pay the salaries of hosts such as Prager; these hosts are incentivized to tout them just as their audiences are conditioned to trust them. The vaccines threaten the framework of burnished shit that supports and sustains these sorts of programs...
On Monday, Prager led off his show by blasting the city of Los Angeles for a new ordinance that would require patrons to show proof of vaccination or a negative COVID test in order to dine inside a restaurant, get a haircut, or engage in certain other indoor activities. Prager warned of “the communist hell that all communists create, and will in the United States if allowed,” and bemoaned “the love of power and the hypochondriacal fear, the maniacal fear that pervades the left about [COVID] and global warming.” Then, he threw the show to a commercial for Relief Factor, in which he spoke glowingly about the supplement’s “100 percent drug free ingredients, each helping your body deal with inflammation.”
...the layout of HumanEvents.com on the day it featured an article headlined “Ideas Will Drive Conservatives’ Revival.” Two inches beneath that bold pronouncement, a box headed “Health News” included the headlines “Reverse Crippling Arthritis in 2 Days,” “Clear Clogged Arteries Safely & Easily—without drugs, without surgery, and without a radical diet,” and “High Blood Pressure Cured in 3 Minutes . . . Drop Measurement 60 Points.” It would be interesting, that is, to ask Coulter about the reflex of lying that’s now sutured into the modern conservative movement’s DNA—and to get her candid assessment of why conservative leaders treat their constituents like suckers.When Prager came back, he was at it again about natural immunity and the CDC—“who I believe are professional liars,” he clarified. By sowing doubt over the vaccines and crying foul over mandates, Prager and his peers are running through the tribal script of right-wing infotainment, otherizing every idea and institution that could plausibly be considered “liberal.” But in a very real sense, they just don’t want the liberals’ miracle drugs, because they already have plenty of their own.
The Long Con - Mail-order conservatismIn 2007, I signed on to the email lists of several influential magazines on the right, among them Townhall, which operates under the auspices of evangelical Stuart Epperson’s Salem Communications; Newsmax, the organ more responsible than any other for drumming up the hysteria that culminated in the impeachment of Bill Clinton; and Human Events, one of Ronald Reagan’s favorite publications. The exercise turned out to be far more revealing than I expected. Via the battery of promotional appeals that overran my email inbox, I mainlined a right-wing id that was invisible to readers who encounter conservative opinion at face value.... I learned of the “23-Cent Heart Miracle,” the one “Washington, the medical industry, and drug companies REFUSE to tell you about.” (Why would they? They’d just be leaving money on the table: “I was scheduled for open heart surgery when I read about your product,” read one of the testimonials. “I started taking it and now six months have passed and I haven’t had open-heart surgery.”) Then came news of the oilfield in the placenta...
These are bedtime stories, meant for childlike minds. Or, more to the point, they are in the business of producing childlike minds. Conjuring up the most garishly insatiable monsters precisely in order to banish them from underneath the bed, they aim to put the target to sleep.
Dishonesty is demanded by the alarmist fundraising appeal because the real world doesn’t work anything like this. The distance from observable reality is rhetorically required; indeed, that you haven’t quite seen anything resembling any of this in your everyday life is a kind of evidence all by itself. It just goes to show how diabolical the enemy has become. He is unseen; but the redeemer, the hero who tells you the tale, can see the innermost details of the most baleful conspiracies. Trust him. Send him your money. Surrender your will—and the monster shall be banished for good.
This method highlights the fundamental workings of all grassroots conservative political appeals, be they spurious claims of Barack Obama’s Islamic devotion, the supposed explosion of taxpayer-supported welfare fraud, or the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
And, in an intersection that is utterly crucial, this same theology of fear is how a certain sort of commercial appeal—a snake-oil-selling one—works as well. This is where the retail political lying practiced by Romney links up with the universe in which 23-cent miracle cures exist (absent the hero’s intervention) just out of reach, thanks to the conspiracy of some powerful cabal—a cabal that, wouldn’t you know it in these late-model hustles, perfectly resembles the ur-villain of the conservative mind: liberals.
In this respect, it’s not really useful, or possible, to specify a break point where the money game ends and the ideological one begins. They are two facets of the same coin—where the con selling 23-cent miracle cures for heart disease inches inexorably into the one selling miniscule marginal tax rates as the miracle cure for the nation itself. The proof is in the pitches—the come-ons in which the ideological and the transactional share the exact same vocabulary, moral claims, and cast of heroes and villains.
...Lying is an initiation into the conservative elite. In this respect, as in so many others, it’s like multilayer marketing: the ones at the top reap the reward—and then they preen, pleased with themselves for mastering the game. Closing the sale, after all, is mainly a question of riding out the lie: showing that you have the skill and the stones to just brazen it out, and the savvy to ratchet up the stakes higher and higher. Sneering at, or ignoring, your earnest high-minded mandarin gatekeepers—“we’re not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact-checkers,” as one Romney aide put it—is another part of closing the deal.
May 15, 2023, Dennis said: "The electrical grid cannot support the demands being made because of environmentalists..." He read from this Substack post by Robert Bryce:
On May 4, members of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission delivered stark warnings to the members of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. The agency’s acting chairman, Willie Phillips, told the senators, “We face unprecedented challenges to the reliability of our nation’s electric system.”
FERC Commissioner Mark Christie echoed Phillips’ warning, saying the U.S. electric grid is “heading for a very catastrophic situation in terms of reliability.”
Dennis: "This is completely because of Joe Biden and the Democrats... Why do these people want to destroy the economy? Because it is all about chaos and power... We are in for quite a ride. What happens when you don't get electric power? Do you understand we won't have enough electricity?"
Does anyone without an agenda believe that Joe Biden and the Democrats want to destroy the economy and that the Democrats are the sole reason for strains on the electrical grid?
Dennis: "It's shocking that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission told the truth."
Prager's agenda is epistemic sabotage. He wants you to know that you are being lied by Big Government, Big Media, Big Law, Big Academia and the like, that he is on your side battling the nefarious elites, and that he will give you the truth to the best of his ability while the establishment sources will not.
Once Prager successfully conned himself that he was uniquely qualified to discern the truth and that the powers that be were lying, my guess is that this transformation happened in high school through the massive social reinforcement flowing from his charisma, it was easy to con the rubes.
Dennis: "Was this reported in the New York Times? The LA Times? Washington Post? CNN? MSNBC? NPR? PBS?"
Like the typical guru, Dennis tells you that competing sources of influence are lying to you while he gives you the truth.
Though this particular committee hearing was not reported in these outlets by May 15, 2023, they've all done numerous stories on strains to the grid. Between May 16, 2022 and May 16, 2023, the New York Times, for example, published 20 such stories, including:
* We Desperately Need a New Power Grid. Here’s How to Make It Happen.
* Winter Forecast: Gas and Electric Bills Will Soar
* The U.S. Has Billions for Wind and Solar Projects. Good Luck Plugging Them In.
* Amid Heat Wave, California Asks Electric Vehicle Owners to Limit Charging
* Just How Good for the Planet Is That Big Electric Pickup Truck?
* California Narrowly Averts an Electricity Crisis Amid Scorching Heat
In school, Prager's classmates were amused by his big mouth, but it never occurred to them that he was a good source for truth or morality. In the more than 50 years since his high school graduation, none of them, to the best of my knowledge, have changed their minds on this score.
George Floyd
George Perry Floyd Jr. (October 14, 1973 – May 25, 2020) was an African-American man who was murdered by a police officer in Minneapolis, Minnesota, during an arrest made after a store clerk suspected Floyd may have used a counterfeit twenty-dollar bill, on May 25, 2020. Derek Chauvin, one of the four police officers who arrived on the scene, knelt on Floyd's neck and back for 9 minutes and 29 seconds which caused a lack of oxygen... During the final two minutes Floyd was motionless and had no pulse, but Chauvin kept his knee on Floyd's neck and back even as emergency medical technicians arrived to treat Floyd.Sep. 29, 2020, Dennis said: "I mean the more we know including George Floyd. The chances are miniscule that the knee on the side of the neck caused him to die. So the two premises of the issue that caused the protests and riots to begin with, is a lie. Or overwhelmingly likely to be a lie. He was not killed by the knee to the neck. The knee to the neck is a usual procedure in the Minneapolis police force -- police department. And we have still not established that he did it because the guy was Black. If you see the entire video he's sort of hysterical from the beginning of his encounter with the police who were completely decent with him. He says he can't breathe, he can't breathe before they touch him."The medical examiner found that Floyd's heart stopped while he was being restrained and that his death was a homicide, caused by "cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression", though fentanyl intoxication and recent methamphetamine use may have increased the likelihood of death. A second autopsy, commissioned by Floyd's family, also found his death to be a homicide, specifically citing asphyxia due to neck and back compression; it ruled out that any underlying medical problems had contributed to Floyd's death...
Voter Fraud
Despite the lack of evidence that voter fraud has changed the result of any major American election in the past 60 years, Dennis Prager kept hitting the topic for decades, but with particular intensity after Trump lost the 2020 election. October 21, 2020, Prager posted to Facebook: "Voter fraud. It's for real." The link featured his interview with Eric Eggers, author of the hysterical book Fraud: How the Left Plans to Steal the Next Election. November 7, 2020, Prager posted to Facebook: "Our videos on voter fraud and mail-in ballots are being censored by Big Tech! Please donate to help us fight online bias and reach more young people with our videos."
Prager promoted a series of cranks on the issue on his nationally syndicated radio show. November 17, 2020, he hosted Hans von Spakovsky on the topic. You couldn't find a more discredited activist on voter fraud than Hans von Spakovsky. From his Wikipedia entry:
According to the New Yorker, von Spakovsky has promoted “the myth that Democratic voter fraud is common, and that it helps Democrats win elections”.Von Spakovsky has supported his claims about the extent of voter fraud by citing a 2000 investigation by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, which purported to find 5400 instances of deceased people in Georgia voting in the last two decades. The Journal-Constitution later revised its findings, noting that it had no evidence of a single deceased person voting and that the vast majority of the instances were due to clerical errors.
In an interview with the New Yorker, von Spakovsky cited two scholars who he said could substantiate that voter-impersonation fraud was a significant threat: Robert Pastor of American University and Larry Sabato of the University of Virginia. Von Spakovsky said that Pastor had personally experienced voter impersonation, but Pastor refuted von Spakovsky’s claim, saying, “I think they just mistakenly checked my name when my son voted—it was just a mistake. I don’t think that voter-impersonation fraud is a serious problem.” Both Pastor and Sabato said that they would only support voter ID laws if voter IDs were made free and easily available to all, which is not what Republicans have tried. Sabato, the author of “Dirty Little Secrets,” also described voter impersonation as “relatively rare today.” In a 2011 article published by the Heritage Foundation, von Spakovsky again referred to Sabato as an authority to establish the existence of common voter fraud, along with “Stealing Elections,” a book by John Fund, whose claims of voter fraud have been extensively debunked, and whom he neglects to identify as the co-author of a book they jointly wrote. He describes the efforts of Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, his colleague both at the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity and Heritage, to expose the alleged existence of extensive voter fraud, as “carefully described research,” although Kobach’s claims have also been shown to be vastly overstated.
In a court decision, Fish v. Kobach, US District Court Judge Julie A. Robinson ruled that von Spakovsky’s claims of widespread voter fraud were not in fact found to be backed up with provable researched cases. Judge Robinson wrote that she gave his testimony little weight because it was “premised on several misleading and unsupported examples of non-citizen voter registration, mostly outside the State of Kansas.” She also noted that during the proceedings, Mr. von Spakovsky “could not identify any expert on the subject of non-citizen voter registration.” When he tried to use a list of 30 people provided by a Kansas election official as proof of voter fraud in one county, Judge Robinson wrote in her decision: “He later admitted during cross-examination that he had no personal knowledge as to whether or not any of these individuals had in fact falsely asserted U.S. citizenship when they became registered to vote and he did not examine the facts of these individual cases.” Judge Robinson found witnesses for the defense were often found to be not credible, finding: “Defendant’s expert Hans von Spakovsky is a senior legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation, ‘a think tank whose mission [is to] formulate and promote conservative public policies’.” Von Spakovsky “…cited a U.S. GAO study for the proposition that the GAO ‘found that up to 3 percent of the 30,000 individuals called for jury duty from voter registration roles over a two-year period in just one U.S. district court were not U.S. citizens’.” However, on cross-examination, he admitted that the GAO study contained information on a total of eight district courts; half reported that not one non-citizen had been called for jury duty. The three remaining district courts reported that less than 1% of those called for jury duty from voter rolls were noncitizens. Therefore, his report misleadingly described the single district court with the highest percentage of people reporting that they were noncitizens, while omitting mention of the seven other courts described in the GAO report, including four that had zero incidents of noncitizens on voting rolls.[36] Robinson said, “While von Spakovsky’s lack of academic background is not fatal to his credibility …., his clear agenda and misleading statements … render his opinions unpersuasive.”
Prager also hosted right-wing activist Steve Cortes on the topic. The Washington Post published Nov. 11, 2020:
In a recent piece for the Trumpist site the National Pulse, Steve Cortes — a senior adviser to the Trump campaign — claimed the 84 percent registered-voter turnout in Milwaukee this year “def[ied] reasonable expectations.” What Cortes failed to mention was that registered-voter turnout in Milwaukee in 2016 was 80 percent. So the increase to 84 percent, far from defying expectation, was predictable, given that turnout in Wisconsin as a whole was up about 5 percent.On May 20, 2022, the Washington Post published:
John Eastman’s election-fraud evidence is as weak as you’d expect...Dennis Prager appeared in the Dinesh D'Souza documentary 2000 Mules and he promoted the movie on his show. Media Matters noted May 4, 2022:The filing then points to other examples of lawsuits focused on legalities rather than fraud, but it soon returns to the idea that he and Trump were warranted in assuming there was robust fraud.
“Statistical evidence, contained in Dr. Eastman’s privileged email exchanges … but also that which was publicly available at the time, strongly indicated ‘the intense improbability of the accuracy of the present Biden lead,’ ” it reads. The source for that? A purported analysis of the statistical unlikelihood of Biden’s win that focuses on things such as the fact that Joe Biden received more votes in many places than Barack Obama did in 2008 — something easily explained by both population growth and fervent opposition to Trump.
The author of that analysis, incidentally, was Steve Cortes, an adviser to Trump’s campaign.
The claims made in the trailer have been debunked by experts. The Washington Post explained how the geolocation data used by True the Vote has no way to be verified as geofencing data typically only pinpoint a person within approximately 30 feet. The Post article went on to suggest the group likely cherry-picked data based on its predetermined theory. A fact check by the Associated Press also showed that True the Vote’s research was based on “faulty assumptions, anonymous accounts and improper analysis of cellphone location data, which is not precise enough to confirm that somebody deposited a ballot into a drop box, according to experts.” And beyond the questionable data in this instance, multiple reviews conducted in the past two years have found no evidence of widespread voter fraud occurring during the 2020 election.Wikipedia (retrieved May 15, 2023) wrote:
2000 Mules is a 2022 American conspiracy theory political film from right-wing political commentator Dinesh D'Souza. The film falsely claims unnamed nonprofit organizations supposedly associated with the Democratic Party paid "mules" to illegally collect and deposit ballots into drop boxes in the swing states of Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin during the 2020 presidential election. D'Souza has a history of creating and spreading false conspiracy theories.The Associated Press (AP) reported that the film relies on "faulty assumptions, anonymous accounts and improper analysis of cellphone location data" provided by conservative non-profit True the Vote. FactCheck.org found the film's "supposed evidence is speculative." National Public Radio (NPR) reported True the Vote "made multiple misleading or false claims about its [own] work". AP reported that the assertion that True the Vote identified 1,155 paid mules in Philadelphia alone was false. The film presented a single unverified anonymous witness who said she saw people picking up what she "assumed" were payments for ballot collection in Arizona; no evidence of such payments was presented in any of the other four states.
On his January 16, 2023 Youtube show with Julie Hartman, Dennis said: "I've been syndicated [since 1999]. Virtually that entire time, I was on at the same time as Rush Limbaugh, the most successful talk show host in America for a good quarter century. I was up against him. He had way more income, way more stations. I had hundreds but he had three times as many. Incomewise, he earned 20-30x more than I did. It never bothered me. I wish I had his audience. I always want to talk to more people because I have very good things to say... I knew what God had given me. I have viewed my life from that age [22], I am a vessel for these ideas. That's all I am. I have these abilities to do good with them."
"I have never been envious of another human being in my life. Whenever I would meet Rush, it was pure fun to meet him. I was thrilled for his success because he was a powerful conservative voice in America. If it was good for society, I was happy."
Dennis Prager: 'Could It Happen Here? It Is Happening Here.'
Some people look outside their window and see trees of green, skies of blue, and think, what a wonderful world. Dennis Prager looks outside his window and sees dead people. How does Dennis see what you don't? Because he's better than you. He's wiser, smarter and more attuned to the signs of the apocalypse. Therefore, he is very important and you should listen to him.Is there any pundit who does not constantly stress his own importance? Is there any pundit for whom self-advancement is not their primary underlying theme? Is there any pundit who notes that election outcomes in America won't noticeably effect 99% of Americans 99% of the time? Does any pundit say that your primary purpose, meaning, excitement and morality in life should come from your family (and if you have space after that, from your friends, community and pursuits)? If people get their purpose, meaning, excitement and morality in life from their relationship with their family and friends, then they have no need for pundits except for fun.
On March 30, 2023, former president Donald J. Trump was indicted by a Manhattan Grand Jury. For the first time in about seven years, I tuned in because I was curious about Prager's reaction. Like a good right-wing talk show host, he was outraged. It was a sign of the apocalypse. America was turning into Nazi Germany.
In his April 4, 2023 column, Dennis wrote:
Communism — or if you will, left-wing fascism and totalitarianism — is coming to America and Canada, and (a bit more gradually) to Australia and New Zealand. Our universities have become moral and intellectual wastelands — almost as ideologically pure as Moscow State University was in the Soviet era. As of December 2022, there were seven times more administrators (15,750) at Stanford University than faculty (2,288).Our medical schools are embracing Soviet-like science. In more and more of them, incoming doctors are instructed not to use the terms “male” and “female.” Harvard Medical School officials use the terms “pregnant and birthing people” rather than “pregnant women.” And children’s hospitals are using hormone blockers (which, among other dangers, can impair future reproductive functioning) and mutilating perfectly healthy teenagers.
Students at elite law schools such as Stanford and Yale behave as if they were members of Komsomol, the Soviet Communist Youth League. On the rare occasions that conservative speakers come to their campuses to give a lecture, students heckle, shout and curse at them, disrupting their ability to speak in ways reminiscent of the Hitler Youth in 1930s Germany.
The greatest of all freedoms, that of speech, is disappearing.
In Ontario, Canada’s most populous province, the provincial agency in charge of education has announced that the notion that there is only one correct answer in mathematics is an expression of white supremacy. The Oregon Education Department has announced the same thing. The American Medical Association has declared that no American birth certificates should list the sex/gender of a child — the child will decide that later.
Teachers across the country are robbing children as young as 5 of their innocence. They are routinely taken to drag queen shows where men in women’s clothing dance for them (sometimes lewdly). Why? Because it is the aim of most American schools from first grade to postgraduate to have all American young people believe that sex/gender is “nonbinary” — that alone in the animal kingdom, human beings are not sexually divided into male and female.
In the COVID-19 era, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institutes of Health and virtually every other national medical and health agency largely abandoned science and even elementary decency (recall all the Americans who were forcibly deprived of any visitors and left to die alone in hospitals) and became tools of the Left. They and America’s Sovietized teachers’ unions ruined millions of American children by closing schools for nearly two years. In addition to the doomsday hysteria over climate change, the imposed gender confusion and the absence of religion, this has led to the highest rates of adolescent depression and suicide ever recorded in America.
Our justice department, about half of our judges and our security agencies are well on their way to becoming what the Soviet ministry of justice, Soviet security agencies and Soviet judges were: tools of the ruling party.
Our mainstream media, with few exceptions, are as uncommitted to truth as were the organs of the Soviet Communist Party, Pravda and Izvestia. The New York Times, The Washington Post, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, NPR and PBS play the same role for the Left and therefore the Democratic Party.
It was only a matter of time until the Left would arrest a former president of the opposition party.
I suspect that people who suffered under Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union would not find much of a parallel with the situation in the United States today.
None of the reasons Prager listed for how America is becoming more like Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union are unique to Nazi and Soviet regimes. None of the arguments that Prager lists for how America is becoming like Nazi and Soviet regimes stand up to examination. All of Prager's stated concerns about America have occurred in similarly in dozens if not hundreds of non-Nazi, non-communist nations. Hundreds of nations, for example, have restricted speech. Hundreds of nations have had institutions of higher learning decline. All medical schools have gone in false directions and have had to retract teachings. Medicine has never been a science. Justice has always been political because it has always been executed by human beings. Hundreds of nations have had people heckle and try to shut down speakers. Hundreds of nations have taught things about sex that many people today would find abhorrent. Hundreds of nations have had institutions supposedly dedicated to truth turn out to be not so dedicated to truth. Hundreds of nations have had their justice departments become tools of the ruling party. Dozens of non-communist, non-Nazi nations have had health departments operate as tools of the ruling party.
If free speech is disappearing in America, than where is it flourishing? It not now, when? In reality, the United States today retains more free speech protections than almost any nation that has ever existed. Restrictions on free speech don't make America Soviet, they make America more like every nation that has ever existed because all nations have restricted speech.
That the American news media is equivalent to Pravda is not an assertion that any knowledgeable person can take seriously.
After Trump was indicted, I listened to Dennis Prager's radio show for the first time in years because I suspected it would drive Prager to revealing over-statement. Within a minute of tuning in, I heard Prager talk about how America was on the path to totalitarianism.
Around this same time, I watched a video called "35 Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Tools | Trauma Informed Counseling Skills" by Dr. Dawn Elise-Snipes, who has a PhD in Mental Health Counsel. Early in her video, she said: "The first and most basic tool is a behavioral one and that is to create safety."
A nationally syndicated radio host telling his listeners they lived in a country increasingly like Nazi Germany is not a good way of creating an appropriate level of safety in listeners. I remember my realization from more than 25 years ago that listening to Prager consistently filled me with rage even though I largely agreed with him and even though he was ostensibly all about happiness and goodness. The man pours poison into the American soul. Enraging people is a great way of getting listeners but it makes people less happy and less effective in life. Outside of a few murder zones, life in the United States for Prager listeners is overwhelmingly safe and free (compared to other countries on this earth). Inculcating gratitude might be a wiser path for a man intent on doing good. There are situations in life where rage is more adaptive than gratitude, such as when you are fighting for your life in a dark alley, but they are few and far between.
April 3, 2023, Dennis said: "The USA Today is a rag sheet on the level of Pravda. 'Trump using anti-semitic rhetoric to raise money after indictment.' Let me say as a Jew who has done more to fight anti-semitism more than almost any living Jew... Who is on the Holocaust Memorial Board. Who has brought more good will to Jews than the entire Anti-Defamation League... This is a damn liar, Erin Mansfield, this piece of crap who writes this goddamn lie... [Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg] is a George Soros funded DA. That is enough to condemn him because George Soros is as close to diabolic as it gets on this planet. He doesn't even identify as a Jew... Soros has as much to do with Judaism, Jews and Israel as a rural Mongolian. And a lot of USA Today readers will believe this lie."
I doubt that many USA Today readers will change their mind because of this one op-ed. People weren't born yesterday. We haven't evolved to be gullible. The only minds that are going to be changed by an op-ed or a radio monologue are those minds looking for reasons to change. You can never change a man's mind against his will.
Prager must have learned early in life how to use the power of drama to command attention. I wonder who he copied?"Alvin Bragg is as bad a human being to occupy that office as has existed. The man is 100% responsible for some of the murders and rapes in New York City because of his completely lenient view of violent crime."
"How do you become a bad human being? ...You accept money from bad human beings. You think of yourself as a victim. There is nothing more guaranteed to produce a bad human being than the victim mentality. I got hurt, I can lash out. I am freed from normal moral demands because I am a victim."
"The indictment of an ex-president for no valid reason except that they are filled with hate, they are Third World thugs. You cannot overstate the significance of the evil that has taken place. It is immoral to tune out."
"Rampant evil is what the Left has engaged in... Twenty years ago at least, I said there was a civil war in this country. If this is not obvious to you, then bad news is not something you want to handle psychologically. The Left and the Right have nothing in common. Like Florida and California at this time have nothing in common. They might as well be different countries on the opposite sides of the Iron Curtain. Whenever I went from California to Florida, I felt like I did when I went from Western Europe to Eastern Europe under communism."
"If you support the indictment, you are not on the side of truth or of concern for America."
April 4, 2023, Dennis said: "We are becoming like the Soviet Union. This is not in any way an exaggeration. I took a vow never to exaggerate because you lose your credibility. I try always to understate and to calm people's fears, but we are sliding into a Soviet system. The parallels are frightening. We have political prisoners [referring to January 6 protesters]. Joe Biden would be completely comfortable in a Soviet Union setting. So would Kamala Harris. So would most of the members of the Democratic party in Congress and in gubernatorial positions. The press functions the way the Soviet press functioned -- as a mouthpiece of the ruling party... When you want to jail your opponents, you can find anything. It is difficult to overstate what the Left is doing to the United States in converting it into a Soviet-type country. Putin speaks of misinformation just the way the Democratic Party and the New York Times speak of misinformation -- whatever we don't want you to know."
"Sorry to be this dark about the situation now. You have to two choices in life - to fight or to check out. Ideally, you get your kids out of the schools that are poisoning their minds, their souls, their hearts, their consciences, their ability to think. We sold our soul in the early 20th Century when we said the government should educate our children."
"People want to believe that we have more in common with our fellow American on the other side than what divides us. What do I have in common with the Left? I can think of one. A Leftist believes in taking care of his family and so do I... In the realm of ideology and ideas, what do we have in common? Nothing."
"I know from years of experience with home-schooled kids that overwhelmingly they turn out happier, finer, kinder and more intelligent..."
"Alvin Bragg [Manhattan DA] is a punk."
"What groups of Americans have been added to the list of Trump supporters? If there aren't any, then it is difficult [to see Trump winning the presidency in 2024]. Do you believe Trump has added any group? [Democrats may believe] that [indicting Trump] may make him so popular [among Republicans that he wins the nomination but loses the general election]."
Caller (Victor in Chicago): "With the media being so far to one side, how can our constitutional republic survive?"
Dennis: "That's a very fair question. You're listening to one of those chances -- talk radio. Talk radio reaches more people than Fox News, for example. PragerU has over a billion views a year, 65% are under 35. The Daily Wire has an enormous reach. TPUSA has an enormous reach on college campuses. However, it is true that when the mainstream media are all in one direction, and with corporations giving hundreds of millions of dollars to left-wing groups and almost nothing to conservative groups, the odds are against us. The worst is Big Tech suppressing us. The suppression of dissent is the road to the Sovietization of this country."
April 5, 2023, Dennis said: "The great lack in young Americans' lives is religion. It is the direct cause, not only cause, of all the depression, lost sense of identity..."
I suspect the Japanese and the Europeans, in general, don't suffer from the amount of depression and loss of identity that American youth are said to suffer from, despite these other nations being much more secular than America."Do you think the American government under the Democrats is less corrupt than the Ukrainian government? I don't. Thirty four counts [in the Trump indictment] with no crime."
To sum up the level of corruption in the American federal system of government with one indictment out of Manhattan is absurd. In a big country like the United States, there have always been hideous examples of injustice. How could there be otherwise when justice is delivered by flawed humans?
March 27, 2023, Dennis said: "I have come to entertain the possibility of a devil. It has been so diabolic what I have experienced the past three years. It is hard to explain on rational grounds the madness that has taken over."
An intellectual non-mystical Jew who can read Hebrew entertaining the idea that a devil is causing most of our problems is about as un-Jewish a reaction as belief in the divinity of Jesus of Nazareth.According to the 2022 Corruption Perceptions Index, the United States ranks 24th in the world while Ukraine ranks 116.
April 14, 2023, Dennis said: "All of Leftism is secularized religion."
He plays a clip from Joe Biden: "The single existential threat to the world is climate change. We don't have a lot of time and that's a fact."
Dennis: "Whenever he says, that's a fact, I assume he's lying. It's a signal that what I'm saying is not true.
"[Climate change] is the single best way for me and the Left to overthrow Western civilization as we know it and destroy the economies of the Western world. That would be the truth."
"All of these great threats...to take away the rights of people. He said that in Ireland. Did you see the Irish prime minister's dog start barking at him? Remarkable. I'm not using this as proof that the dog knows what I know -- that this is the scummiest human being to be president of the United States in our history, but dogs are sensitive to human meanness."
"The WSJ: Biden's EPA remakes the auto industry. His new car rules are de facto orders to make EVs. They call out Donald Trump as fascist. When the government tells businesses what to do, that is one of the truth sign posts of incipient fascism."
Thousands of non-fascist governments have told businesses what to do. It's hardly a sign of fascism. People with power frequently tell people with less power what to do. That's less a sign of fascism than a sign of being human. As Thucydides put it: The strong take what they want and the weak endure what they must.
To those who take Prager seriously, his civil war talk has a depressing effect. Prager's Youtube cohost, Julie Hartman, said December 19, 2022: "I have to tell you, Dennis, and this is a really depressing thought, and I can't believe I'm saying, I have really started to fear that I am going to see the demise and the downfall of the United States in my lifetime. I don't know if it is going to be around when I am forty. If we keep going down this path, it won't."
Dennis: "If we keep going down this road, there will be two United States."
Julie: "This will not impede my will to fight. If we descend into a civil war or if China comes for us... They are so much more technologically skilled than we are. They have a more robust military. We used to have the top military in the world and they have surpassed us."
Dennis: "I don't see China attacking us. I see China assuming we are going to commit suicide."
Julie: "China is trying to expedite the process. Look at what they're doing with fentanyl. They're trying to kill American citizens. They don't need to do much, we are self-destructing."
Dennis: "The left has been working to destroy this country for a century. They're an overnight sensation."
Under the headline "Hastening the End", Mark O'Connell wrote in the New York Review of Books April 20, 2023 issue:It’s in the nature of apocalyptic movements, and of human beings, to think of history as a narrative with a beginning, a middle, and an end that is about to be revealed. And our current moment, with its rising sea levels and viral pandemics, its Mars-colonizing billionaires and fragmenting global orders, certainly feels apocalyptic. But there is something undeniably self-flattering in the idea of an imminent apocalypse, in that it places us—our generation, our time—at the very center of the meaning of things, as the ultimate protagonists of history.And this is related to the somewhat grandiose appeal of the end of the world as a subject. ...if you’re writing a book about the end of the world you can be confident that there is nothing more pressing to consider, and thereby be assured of your own intellectual seriousness.
By claiming he sees American in civil war and on a road to Nazi Germany, Dennis Prager places himself at the very center of things. He feels confident that "there is nothing more pressing to consider" than his ideas.
October 31, 2022, Dennis Prager's Youtube cohost Julie Hartman said: "It's really really hard for me to be friends with people who would vote Democrat. Someone said to me, isn't that sad that a friendship must end over politics. But it's not politics."
Dennis: "It's not politics. That cheapens the issue."
Julie: "It's Western civilization on the table."
Dennis: "That's right.... We believe that if you vote Democrat, you are voting for the party that is destroying my country."
Julie: "This is a do or die situation that we are in."
Dennis: "We are obligated to fight like they did on Normandy Beach."
Julie: "After reading things by Mollie Hemingway, I'm very skeptical that we can run elections without major improprieties."
Dennis: "We no longer have an election day [due to mail-in voting]. And why did they get rid of paper ballots?"
October 3, 2022, Julie said to Dennis: "I've turned into you."
Nov. 11, 2022, Dennis said: "A lot of bright people at Harvard and almost all of them are fools."
May 10, 2023, Dennis said: "We now have judges [referring to the judge who presided over the Jean Carroll rape and defamation civil case against Donald Trump, and some of the judges presiding over January 6 rioters] who are morally indistinguishable from the judges who served Stalin."
May 1, 2023, Prager's Youtube cohost Julie Hartman said: "There are some people on the Right who are government conspiracy theorists. They think there is an apparatus to create chaos and tear down the United States. I don't think those people are totally nuts because all of this seems too coordinated to be coincidence."
Dennis: "The desire is to bring down this country... They think they will be the leaders in the new America that replaced the great America that existed before... I've always elevated Americans. The past few years have been sobering."
Aug. 23, 2022, Dennis said to his Youtube cohost Julie Hartman: "For the first time in its history, freedom is under assault [in America]... The dismissal of humans based on the color of their skin. It is the opposite of liberalism to say that color matters. The Ku Klux Klan said color matters. The Nazis said color matters. And now the Left says color matters."
Color didn't matter much to the Nazis who murdered six million whites in the Holocaust as well as a greater number of white non-Jews during WWII while simultaneously allying with brown Arabs and yellow Japanese.
How is considering color the opposite of liberalism? According to Wikipedia: "Liberalism is a political and moral philosophy based on the rights of the individual, liberty, consent of the governed, political equality and equality before the law."
Wikipedia has an entry for "racial liberalism era": "Racial liberalism is an era in American history during the 1940s that is considered by many historians as the precursor to the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s."
Feb. 7, 2023, Dennis wrote:
[F]or the first time in American history, the United States cannot be described as “a beacon of light, liberty, and justice.”Jan. 31, 2023, Dennis Prager wrote:If we were to retain that part of the prayer, we would be involved in a deception before the community and before God.
For the first time in its history, because of the Left’s takeover of nearly every public and large private institution, the United States is now a net exporter of toxic ideas:
All white people are racist.
Healthy teenage girls should have their breasts removed if they say they are boys.
There are more than two sexes.
Western civilization is no better than any other.
Men who say they are women can compete in women’s sports.
The only difference between the American Left and communist totalitarianism is opportunity. All leftists want to control speech and eventually thought.The next time you read about “thought control” in North Korea, understand that North Korea’s thought control differs from “Pride” days and nights at sporting events — and from the rest of the Left — only by degree. The Left in America, like the Left in North Korea, demands your mind, not just your behavior.
Dennis makes leftists sound like scary people who want to destroy you. To the extent that the average Prager listener takes him seriously, they will feel more fear, anger and hatred about their fellow Americans than they would feel if they didn't listen to him. Taking on these negative emotions about a large portion of the people you will likely encounter on a regular basis doesn't sound like something that will help you be happier and more effective in life.
May 25, 2023, Dennis said: "California is not the Soviet Union, but it is moving towards the Soviet Union... It's quite possible that society as we know will end."
June 12, 2023, Dennis said: "The use of the Department of Justice to render America a police state for the first time in its history. The evil that this man [Joe Biden] has done has no parallel in the history of the United States."
Instead of juicing up needless hatred, Dennis could use his talents to promote understanding. He could explain that left and right politics are evolutionary adaptations that enabled our ancestors to pass on their genes. In some circumstances, a left-wing approach of welcoming strangers was more adaptive. In other circumstances, a right-wing approach of fear of strangers was more adaptive. In some situations, a traditional hierarchical approach to organizing the community was more adaptive, while in other situations, a more democratic approach was more adaptive. At times, organizing life in a new way was more adaptive, and at other times, following the old ways worked best. Notes the 2013 academic book Predisposed: Liberals, Conservatives, and the Biology of Political Differences:
[T]he political left has been associated with support for equality and tolerance of departures from tradition, while the right is more supportive of authority, hierarchy, and order. [T]he right has been associated with religious and social orthodoxy, the just, and the good, while the left has been associated with the opposite...Evolution is the process of species adapting to their environments and, because the environment itself is a moving target, the process is never ending. Evolution is not a destination but a temporary and sometimes lagging accommodation to environmental realities that existed at a certain time. If the environment shifts again, evolution will begin to move in a different direction, so no genetically based political predisposition is rightly viewed as more or less evolved.
...existence in hunter-gatherer societies prior to the advent of mass agriculture was short and filled with a remarkable range of threats. Selection pressures in such environments would likely favor individuals with higher degrees of negativity bias, who approached novel situations with caution, who were loyal to their group, and who were suspicious of the tribe over the hill. These would be the individuals most likely to avoid danger given that they would be less likely to open themselves up to situations in which they would be vulnerable. Such individuals would be responsive and attentive to threats. Given the evidence presented in the previous chapters, they would also have been the individuals who, in a modern mass polity, would display conservative political predispositions.
Our best guess is that in the rough and tumble of the Pleistocene, individuals who tried new things, opened themselves up to members of other tribes, and had little to no negativity bias were rare—it simply seems a losing long-term strategy in the face of all the dangers swirling about. Social units relatively isolated from threats for long periods of time might have permitted some protoliberals in the mix, but most hunter-gatherer groups would likely have needed to keep a constant eye on the horizon and maybe even on the next hut. These were likely conservative societies in the sense that they did not often make big changes in the way they did things and those genetically inclined to take chances, to go through life marching to their own drummer, were probably selected against...
Most people in the developed portions of the world today simply do not have the same constant, life-threatening worries that existed in the distant past. As a consequence, people today can “expand their circle” of social contacts and ethical concerns beyond family and tribe to people far away and perhaps even to animals. Not everyone will take this opportunity, and the absence of strong selection pressures will encourage tremendous variation in genetically influenced predispositions toward what in modern mass-scale societies is called either liberalism or conservatism. Liberalism may thus be viewed as an evolutionary luxury afforded by negative stimuli becoming less prevalent and less deadly. If the environment shifted back to the threat-filled atmosphere of the Pleistocene, positive selection for conservative orientations would reappear and, with sufficient time, become as prevalent as it was then...
We believe that traits such as orientation toward out-groups, openness to new experiences, and a heightened negativity bias fit more naturally with social than economic issues, and we tend to agree with Congressman Weaver that economic positions are typically secondary. He points out that “ethnocentrics do not give a fig for individual rights” and sees the connection between conservatism and free market principles as a relatively recent development...
Conservaton is, for some people, the perfect place to live... People dress predictably and nicely. Conservatonians are a bit cliquey; they don’t take to outsiders much and are especially wary of the residents of the only other town of consequence in the county: Liberalville.
Big Lies
In a December 6, 2022 column against Holocaust denial, Dennis Prager wrote: "Big Lies inevitably lead to violence and can even destroy civilizations."
That sounds like an amazing insight, but is it true?
July 14, 2017, Dennis tweeted: "The news media in the West pose a far greater danger to Western civilization than Russia does."
That sounds like an amazing insight, but is it true? We did not evolve to be gullible. Even though the mainstream media was overwhelmingly against Trump in the 2016 presidential election, even though almost all elites opposed him, he still won. So how dangerous can the news media be if they don't change minds? Also, Russia has nuclear weapons. The New York Times does not. An entity with nuclear weapons is usually more dangerous than an entity that does not have nuclear weapons.
Jordan Peterson
On his March 6, 2023 show with Julie Hartman, Dennis said: "I asked [a major liberal] if he had ever heard of Jordan Peterson. No. I went through the list of the finest conservative minds and he had not heard of one of them."
The idea that Jordan Peterson is one of the finest conservative minds would only occur to somebody whose idea of fine was junk food.
January 30, 2023, Dennis said: "I think meat is the healthiest food there is. I got that from Jordan Peterson." The Atlantic noted in 2018: "The famous psychologist and his daughter swear by a regimen of eating only beef. Restriction can provide a sense of order in a world of chaos—but at what point does restriction become a disorder?"Why would anyone regard Jordan Peterson, who became suicidal because of a benzo addiction, as an excellent source for advice about healthy living?
At the Prager Summit in Santa Barbara May 3-4, 2019, Dennis held a public dialogue with Jordan Peterson.
Dennis: "I never met Jordan Peterson in person [before], but I said to him right before lunch, something that is said to me by so many people who meet me. 'I feel like I know you.' That is the highest compliment. I never gave it to somebody before you. I have watched you for hours. I have listened to you... You open your heart and your mind and so do I. When I was very young, I realized that God or nature had given me a goodness detector. I always knew when I was in the presence of a good person. That's all I really care about... And I've always been right... I think brains are wildly overrated. You're not bright if you join MENSA. Why you would want to announce to the world your IQ?"
"When I hear you read your book, the passion comes from you just want to help people lead a better life. It's overwhelming. Everybody knows you're bright but I know you're good."
Jordan is on the edge of tears all through the dialogue.
Jordan: "I learned in the early '80s that people have a great capacity for evil. I would never claim to be good, but I came to be terrified about how evil I could be...that I tried to avoid the pathways that lead people to evil."
Dennis: "The parallels between us are eerie."
May 7, 2021, Dennis told Jordan Peterson: "I can't find a thing you have ever said that isn't ennobling. I love your work. I wrote the introduction to your biography."
Age
May 1, 2023, Julie Hartman said to Dennis: "You're turning 75 soon."
Dennis: "Let's not talk about it. In the public's view, I don't have an age, so I don't talk about it much because it is not relevant to any part of my life. I feel the same as when I was your age and I act the same as I did when I was your age. I don't like to emphasize it. I prefer that people just think of me as Dennis."
Julie: "Your soul is ageless. I think that of other unique people. Donald Trump. He seems ageless. You seem timeless. Do you think you'll do anything for your 75th?"
Dennis: "I don't want to do a thing."
Julie: "Was turning 70 hard?"
Dennis: "Very hard."
Julie: "I feel like 70 is really leveling up."
Dennis: "My life is better than ever."
* Charismatic leaders get people focused. They turn their attention onto the same thing. They set in motion positive feedback loops: people in the group build up a shared emotion; the stronger the emotion, the more they feel themselves in tune with each other, and the more tightly they focus together. And the more tightly they focus, the more their shared emotion pumps each other up.Douglas Murray
May 25, 2023, Dennis said that Douglas Murray is his favorite English thinker.
Polemicists of a feather flock together. Gurus respect the game of other gurus. Those who are working a solid angle respect their fellow anglers.
On the other hand, scholars aren't fans of hacks.
Statistician Andrew Gelman wrote September 12, 2012:[A]cademia has what might be called the John Yoo line: the point at which nothing you write gets taken seriously, and so you might as well become a hack because you have no scholarly reputation remaining.John Yoo, of course, became a hack because, I assume, he had nothing left to lose. In contrast, historian Niall Ferguson has reportedly been moved to hackery because he has so much to gain. At least that is the analysis of Stephen Marche...
Ferguson is looking for (as am I, in my scholarly domain) is influence. He wants to make a difference. And one thing about being paid $50K is that you can assume that whoever is paying you really wants to hear what you have to say.
The paradox, though, as Marche notes, is that Ferguson gets and keeps the big-money audience is by telling them not what he (Ferguson) wants to say—not by giving them his unique insights and understanding—but rather by telling his audience what they want to hear.
And so he slips under the John Yoo line.
This is too bad; I was a big fan of Ferguson, back before he jumped the shark.
Hate
On his January 30, 2023 show with Julie Hartman, Dennis Prager said: "This will sound pompous... When I read, and there are many people who hate my guts, and it has no effect on me, but it does tell me about them. If you hate me, it doesn't tell me anything about me, it tells me everything about you. I know that I aim to do good and I do good. I know there are many people who have happier marriages because of my male-female hour. There are many happy people because of my happiness book, lectures and radio hour. There are many people who have reconciled with their parents because they heard me. How many leftists who hate my guts can say that? Zero. How many people are kinder because they were influenced by a leftist? Zero. It's not possible to become woke and to become kind."
Has nobody become kinder because of a good teacher or a good social worker or a good therapist? These professions are overwhelmingly on the left.
January 6, 2021 Capitol Hill Riots
May 11, 2023, Dennis said: "Donald Trump announced that if he is elected president, he will pardon all or nearly all of the political prisoners. They are political prisoners. If they are not political prisoners, then Andrei Sakhorov is not a political prisoner in the Soviet Union. The definition of a political prisoner is someone who is placed in prison by the ruling authorities in order to shut them up or in order to set an example to others, not because of the crime they allegedly committed."
40 Years As A Talk Show Host
I believe I have talked with — not to, with — more people than any living human being... The single most important quality in communicating is being interesting... It is the one thing that characterizes all talk show hosts. Left or Right, whether they talk about politics, finances, sports or anything else, they are interesting.Nov. 22, 2016, Bryan Curtis wrote:
Sports Radio in the Age of TrumpFor hosts like Colin Cowherd, it’s more important to be “interesting” than “right.” That’s why the president-elect has replaced sports chatter as the topic of choice...
[Cowherd:] "I tell Doug Gottlieb, one of my best friends, ‘There’s no money in right. All the money’s in interesting.’"
"I’m just doing sports," Cowherd continued. "If I’m wrong on Cam" — he turned his palms upward and shrugged his shoulders — "who cares? … I’m in the interesting business."
Donald Trump is also in the interesting business... But Trump and the sports-radio host will continue to have one, final commonality. They will still be playing the same character. On the stump, Trump fashioned himself as the only honest man in the world. The left was handcuffed by political correctness; the right by orthodoxy; the media was "failing." "One thing I can promise you is this: I will always tell you the truth," Trump said in August.
"That’s largely my brand," Cowherd said. "Through the years, my brand has always been ‘Everybody’s lying to you — except me.’"
When you portray a world full of liars, you — presidential candidate or talk-radio host — make yourself indispensable to the audience.
'Is Canada Becoming North America’s Cuba?'
Canada is leaving the Western world.Where do rights come from? The nation-state, and nation-states have always withdrawn rights in times of real and putative emergency.In terms of all-encompassing government, suppression of dissent and the denial of fundamental human rights to many of its citizens, Canada is now more similar to Cuba than to any free country.
Last week, for only the second time in Canadian history other than wartime — the first time was under Justin Trudeau’s father, Pierre Trudeau, the other Marxist to govern Canada — Justin Trudeau invoked the Emergencies Act. This statute enables a Canadian prime minister to suspend fundamental human rights and rule as a dictator...
The CBC described in detail how Trudeau is using the Emergencies Act to destroy the lives of Canadian dissidents. This should be read carefully. Such policies have never been enacted by a Western country against its own citizens (with the extremely rare exceptions of those actively engaged in terrorism):
“Using powers granted under the Emergencies Act, the federal government has directed banks and other financial institutions to stop doing business with people associated with the anti-vaccine mandate convoy occupying the nation’s capital.
“The government’s new directive, called the ’emergency economic measures order,’ goes beyond asking banks to simply stop transferring funds to protest organizers. The government wants banks to stop doing business with some people altogether.
“The order says that banks and other financial entities (like credit unions, co-ops, loan companies, trusts and cryptocurrency platforms) must stop ‘providing any financial or related services’ to people associated with the protests — a move that will result in frozen accounts, stranded money and cancelled credit cards.
“The Emergencies Act gives authorities the power to freeze the finances of those connected to blockades and protests, and the consequences could last long after the demonstrations end…
“The regulation’s definition of a “designated person” also includes … anyone sending funds to support these protests…
Constitutional Dictatorship: Its Dangers and Its DesignIf Americans know one thing about their system of government, it is that they live in a democracy and that other, less fortunate people, live in dictatorships. Dictatorships are what democracies are not, the very opposite of representative government under a constitution.
The opposition between democracy and dictatorship, however, is greatly overstated. The term “dictatorship,” after all, began as a special constitutional office of the Roman Republic, granting a single person extraordinary emergency powers for a limited period of time. “Every man the least conversant in Roman story,” remarked Alexander Hamilton in The Federalist No. 70, “knows how often that republic was obliged to take refuge in the absolute power of a single man, under the formidable title of Dictator” to confront emergencies caused by insurrection, sedition, and external enemies. No political constitution was well designed, Hamilton believed, unless it could confront emergencies and provide for energetic executive powers to handle them.
Under this view, dictatorship-the power of government officials to act on important matters free of accountability or timely legal checks-is not the opposite of democracy-or what our Constitution calls a “Republican Form of Government.” It is an institutional feature within constitutional democracies that can and should be employed to perform valuable civic functions. From this perspective, “dictatorship” becomes-as it was in the early Roman Republic-a term of description rather than a term of opprobrium. It refers to institutions and powers of emergency government that constitution makers might establish to serve the public interest. Indeed, if the institutions are properly designed, “dictatorship” might even have positive connotations-think only of the praise heaped on the legendary Cincinnatus...
* Carl Schmitt offers perhaps the most chilling analysis of all. Although he recognizes the possibility of commissarial dictatorships, where the ultimate goal of dictatorship is restoring the status quo, he assumes that elements of the sovereign dictatorship always lurk in the background, waiting to emerge and to transform any existing political order. No matter how well designed a constitutional system might be, the true sovereign will always be able to escape the confines of that design and make exceptions to it.
* Emergency, or at least claims of emergency, are the standard cause and the standard justification for creating dictatorships.
May 22, 2023, Dennis said the United States is now morally behind Europe.
'A comedian is the world’s most courageous political leader'
By general consensus among the world’s media and world’s nations, Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is the most courageous leader in the world today.In a speech uploaded to Youtube May 23, 2023, John J. Mearsheimer said that America arming Ukraine against Russia is a much worse mistake than invading Iraq in 2003. "We committed a colossal blunder and I find it hard to see how we get out of this mess. It just looks like it goes on and on. When you start thinking about the consequences just for European-Russian relations moving forward. Talk about Nordstream. The Russians are going to be interfering in European politics, looking for cleavages and trying to exploit them. The Russians will look for cleavages in the trans-Atlantic relationship and trying to exploit those. We will be going to great lengths to undermine Russia economically and politically. They will be trying to wreck Ukraine and we will be trying to save Ukraine. Where does this end? We'll all be dead and this will still be going on. There's no deal, whether they bring in the Chinese or the Indians or someone from outer space."For many people, this is particularly remarkable since Zelenskyy’s professional background is that of a comedian. It strikes most people as amazing that a comedian turns out to be the world’s most inspiring leader.
That, of course, was the reason so many dismissed Donald Trump when he ran for president: “He has no political experience, he’s just a wealthy real estate developer.” However, that real estate developer also turned out to be the most courageous leader in the world. Honest haters of Trump must at least acknowledge his courage — just as supporters must acknowledge his lack of a filter between his brain and his mouth.
It was Trump who had the courage to demand that our NATO allies live up to their obligations with regard to military spending. Ironically, thanks to Putin, the NATO countries are finally doing so. It was Trump who uncovered a deep state of corruption in nearly every major American governmental institution. It was Trump who took on the mainstream media, regarded by half of America as little better than Pravda, the Soviet newspaper. It was Trump who had the courage to do what president after president and Congress after Congress called for but never acted on: moving the American embassy in Israel to Israel’s capital city, Jerusalem. He did this despite the opposition of almost every world leader and his own State Department. If that’s not courage, what is?
And it remains a fact that Putin did not invade Ukraine while Trump was president. Putin feared Trump. Neither Putin nor anyone else fears President Joe Biden.
Legacy
One Sabbath morning in 1996 at Stephen S. Wise temple (Prager’s religious home from 1991 to circa 2016), I told Dennis Prager that I wished his ideas were more influential in Jewish life. He replied that it might take a thousand years for his ideas to take hold in Judaism.
“I feel quite satisfied [in what I've accomplished],” said Dennis May 14, 2010. “I feel I could do more good if I touched more people. I have that every single day. If I’ve touched X number of lives, why could I not do 5X if I had a vehicle to do so… I’ve been lucky and I’ve worked my tail off.”
May 21, 2010, Dennis said: “The Obama administration is destroying American credibility abroad in the attempt to be liked… If America is liked, it will not be right. That’s your choice…
"All of this compels me to fight harder and not despair... I will have to answer to God one day...for why I didn't fight as hard as possible for goodness during the years that I was given on earth. And if I say, 'Well, the news was bad, God, so I decided to spend more time watching TV or talking to friends,' I will be judged accordingly.
"Even if there is no God to whom I will have to account for my life, I will have to account to me for my life, and I am not prepared to sit back and to say the left ruined America...
"...The world is getting worse. Every single aspect of the world that I can measure at this time is getting worse and has been getting worse since Barack Obama became president. I want him to live long enough to be rated among the worst presidents in America history. The country and the world are worse as a result."
In a 2005 lecture on Deuteronomy 30, Dennis said: "I have Christian friends who find it incredible that I feel that God is satisfied with me. They're stunned. They walk around with this deep sense of unworthiness. I haven't felt unworthy for ten seconds."
Saying GoodbyeOn the happiness hour of his radio show March 26, 2010, Dennis Prager said that when he had to die, he wanted to be at home with friends and family.
“We should all have that opportunity,” said Dennis. “Hospitals. I get depressed when I see the word. I know where I want to go when I go. I was once in a hospital overnight and I snuck out at 6 a.m. I didn’t check out. I just had to get out of there. And I wouldn’t put on the gown. Why? I was just being observed. Why would I wear one of these buttocks-showing gowns? As soon as you put the gown on, you get depressed. I did a whole show about hospital gowns, about how they lower people’s dignity and make people feel sicker. Putting one on says, hello, I’m sick. Wearing normal clothing says, I’m well but I’ve got a problem.”
May 18, 2010, Dennis said: “I bank my psychological/intellectual stability on the existence of an afterlife… I have felt this since I was in high school. Given the amount of unjust suffering in this world, I can only live with this… in the belief that there is ultimate justice after our death. It is one of the only propositions of my life in which I have never wavered, even for a second.”
Said Dennis in a 1996 lecture on Exodus 12: “I’d much rather die at 55 [yo] and have a life in the next world than die at 70 and with no life in the next world.”
Said Dennis in a 1998 lecture on Exodus 22 about the movie Alive: “I did the same flight. They ate their friends to survive. I was stunned that there were commentators who spoke about the moral problem of cannibalism. Baloney! There was no moral problem at all. I hereby announce that should you be in a crash with me and I am the only thing left to eat, you have perfect permission to have me. I am very big. You will have a lot to eat. You should have no compunctions.
“Should I be murdered, I want you executed. I want you to know that I don’t blithely give my body away.”
In a 1998 lecture on Exodus 24, Dennis said: “My primitive concept [of the afterlife] is pretty much disgusting — ever ongoing carnal joy interspersed with great symphony orchestras at your disposal and an endless supply of my favorite fountain pens.”
Dec. 11, 2012, Dennis said: "Everything I stand for is changing people's minds."
Apr. 8, 2014, Dennis said: "Ninety percent of what weighs on me is macro. I'm pre-occupied with my society's problems."Tom called Dennis Feb. 1, 2013: "Recently I found out that I have an expiration date [cancer] and I got a little depressed and I decided I was really tired of the pain. I was a POW in Vietnam. I am familiar with a little bit of pain. I decided it was time to eliminate the problem. A shotgun was involved. I found myself in Death Valley looking down the barrel when a line you said from Religion on the Line days that I had some worth and it so impressed me and hit me so hard sir, it stuck in my chest like a knife. I came home and gave the shotgun to a friend and went about my life and I was able to watch my grandchildren grow up. I want to thank you. What you say means a lot. I know how carefully you phrase your words. What you said many years ago means something today."
Dennis: "I am aware every day that words that I utter can affect a life in all directions. I'm careful to be both direct and yet only in a positive way because direct is a gamble."
He Had A Blast
In a public dialogue with Adam Carolla Feb. 25, 2012, Dennis said: "Very very few people can play the violin. Everybody can speak. Yet, there are far more great violinists than great speakers."
"Our job is to have the listener think this is the easiest job in the world, but it's very hard."
Adam: "It's like sex."
Dennis: "No, it is not."
Adam: "If you're doing it right, it seems very natural."
"How much of your off-time is consumed with scratching out notes on things?"
Dennis: "It's frightening."
Mar. 10, 2012, Dennis says: "You think that its inherently so exciting to have a national radio show that of course, there's no challenge to being happy under those circumstances, but you must know that is not true. Among my colleagues is the same exact representation of happy and miserable as among any other job."
August 2, 2022, Prager's Youtube cohost Julie Hartman said: "You said to me a few days ago, 'On my tombstone, it will say, 'He had a blast.'"
Notes On Method
If I cited a date for when Dennis said something but provided no further context, that meant the quote came from his radio show.
My related posts can be found below: