The Truth Network Radio
April 24, 2017 4:20 pm

From the Elections in France to Bill O'Reilly and More

The Line of Fire / Dr. Michael Brown

00:00 / 00:00
On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 1516 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.


April 24, 2017 4:20 pm

Dr. Michael Brown discusses the complexities of sexual harassment, the controversy surrounding Bill O'Reilly, and the implications of Marine Le Pen's potential presidency in France. He also addresses the alt-right movement, evolution, and the Science March, highlighting the intersection of science and politics.

YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE:
JR Sports Brief
JR
CBS Sunday Morning
Jane Pauley
CBS Sunday Morning
Jane Pauley

From the elections in France to charges of sexual harassment against Bill O'Reilly. We've got you covered right here. It's time for the line of fire with your host, activist, author, international speaker, and theologian, Dr. Michael Brown, your voice of moral, cultural, and spiritual revolution. Michael Brown is the director of the Coalition of Conscience and President of Fire School of Ministry.

Get into the line of fire now by calling 866-34-TRUTH. That's 866-34-TRUTH. Here again is Dr. Michael Brown. Is anyone surprised that things continue to shake?

worldwide. that there's something new, something different. The old being challenged, or the status quo being challenged, and then maybe not being challenged. Talking about France and beyond. Hey, friends, welcome to today's broadcast.

This is Michael Brown. We've got a lot of great things planned for you on today's show. And as always, or virtually always, Our phone lines are open. 866-866. 3-4-Truth.

That's 866. three four eight seven 884. Before we get to France, before we talk about Donald Trump, get close to the end of his first hundred days. Before we talk about Earth Day and the Science March, Before we talk about some dialogue I had with folks who identify as alt-right. Uh and by the way Some of the dialogue with a couple of folks, again, not representative of everyone on the alt-right, and the alt-right is not monolithic.

But interesting that folks take exception to being called racist. and then identify as racist in everything they say. But that's That's another subject we'll get to. Before any of that... I've got a question for you.

Men, women, alike, I'd love your feedback. eight six six three four truth Let's say a woman comes to work And she is in Suggestive attire. Let's say she's wearing a very low cut Top. And the guys at work or her boss, they kinda check her out. By the way, I'm not saying women should dress like that.

I don't believe women should be, godly women specifically, should be dressing in such a way as to draw sexual attention. to themselves. But Let's say she dresses like that. Let's say the guys kinda check her out. They they stare at her.

All right. Let's say our boss does. Is that a form of sexual harassment? Or Is she getting the attention she asked for? Or Is she totally unaware?

that her her top is low and and revealing. Or does she feel a pressure to do that? because of the strongly sexist society in which we live, or I should say over-sexed society in which we live, which is sometimes sexist as well. Is it sexual harassment? If she notices guys checking her out, when she comes in that outfit.

She comes in in a super short, super tight, Mini skirt. and she notices the guys looking at her legs. Is is that sexual harassment? Or is that hey, she got what she asked for? Is that a matter of, come on, it's just people being people?

I'm not talking about From a believing gospel-based standard from believing gospel-based standard. Godly woman would not seek to look unbeautiful, but she would seek to look modest. For sure. and she wouldn't be showing herself off to other men. And a godly man would not be checking out the ladies.

If a lady was dressed inappropriately, he'd look the other way rather than check her out.

So we understand those things. But I'm asking about Sexual harassment. I posted this question on Twitter. It was late last night, it was like 2.33 in the morning, but I thought, you know, I'm just going to do this, and then people join in more in the morning. But I asked the question, if a woman wears a low-cut top to work, is it sexual harassment if a man checks her out?

And then I repeated yes, no for female and yes, no for male so we could know exactly who was responding. The The ants. Answers are fascinating. say the least. And I'm bringing this up because the whole Bill O'Reilly situation.

We'll be right back. God of light, hear our cry, send the fire. It's the line of fire with your host, Dr. Michael Brown, your voice of moral, cultural, and spiritual revolution. Here again is Dr.

Michael Brown. Thanks for joining us today on the line of fire. Yeah, so Bill O'Reilly is out at Fox. Was it just a power play within the Murdoch family? Was O'Reilly?

genuinely guilty of sexual harassment over a period of years. And should he have been removed or disciplined a long time ago? O'Reilly says all the charges are unfounded. Right now, I'm making no judgment on the situation, not knowing any more about it than you know. But I'm asking the larger questions about sexual harassment in the workplace today.

Again, to weigh in, 866-34TRUTH. Maybe. You could argue? That for a woman to dress suggestively, I mean, very suggestively. in an obvious and overt way.

that that is sexual harassment of her male co-workers. Or bosses. that she is harassing them by dressing like that. That's another side to it, right? Never heard that raised, or don't hear it raised.

O on the flip side you say would be crazy. Come on, there are guys. If if a woman came in dressed in a sack, they'd they'd be lustfully attracted to her and they think filthy thoughts all the time. What you know, what are you gonna do? Wear require them to wear burkhas to work?

Fair question. Absolutely a fair question. We tell our daughters as they were growing up, you know, I'd say, you don't understand how boys think. And I said, They're trying to check you out. They're trying to you know look in your shirt.

No, dad I said, that's what boys do. They not every boy, but many, and probably most. Yeah, and and men as well do those kinds of things. And that's why Being disciplined with your eyes, with your thought life is part of following the Lord, part of self-control. And women not seeking to present themselves as sexual objects.

That's part of godliness. You can be beautiful while modest. But When it comes to the O'Reilly case, I I want to say a few things plainly. Number one, I'm not denying the reality of sexual harassment in the workplace. I'm not denying it, I'm not minimizing it.

I'm not denying that some men feel they have the right to treat women as sexual objects. Again, not denying it. not minimizing that reality. I'm not denying that many women feel constant pressure to dress and look sensually. Not denying that.

And I'm not denying that some judges have outrageously implied that rape victims. Basically deserved what they got, 'cause of the way they were dressed. You didn't dress like that. You might be raped. Yeah, think think of pouring salt in a very open wound already.

So I'm not denying any of these issues. I'm not minimizing. any of these issues. What I am asking is where the line is properly Drawn. Thankfully, in the decades that I've served in ministry, leading schools, teaching at schools, leading ministry organizations.

We've not had issues with these things. We've had people who are modest. We've had people who understood what it meant to work in a ministry environment. And we've not had issues like this, but I'm sure. These are issues that are faced in the workplace all the time.

Again, I don't want to minimize them, but I want to ask about reality.

So one of the women. who came forth at the end to bring charges against Bill O'Reilly. African-American woman. I mention that because one of the... charges that she brought was that he referred to her as hot chocolate.

One time.

Now, she said it made her feel like she was on a plantation. paraphrase her her words. Did he say that? I don't know. If he did Was that harassment?

Was that racial harassment? Was that just being cute, maybe in his world? It was just being cute. Just asking questions. Um She claimed O'Reilly told her, looking good there, girl, one time when she was getting off the elevator.

Is that sexual harassment? A woman comes on the job In a nice outfit. And a man says, Hey, you're looking good Is that sexual harassment? Is it the way he says it? Is it how he looks when he says it?

Is it, as being claimed on some college campuses, a microaggression? To say that as if to say, you're of no worth, no value whatsoever. I don't esteem you as a peer, as a colleague, in any way. I'm simply looking at you sexually. Is that?

What is being said? Or If you as a woman Wore a really nice new outfit to work one day. And nobody said a word to you. I'm talking about. not just women but the men nobody said a word to you would that bother you Would you expect some complicated?

compliments. Um Prikita Burgess claimed O'Reilly would come by her desk and would leer at her up and down. She felt like he was looking at her cleavage, and it made her feel uncomfortable. Maybe he did this. Maybe that's who he is.

Yeah, i in my book, if you did that, you leer at someone, you come over, you look them all up and down all the time, yeah, that would be sexual harassment. On the flip side, if someone was wearing a low-cut top. Say a woman was wearing a low cut top, She put it on she stood in the mirror, looked in the mirror when she put it on. And A co-worker comes by and talking to her and and she notices that he's he's staring at that place that's partly uncovered, is that sexual harassment? 866-348-7884.

What I found interesting. on my Twitter poll. Was that the responses from men and women? in terms of their feelings were almost equal. That I found fascinating.

The the responses were almost equal. In other words, it wasn't that the... man overwhelmingly said, no, it's not sexual harassment. And the woman overwhelmingly said, you better believe it is. To the contrary And just look at percentages now.

The percentage of women who said it was not was higher than the percentage of men. Who said it was not? Let me grab a call. Tyler in Monroe, North Carolina. Thanks for joining us on the Line of Fire.

What's your take on this? Um My take it's it's uh a little bit complicated. Um staring down at uh a woman's breast on a low cut top. I I wouldn't say it's sexual harassment if But it depends on how long you do it. If it's there for twenty seconds, then it becomes that Mm-hmm.

I think it's all, you know, about class, but We do have to realize that It's about political correctness as well. going just run amok? Um Sorry, I'm a little nervous on the radio right now. No, we're just chatting. We're just chatting.

We're good. Yeah, so, okay, the first thing is. Um if somebody uh and again, hopefully godly men Are careful with their eyes, and godly women are modest in their dress. But we're just talking the general secular workplace.

So it's one thing for a guy to notice something, it's another thing for a guy to stare and make a woman feel uncomfortable, right? I'd make that distinction. But, right, the problem is. The the P C environment in which we're living.

So expand on it. P C in what sense? of political correctness run amok. I mean it in the sense that Let's say even uh ten years ago. I mean, I'm only twenty three, but I can remember that you were able to speak your mind and They wouldn't Jump to the racist card or sexist card.

Um, I just I just believe like, um, Political correctness is one among us. Yes, still O'Reilly, you know, did that stuff, but If you didn't do it on the show, Then I I don't see why, you know, the need to fire him. I never liked the guy, I thought he was pretentious, but we had to beat him with speech. Yeah, let let's just separate two things though. One is, yeah, the PC attitude run amok.

So I'm glad. that we're more sensitive to things that can be insulting, that can be racist or sexist, and comments that we don't realize, but it's gone to, you're right, crazy, crazy extremes. And just simple comments are now taken as microaggressions or as being somehow insults or jibes.

So I'm totally with you on that. But as far as O'Reilly and work, let's think of this. Let's say that someone was a prominent T V host. and was found to um have have raped someone. They didn't rape them on the job.

They didn't rape them on the TV set. But obviously, not only are they going to jail, but they're going to lose their job even if they didn't go to jail. If someone was found guilty of extortion, you know, and they are. Uh they they are uh stealing money you know from from somebody in some scam even if they didn't do it related to work They'd suffer the penalty.

So that. That I understand. I have no issue with that. If he was guilty, and again, I don't know. if he was guilty of genuine sexual harassment.

of telling women, okay, you want to get ahead. on the job here, you're gonna have to sleep with me or something like that. If he's guilty of that, of course. That's the kind of thing you lose your job for no matter how prominent you are. Um The question is, if he had been a liberal host, would the attack come against him the same way?

Or would there be a different standard? Those are the questions. But, Tyler, I appreciate you weighing in. Your comments are. Heard and taken note of.

We'll be right back. It's the line of fire with your host, Dr. Michael Brown. Get into the line of fire now by calling 866-34TRUTH. Here again is Dr.

Michael Brown. So just to stay on this issue of sexual harassment for another moment, let me repeat. I'm not minimizing. the reality of sexual harassment in the workplace. I'm not minimizing that there are men that feel they have the right to treat women as sexual objects and women who feel they need to climb the ladder.

of success by presenting themselves as sexual objects. Not denying any of that. nor am I minimizing the problems associated with that. And It must be very difficult. for women today.

uh to with all of the airbrushed and plastic surgeon enhanced plastic surgery enhanced images out there. There must be pressure on women to look a certain way. And then they may just try to dress away that they think looks nice into some man that's presenting themselves as a seductive object. Men can misread things. On the other hand, women often know exactly how they are presenting themselves.

So there are different aspects to this, but I don't want to for a moment downplay the problems that exist or minimize them. And when I hear accusations, say, against Bill Cosby, and these are more extreme than the charges against Bill O'Reilly.

Well, you hear one or two, you wonder. When you hear enough, you begin to think, okay, this does sound like the person's guilty. and you still wait for truth to emerge as best as possible.

So with Bill O'Reilly, number one, I have no idea if the charges are true or not. If they were true, to surprise me. Why would it surprise me? He's a man of power and influence and prestige, and that can easily get to your head. And although he's of Catholic background, I don't look at him as a true Christian who'd be walking closely with the Lord and having godly convictions in his life, although he'd have.

good moral standards from many other areas. On the other hand, it wouldn't surprise me that people are coming against them with false charges. I mean, it seems pretty orchestrated. The way the New York Times released the story at the same time that advertisers were being influenced by media matters to pull away from O'Reilly and just kind of the perfect storm hitting at a certain moment seemed to orchestrate it. But putting all those things aside.

Putting those things aside. I look at some of the accusations and I scratch my head. Others I think, yeah, that's if he did it, that's terrible. And if he had to step down because of it, so be it. But others I look at and think Mm.

What what's so bad about that? For example. Perkita Burgis says O'Reilly told her, looking good there, girl, one time when she was getting off the elevator. Looking good there, girl.

Now In some cultures referring to a woman as girl itself would be Insulting. All right. Or for a man to dare say to a woman he's not married to, looking good. Yeah, look, I if If someone if if there was a female employee in our ministry organization. And she came in.

in a nice outfit, all right? I I wouldn't compliment her. I wouldn't say, boy, that's a really nice outfit. I mean, it'd be the rarest. of rare Why?

What's that my wife? It's that simple. And I'm the leader of an organization and ministry, so I wouldn't do it. You know, if I might say, oh, new hairdo, or something like that, if it was that conspicuous, like, how can you not say something? Right?

Now, others I have male colleagues that would have no problem. Say, oh, great out and really nice outfit. That's fine. Perfectly fine. But For Riley to say what she said, and now this is national news, he said to her, Looking good there, girl.

That sounds to me like a witch hunt. if that's sexual harassment.

Okay. And again, I wonder... If it and and ladies, you can tell me If you got a really nice New outfit and you came in to work one day wearing it for the first time. And None of the men, just around men now, none of the men. set you hey nice outfit and you got friends there and co-workers and a you know boss or two whatever Would that bother you?

Would you think how come nobody noticed it? Or would you say, well, they can say it's a nice outfit, but they can't tell me I look good. I'm just asking. 86635. For truth.

Take one more call. James in Charlotte, thanks for calling the line of fire. Yes, I I actually agree with uh everything you just said. But Um I I I think it is kind of a witch hunt, as as you said, because For example, if he did say you have to sleep with me to move up in your job. That is sexual harassment.

Yep. But saying looking there looking good there, girl, that could go either way. I think it all depends on how it is said. For instance, I tell co-workers and other women, you know, hey, you look nice today. And it's just all about how you say it.

And they never feel threatened or anything like that. But also at the same time, I ask them, like, Do you mind if I said I'd just say Google's nice today? You know, there's that, but if you'd like me to keep that to myself, I can. Yeah, yeah. Again, it all depends on the type of person you are, the type of person they are, the kind of relationship you have.

if if you've known each other for a period of time and you've always conducted yourselves with the the highest ethic you know Then all those things can be fine and appropriate. Why wouldn't you be surprised if there was a witch hunt? to take down O'Reilly.

Well like I said, if he did say you gotta sleep with me to move up, that's yeah, of course. A hundred percent. No no justification, no no minimizing Bill O'Reilly has, um, he's known as a controversial guy. He will say. things to upset the Liberals or let's say upset That's the right wing that most people won't agree with.

Bill O'Reilly is known as someone who you know, we'll we'll say what he means and we'll pay it out. just no matter what.

So if he said, you know, looking good girl, I don't think anybody should necessarily be surprised with what he said.

Okay. said even worse things in the past about let's say the veterans or stuff like that. Got it. Got it. Yeah.

Yeah, I I do. If if he speaks his mind on T V. He's going to speak his mind probably in private as well. Hey, James, I appreciate you weighing in. Listen, let me just say a few things.

And I'm writing an article about this, probably posted tonight or tomorrow. about the subject. just to think it through with folks. But Let me say once more. that I believe that that we should treat one another with respect.

and that we should take the higher road. When there are two options, a lower road and a higher road, take the higher road. And act as people of dignity, especially. Especially if you claim to be a believer, if you claim to be a follower of Jesus. then by all means, by all means, conduct yourself with with certain dignity.

And women, don't try to present yourselves to draw sexual attention from the opposite sex. If you're married, you have your own relationship with your husband, but Don't. Don't demean yourself in doing that, and don't be a stumbling block to others. If you've been blessed with a beautiful body, then don't make that a curse. And don't make it a stumbling block for others.

All right. But That being said, Uh We need to stand up to the extreme political correctness of this day. with sobriety. say hey sexual harassment let's work together against it sexism, oversex culture, let's address it at the same time. Let's be realistic.

Let's be sober.

So in my poll, 6% of women and 14% of men said yes, it's sexual harassment. 26% of women and 54% of men said it's not. And that's because the men, higher proportion on Twitter. We write that. It's the line of fire with your host, activist, author, international speaker, and theologian Dr.

Michael Brown. Your voice of moral, cultural, and spiritual revolution. Get into the line of fire now by calling 866-34Truth. Here again is Dr. Michael Brown.

Oh, okay, before I switch over to France, let me just clarify something on the polling data that I did. We've got on Facebook About 530. Thousand followers there. And on uh YouTube It's it's much smaller. YouTube is what?

Twenty-five 25%. But it's much easier to do a poll on Twitter.

Alright, and we've got about 30,000 plus subscribers to our YouTube channel. But it's much easier to do a poll on Twitter.

Because you you simply Post your question. It has to be within a certain number of characters. And then you can give up to four options. And you only have so much space for each of those options.

So, what that means. is that you can get an instant response tallied. On Facebook, we've got to read through the responses and then compile where people come out. On Facebook, we're probably about 55% female, 45% male. I only know this because they're demographics.

Just go on, it tells you. Although our largest single demographic is probably men. 18 to 35, thereabouts. And then right after that, women, 18 to 35.

So we've got a good number of young people there, which is positive. But Twitter. Is is seems to be much more male presence than female presence on Twitter. And I'm looking for the poll which for the moment seems to have disappeared here on twitter uh here we go here we go So 32% of the responders were female so far. And the other sixty eight percent male.

So out of the 32% female who responded. 26% said no, it's not sexual harassment if a woman wears a low-cut top to work and a man checks her out. 6% of the women said it's sexual harassment.

So the no's were more than four times the amount of the yeses. All right. So over seventy five percent of the responses if you if you multiply it, right? Uh over 75% said no. Of the men, they were at 68%.

Uh 14% said yes, it is sexual harassment. 54% said no. It's not sexual harassment.

Now notice this, notice this. It's slightly under. 75% of the men who said it's not. It's slightly over 75% of the women who said it's not.

So the women. Slightly higher percentage say no, it's not sexual harassment.

Now, why is that the case? Wouldn't you have thought? that the women would have been more prone To say this is sexual harassment? What's my interpretation of the poem? My interpretation is that the women are saying consciously, yeah, If you dress like that you know what you're doing.

And you even want the attention. And the men are saying Look, I've got to treat women with more respect. And I don't want to be sexist in my answer, hence. The men are are responding with more sensitivity, shall we say. or care About the sexual harassment charge than the women.

Again, it's no surprise that that happened. for the reasons stated.

Now I could be wrong, but that's my guess. Men want to be more careful in how they answer this. Women are being more candid. Again, we're only looking at 9,500 votes so far, and it's my interpretation of. data on a page, but I found it very, very interesting.

Kiki wrote, that's why women wear revealing stuff where they admit or not, so men will look at them. Greg said, yes, but do women have a responsibility of dressing themselves properly? Men are visual. Let's be real. Susan said women should respect themselves more if they want to be respected.

Sean, both sides have a responsibility. Yeah, just looking at some answers here. Very interesting. We'll be right back. We're going to France.

It's the line of fire with your host, Dr. Michael Brown. Get into the line of fire now by calling 866-34TRUTH. Here again is Dr. Michael Brown.

Thanks for Joining us on the line of fire, 866-348-7. Eight. Eight. Four. Yeah, Matt, too much information.

Got it in terms of certain outfits, all clear. All right, all right. We're switching over. We're switching now from sexual harassment issues to French. politics.

So what happens in the elections yesterday, and not surprisingly, Is that Marine Le Pen, the National Front Party, which is normally branded extreme right. Extreme right wing. Nationalist Party. She got 21.7% of those 22% of the votes. And Markon.

who was from a so-called centrist moderist party. He got slightly higher, about 23% of the vote. And you had other candidates, but the so-called mainstream candidates, the ones that would be the equivalent of our Republicans and Democrats. Did not make it for the first time in decades and decades and decades. Neither of them represent who will now join in the runoffs.

So you have now the two top candidates.

Now, according to what's expected, With another conservative candidate saying, throw the votes towards Marcon. We don't want Le Pen to get in. It seems that Marine Le Pen will lose.

Now anything could happen. there could be another horrific terror attack and that could further shift opinion. But let's try to analyze this. You say, well, what happened to the other candidates?

Well, the main party, Socialist Party, led by the current president. is uh is terribly Unpopular. The party that would be kind of the conservative equivalent of the Republican Party. That that should have done well. in many ways that should have done well, Because it would stand for French security, stand against radical Islam.

Without having some of the extremist leanings that the Le Pen family has been known for over the years, but. Check this out. Personal scandals brought them down. Yep. So the looking at a headline on Breitbart, Francis Fallon leads establishment conservatives to historic defeat.

Former Premier Francois Felonne was one of the early favorites to become President. This is uh AP News from France. But in the end, he led the French right to his historic defeat as a fake job scandal engulfed his campaign. Isn't that amazing? You're talking about potentially the fate of a nation.

You're talking about the direction of a nation for years to come. You're talking about issues of security. and economic strength. and relationship to the rest of Europe and the rest of the world. And perhaps Philonne could have been the candidate.

to lead the way. with a strong conservative stance. But personal scandals destroyed the whole thing. You say, on what level? Are you ready?

The former Prime Minister was charged in March with misuse of public funds over the employment of his British-born wife Penelope. as a parliamentary assistant for fifteen years. That That's the fiasco. That's the scandal. It was a severe blow to the 63-year-old who clinched the nomination for the Republican Party.

in November by presenting himself as unsullied by the scandals that surrounded his rival and former boss, ex-President Sarkozy. But his failure to win a place in the May 7th presidential runoff also marks the first time since 1958. that France's main right wing party has failed to make it to the second round. It was said to be a fight which the right could not lose and which has ended in a lamentable fiasco. said Jean Francois Cope, Cope, not sure the pronunciation.

form a head of the union for a popular movement. has been swept away. The right has just experienced its April 21st, he said, referring to April 21st, 2002, when socialist candidate Lionel Juspin was knocked out in the first round by Jean-Marie Le Pen, whose daughter Maureen. will take on centrist Emmanuel Macron in. two weeks time.

Did I call him Marcone instead of Microne? I think I did. For Philon, the devastating allegations that Penelope had earned 680,000 euros for a fictional role were first reported by this newspaper in January. He denied things, and anyway, that's what hurt him. even more.

Isn't that wild? One scandal could sink a party. and a leading politician. Yeah, understandably so. But you've got these major national issues and that's what sinks things.

How bad? is Marine Le Pen. Her Uh opposition. is a man who is much more liberal who will not try to pull France out of the European Union. who in that sense is less nationalistic Will he deal properly with radical Islam, one of the major problems in France?

Excellent chance that he will not decisively deci uh d uh despite what he says.

So, then what's wrong with Marine Le Pen? Is she being told? hard and feathered because of what her father did. You said, well, well, what did her father do?

Well, he's a Holocaust denier. He has been Uh fined multiple times for a Holocaust denial. He once said, quote, if you take a thousand-page book on World War II, The concentration camps take up only two pages and the gas chambers 10 to 15 lines. This is what one calls Yeah. Um Yeah, he's a known anti-Semite with some extreme views on other subjects.

So is Marine Le Pen is simply her father's daughter. There's an article on Fusion.net. Five terrifying facts about Marine Le Pen and the French far right. Number one, Marine Le Pen is her father's daughter.

Well, on the flip side On the flip side she kicked her own father out of the party. She kicked anti-Semites out of the party. She's saying, in that respect, I am not my father's daughter. Um On the other hand... She has said that extremist mosques should be shut down.

And the preachers and leaders Should excuse me. be kicked out of the country.

So let's say you've got Yeah. an immigrant, a Muslim immigrant from another country. They're in France. They are preaching violence from the pulpits of their mosque. Should they be expelled?

I've got no problem with that. If they're saying overthrow the government, you're an immigrant, another country, And you're saying let's violently overthrow the government or let us attack the the non believers, let us kill them Or you're saying after a terror attack, good, this was to the glory of Allah, good. Why shouldn't you be expelled? Why should you be able to stay? Explain that.

And and should these mosques be monitored? Yes, absolutely. I I've got no issue with that. That's just security. Doesn't matter if there's religious guise or not.

If it was a Christian Church with the same rhetoric, yes, they should be monitored. If you had some immigrant. pastor that that came into America, And they were preaching the massacre of a certain part of our population. They should be wiped out, they should be destroyed. Here's how to build bombs.

Yeah, why should they have the right to stay in the country when they are seeking to foment violence. against people within that country. The problem is that Marine Le Pen in order to come against radical Islam. Is also saying, look, we have to have equality in the way we treat Muslims and Jews. And she has said a couple of things that have really raised concerns.

One is that Jews living in France as citizens cannot have dual citizenship with Israel. They cannot have dual citizenship. If they want to stay as French citizens, they will have to drop their Israeli citizenship. That to me is an example of an extreme and unhealthy. nationalism.

She has also said that Jewish men should not wear the kippah. the head covering, yarmulka as it's called in Yiddish. they should not wear that in public. And she's going to be calling for equal sacrifices for Muslims. as well Why, this makes me wonder Are Catholic priests in France allowed to dress as priests?

Are Catholic nuns allowed to dress as nuns? Although the country is tremendously secular, it it still considers itself in certain ways Catholic. Although, as I say, it's tremendously secular in its culture and outlook. It is as humanistic a country as you'll find. But What about wearing a cross in public?

Should that be disallowed?

So my problem is in dealing with radical Islam. She's now dealing unfairly with Jews. By the way, I have a new article. If you haven't read it yet, just go to askdrbrown.org, A-S-K-D-R-Brown.org. And it's entitled Marine Le Pen and the Jews of France.

It's complicated. but clear. I'll give you my perspective when we come back. It's the line of fire with your host, Dr. Michael Brown, your voice of moral, cultural, and spiritual revolution.

Here again is Dr. Michael Brown. So Beryl Azar. the chief rabbi of Russia. has said that if the Penn gets elected, French Jews should leave.

One of my colleagues says that it's just so short-sighted. The French right is not the enemy. of French Jews. But then I pointed out that, hey, Jews get scapegoated all the time. If things go bad in the country, it does not take much.

For sentiments to turn against the Jewish people. They're good. Oh, they're the cause of it. They're the guilty ones. They control the money.

They control the media. They control this. They control that. It's the Jews You'd be amazed how much ugly stuff I get I see post-it. on our YouTube channel and other places where there's public discussion going on.

Virulent, anti-Semitic, ugly, ugly stuff, and some of it from professing Christians.

So I I don't know. that I agree with Chief Rabbi Beryl Lazar. Obviously, he has his finger on the pulse of world jewelry more than I do. On the flip side, he's praising Vladimir Putin in Russia. and for the liberties and freedoms Jews have there and now?

That's interesting when there's definitely been a crackdown and religious freedom in certain other ways, especially towards evangelicals, or I should say non- Russian Orthodox Christians. in in uh the country. But he lives there. Lives there.

So he knows the situation better than I do. But should Jews leave France? I said it should be on their guard. If Marine Le Pen gets elected, be on your guard. On the one hand, she Certainly.

Could be of help to the Jewish population by fighting against radical Islam, naming it for what it is, exposing it for what it is, coming against it for what it is. Certainly. On the other hand On the other hand, Uh What if she treats Jews in an unfair way? Can't wear religious garb, you shouldn't wear head covering? Can't have dual citizenship.

That That's negative.

So some questions I raise in my article. And there's an editorial I saw after I was writing my article. in in Ha'aretz, which is a very left leaning Israeli publication. And the article said: Marine Le Pen's instinct is right, fighting an Islamic takeover requires France to shed its guilt and shame over its past. but a desire for foolish consistency means Vichy and Jewish identity are also included.

So here are my questions. Um Why shouldn't French Jews be allowed dual citizenship? Has their solidarity with Israel over the decades damaged the people of France? Has it made them any less loyal citizens? Have they plundered France to aid and abet?

Israel? And why shouldn't a Jewish man be allowed to wear a head covering? What about his beard, if that's part of his religious identification? Must he shave his beard? Two?

And again, is she is is Le Pen going to require Catholic priests and nuns not to wear their ritual attire? or Catholics in general not to wear crosses? It's not Weissing out Jews. Why not deal with radical Muslims as such without penalizing everyone else, including moderate Muslims.

So again, some questions. for Marine Le Pan and her party. Where are the Jewish terrorists in France? Why are you going to penalize Jews? While seeking to discipline, deal with Radical Muslims.

Where the Jewish terrorists in France? How many have murdered policemen in cold blood wh while shouting out pro-Israeli slogans? How many have rammed trucks into civilians, slaughtering dozens? How many have massacred scores of concert goers? How many have attacked restaurants and killed as many diners as they could?

How many have broken into magazine headquarters and butchered anti-Jewish journalists? I mean, these are all things that radical Muslims have done. Jews and none of these Jews have often been the victims.

So why put a restriction on the Jewish population? When it's radical Islam that you're after, just deal with radical Islam and ask moderate Muslims, whoever they may be, whatever number they may be, to work with you against the plague of radical Islam. After all, If you have a list of casualties, people killed by Muslims worldwide. Who's highest on the list? Would you say Christians?

Well, Christians are very high on the list. But who's highest on the list? In all likelihood, other Muslims. This happens all the time. Muslims killing Muslims.

I mean, just a few days ago in Afghanistan. Taliban recruited against an army base. They're they're uh had The army had taken out a couple of their people. and they retaliated, they somehow got army uniforms, they pulled up to the base while the soldiers were stopping for prayer because they're fellow Muslims. And they slaughtered them.

It was a it was a long gun battle and explosives and things like that.

Something like a hundred soldiers massacred. A few Taliban casualties. Muslims killing Muslims shouldn't. Shouldn't the Shouldn't the Uh The moderate Muslims say we want to stand against this as well, unless they're not really moderate. Look.

Once You have a strongly nationalist government. It is very easy when things go bad. It's a scapegoat, a minority group in your midst. And all two happen uh and by the way, it can go with extreme left, extreme right. But but all too often All too often Jews have gotten scapegoated.

You know, during the Black Plague in Europe that killed as much as one-third of the population, who got blamed for starting it? Jews! Poison in the wells. Allegedly using hearts of animals and elements from the Lord's Supper and making some mixture to poison the wells. Did Jews die too?

Yes. Did they die in this high number? No. Why not? Hygiene, Jewish law.

Various things b b that they practised that kept them a little safer. They die too. No, they poison the wells. And in Germany, the rise of the Nazis, the Jews, it's their fault. Why is the economy crashing?

Why is our country in such a mess? It's the Jews!

So that's my concern in France. If Maureen Le Pen was elected, She could do good in certain ways. In terms of working against radical Islam and the Islamization. of France? She could potentially Uh do good for her country by pulling them out of the European Union.

The the the Brexit of of France.

Someone said it's a bad thing.

Okay, that can that can be debated. But for sure, if she was elected with her current policies, even if she is not her father's daughter, even if she abhors anti-Semitism. The hypernationalism is dangerous and destructive. And because of that, I have concerns. Again, Read my latest article at askdrbrown.org.

Oh, and we've got new videos up for you in our digital library. Let me check really quickly and just see our latest. We've got always new articles. Um And let's just see here in our digital library what's new. We've got the article on Marine Le Pen.

Oh, got an article. uh video what happens to the baby when daddy becomes mommy An article, or a university is producing, spoiled brats, a video, what is the best English Bible translation? And a bunch of others.

So check these out. Is the Pre-Trib Rapture Biblical? All recent videos or articles on our website, askdrbrown.org. Remember, friends, if you don't get my e-newsletter, sign up for today. I want to send you a fascinating free e-book, Seven Secrets of the Real Messiah.

You get it. When you sign up for our newsletter, do it at askdrbrown.org. From the elections in France to charges of sexual harassment against Bill O'Reilly. We've got you covered right here. It's time for the line of fire with your host, activist, author, international speaker, and theologian, Dr.

Michael Brown, your voice of moral, cultural, and spiritual revolution. Michael Brown is the director of the Coalition of Conscience and president of Fire School of Ministry. Get into the line of fire now by calling 866-34 Truth. That's 866-34 Truth. Here again is Dr.

Michael Brown. Hey, I've got an honest, honest appeal here. All right. No mockery. no intent to disparage whatsoever.

But if you are an atheist or agnostic or simply a strong believer in Darwinian evolution. Could you give me your perspective on something? We had the Earth Day March on Science, Science March, so-called, on Saturday.

Some say it was a great success, others say it was self-defeating and even self-mocking. We'll come to that in a little while. But I I I saw a video today and I posted it on our Ask Doctor Brown Facebook page. And if you consider yourself an agnostic or an atheist or simply a proponent of Darwinian evolution, I'd love to hear from you today. Again, this is not to mock.

This is not to disparage, it's to ask an honest question, 866-348-7884. And we've got a bunch of things to talk about. Donald Trump almost completing 100 days in office. How is he doing? Is he keeping his promises or not?

How far have Democrats gone to be the party of Death. A bunch of other things we want to talk about. I've been talking the first hour about elections in France and sexual harassment issues with Bill O'Reilly, but we'll mention a few things in that regard as well. But here's the video, and here's where I'd love to hear from someone. who is a naturalist, who does not believe in God the Creator or in any type of intelligent design.

of the universe.

So it's a video about the pufferfish. This little fish that is barely visible in its environment. Yet the male And this is BBC Earth produced this. It's not produced by a Christian ministry saying, wow, look at this. It's BBC Earth.

Here is this little fish, the male. And over one week it barely barely Sleeps because he has to do this. in a certain period of time was the current mess things up. He makes this amazing design. All he has is his fins, so he.

He slides across the bottom of the water there, so the bed of the sea, wherever he is. And he looked at this. He makes this remarkable. image. With with um grooves coming in and out and and mounds higher and lower.

I mean, you'd think. You have to design this. You'd have to step back and look at this. He's got a little brain, he's a little fish, he's got a little brain.

somehow is able to make the mathematical calculations. And then, if he's got like if he sees little shells and things like that, he picks them up with his mouth, but then he uses them to smooth out grooves and things like that. And he does it. he does it so as to get the attention of the female. Uh Can you explain to me if you believe in Darwinian evolution?

If you're an atheist or agnostic or simply believe in Darwinian evolution, can you explain to me How this tiny little fish or this tiny brain and this fish It's able to make all these mathematical calculations. How it is. that this now attracts the female. Who figured this out? And and what were they doing to attract each other In all the millions of years that it took to evolve this behavior.

And and it How can it be explained without some type of intelligent design? I'm talking just academically, intellectually. I don't see a logical answer. If you have one, give me a call. And I mentioned that, not just because I saw the video today and posted it.

Nancy sent it to me, then I posted it on our Ask Dr. Brown page, but also because a lot of what happened in the whole march in science has got nothing to do with science. It has to do with ideology. Ideology We'll be right back. It's the line of fire with your host, Dr.

Michael Brown. Get into the line of fire now by calling 866-34TRUTH. Here again is Dr. Michael Brown. Let me just type this question out.

As for evolving wings, how do we survive? while we evolve them. Yeah, I I'm interacting during the break with a gentleman who is answering my question on Facebook. This is Michael Brown. You're listening to the line of fire 866-348-7884.

And I asked the question about this puffer fish in the video. You've got to watch it. It's at the Ask Dr. Brown Facebook page. I said this.

How can anyone watch this video and not recognize that God designed this fish? its tiny brain just evolved with the ability to do this, and it just so happens that the female fish is attracted to this? And how, pray tell, does the next generation learn to carry on this artful legacy? Or is it just is instinct?

So one answer was was this Evolution is about adaptation to the environment. Science has shown that animals naturally adapt. Over a million years of adapting, animals will change based on the environment, so it's not unreasonable to believe that this animal evolved exactly as it is. The female fish will be much like humans. We are attracted to any capability of survival and flourishing and passing on a strong genetic code.

So I replied, how did these fish survive and multiply while the male was learning how to attract the female? And how does this tiny brain figure out the precise mathematical calculations to create such a balanced design? It's like saying we can evolve one day so that we jump to the moon. I think not. And the gentleman who actually Uh was talking about theistic evolution.

So seeing God involved, but seeing an evolutionary process. Yes, they're evolutionary processes within a species. Modification within the species. I think we all agree on that. That's how God designed things and that's the ability within a species, but not to get from one species to the next or not to create life in the first place or to create the universe in the first place.

Yeah, someone said, yeah, the Big Bang did a lot. But yeah, the repercussions of the Big Bang is that billions of years later you have this fish with a tiny brain who can do these mathematical calculations and produce something amazing. Mm-hmm.

So The gentleman was having a civil dialogue. And he's he's explaining His answer to my question. How did these fish survive and multiply while the male was learning how to attract the female? How does this tiny brain figure out the precise mathematical calculations to create such a balanced design? It's like saying we could evolve one day so that we jump to the moon.

I think not. He replied, it's all instinct. The females are attracted to the fittest for survival available to them. The same thing with humans. Female humans are attracted to wealth, health, and confidence.

Also, to say that we could evolve to jump to the moon may be a bit of a stretch, mostly because our survival doesn't call for that sort of thing. If survival of the species called for flight, I'm sure the good Lord would allow us to evolve wings. But the question is, how do we survive until we evolve the wings? No, I don't believe we could evolve wings. All right, that's number one.

I've seen no scientific reason that we could evolve wings. But number two, how do we survive while we're waiting to evolve wings? There's some predator. that is trying to devour us, that's going to wipe us out. And the only way we can get away from them is is we have to get airborne.

Well, if we so we're primitive, right? We don't have planes and all this stuff, right?

So how do we get airborne?

Well, the wings will evolve.

Well, we're no longer a species at that point. We just got eaten up. Because we couldn't survive. And and or the well no, you hide in caves.

So we're going to evolve wings while hiding in caves? And what do the wings evolve out of? I'm here, I'm flapping. I'm sitting in my desk in my studio. I'm flapping, but I flap a lot.

I can keep flapping for a year. I can flap all my life and my kids could flap and their kids could flap. We still don't have wings.

So how do we survive? You see the problem.

So again, I'm not being facetious. Being facetious. Um I'm asking for a naturalistic explanation to this because, as I look at it, I see none. And why you say, well, the females are attracted to the males that do this, but why would a female be attracted to patterns of the ground? Wha look at that Wow Why aren't the sharks attracted to that pattern?

He must be really good, tasty, let's eat him. He must be a really capable little fish. Why aren't fish of other species attract why are only the females of that species attracted to that design? Trust me, you got to check out this video. You can see it again.

on the Ask Dr. Brown Facebook page, A-S-K-D-R-Brown on Facebook. And it's gotten just on my page, it's gotten, I don't know, well, I don't think I can see how many views it's gotten on my page. But it's gotten, uh overall since it's been posted, like 26 million views. All right, and it's again about the puffer fish.

And it's posted by BBC Earth.

So that leads me now to the subject of science. I've been reading the writings of some scientific thinkers. And they have been downplaying the March for Science. Either scientists or folks who engage with scientific thinking. William Briggs, writing on the stream, said this.

I'm pleased to report the Asinine March for quote science. has been a dud. Organizers lit the fuse of what they thought was going to be an enormous stick of dynamite. Wait till you hear the boom, honey But what they got was a tiny pop from a damp ladyfinger pop. No exclamation, Mark.

The Independent quoted some guy called Peter Lipke who said, I'm a science professor. This prep the reader signalized signaling some solid science was on his way. Lippy continued: The current administration has shown complete disregard for facts and the truth.

Well, a lot of this. is a reaction against Donald Trump downplaying the human element of climate change or the global crisis of climate change. And I want to make perfectly clear that I am a total non-expert on the question of climate change. If you want to get the top 10 million people to talk to about climate change, I'm not in that list.

Okay? The question is not: is there climate change? The question is, how much is being caused by human beings? and how severe a problem is it? As followers of Jesus, I believe we should be good stewards of the earth.

Just like if you inherit something, you're going to pass it on to the next generation, you want to pass it on in the best possible way to your kids, grandkids, absolutely. And think in a multi-generational way? Absolutely. And the book of Revelation even speaks against those who destroyed the earth.

So healthy environmentalism? Sure. Tree hugging? Come on. The question is how much?

How much of the so-called Science March was about real science and how much Was it about? pushing various ideologies.

Well, here's an article on Pink News from the UK. Yes, pink as in Gay. The headline says, Queer Trans Man Speaks at the March for Science. One of the speakers at the March for Science on Saturday was a transgender queer man. This is being reported by Joseph Patrick McCormick.

Thousands took to the streets of Washington, D.C., as well as other cities around the world. to demonstrate against what they say is an assault on science and facts. Kellen Baker, a senior fellow with American Progress, spoke in Washington, D.C. about data and how it can be used to tell a story or provide a narrative. We'll have a story.

Mine is that I'm a public health geek and a policy wonk. I'm also a queer transgender man.

So what exactly does that mean for us? Let's parse that. A queer transgender man, so He Is she? He is born female. but identifies as male now.

in dresses as male. presents as male maybe even had sex chain surgery. Don't know. But born female. Then queer.

What would that mean?

Well at least gay, if not beyond.

So perhaps As a Transgender man now, this individual is attracted to men. You said, well why not? Stay a woman and be attracted to men. Oh, that shows you don't understand you're transphobic.

Okay. Adding, so he said science is not neutral on political issues. Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. Science is about science. Science is not about Politics in less the politics directly intersect with science.

For example, Science has nothing to say. about whether we should build a wall to keep out illegal immigrants. Science could say This is the type of wall that would be the safest. This is the type of wall that would provide the most protection. This is the type of wall that would be the most long-lasting.

This is the type of wall that would be the most difficult to breach. But it can't say whether you should build a wall or not. Science could identify This is someone who is legitimately intersex, who has male body but with a mix of female chromosomes or a a a def chromosomal defect that makes it important male or female. Science can tell us that. Science can tell us.

with her man who identifies as a woman. She'd be able to use the ladies' bathroom. And in fact, it reminds me of a debate I saw with Richard Dawkins and John Lennox some years ago. I only watched the beginning of it, but. Dawkins made this ridiculous statement about science and religion.

I'll come to it on the other side of the break. Stay right there. You're listening to the line of five. Change the world. Change the world.

Give us strict to always do what's right. It's the line of fire with your host, Dr. Michael Brown, your voice of moral, cultural, and spiritual revolution. Here again is Dr. Michael Brown.

Thanks for joining us on the line of 5866-348. 7. Eight, eight, four.

So I do want to get your take. Donald Trump, we're coming to his first 100 days. How's he doing? If you voted for him. Is he living up to your expectations?

Are you giving him a thumbs up? If you didn't vote for him, is he confirming your worst fears? Or are you surprised? By how he's leading 866. three four eight seven eight eight four.

All right. Uh back to science for a moment. This is a statement made by quote a queer transgender man. at the March for Science. with the Science March in Washington DC on Saturday.

Yeah. He said science is not neutral on political issues. Advocacy is not a dirty word. Quote, Science is objective, but science is not neutral. The poet Dante wrote that the hottest places in hell are reserved for those who remain neutral in moral crisis.

We cannot pretend we are above the fray. According to the diversity statement of the March for Science, of course there had to be a diversity statement. How utterly scientific. Sarcasm. Fully intended?

Quote, people who care about science are an intersectional group embodying a diverse range of races, sexual orientations, gender identities, abilities, religions, ages, socioeconomic and immigration statuses.

So it has made judgment calls now. It has made judgment calls about gender identities. It has made judgment calls. We, the March organizers, represent and stand in solidarity with historically underrepresented scientists and science advocates.

Well, hang on. Whoa, help me here. Help me here. It is we are told, the overwhelming number of scientists who believe that human beings are causing global warming and it's dangerous. And it is a small minority and a vocal minority who sing bogus, bogus, bogus.

There's been manipulation of data. There's been exaggeration. Things have not Yeah, uh gone according to the predictions and the etc. Even things are reversing in some other ways, so it's false. And where there is global warming taking place, you can't say it's caused by people.

Okay. Well then, why aren't you standing with them? Why would positions like that have been completely out of place? I thought you're standing in solidarity with historically underrepresented scientists and science advocates. It seems...

that you are standing in solidarity with extreme left-wing views. Nothing to do with science. Nothing to do with science. The former Atheist, now deceased, Anthony Flew, I became a theist. before passing away.

was a great champion of atheism for decades, one of the leading Atheists in the world. That uh As he explained his coming to theism and why he did. one of the things he explains is what science can and cannot say. Science cannot say. That woman has a beautiful face.

'Cause that's subjective. Science can say the woman's face is well proportioned. Signs can say the woman's eyes are deep blue. Science can say that woman's hair is extremely thick, But science cannot say The woman has a beautiful face, or that's a beautiful sunset. Because that is not a scientific evaluation, that is an aesthetic.

Evaluation. Yeah. You're right, Matt, but that's that's another subject.

Okay. So I'm watching this debate, Dawkins versus John Lennox, Richard Dawkins vs. John Lennox. And John Lettucks is from Ireland. And he has PhD in mathematics and PhD in science, I believe.

And he teaches at Oxford, I think. but he's Oxford and Cambridge, educated, brilliant man, multilingual. And when I had him on the air a few years back, he was in the studio because he was speaking at an apologetics conference in Charlotte, North Carolina. And they're full of joy as well, and a very caring man and an unashamedly Christian man. I mean, I wish I had literally one-tenth of his scientific knowledge.

I could do really well in debates that. Probably one hundredth of his scientific knowledge would be a massive boost from where I am. But man, one-tenth, I'd debate any scientist or atheist out there if I just had more ammunition in that regard. Um And and he's he's ridiculing the idea. John Lennox is that the Universe.

just came into being and human life just came into being by by the freak products as the freak products of random evolutionary processes. And and Dawkins had made this statement that concepts like vicarious atonement, are completely unscientific. I only watched it that one time and only part of it.

So I don't know if Dawkins has made similar comments. or how it came up if it came up the rest of the debate. But I thought, what in the world are you talking about? Vicarious atonement is a totally theological and spiritual concept. Saying that, God can allow someone to suffer for another person's sins.

and bring that person forgiveness and redemption.

So vicarious atonement is substitutionary atonement.

So Jesus takes our place dying on the cross. Right?

That's vicarious atonement. Substitutionary atonement. I'm guilty. I deserve the penalty. Jesus pays it for me.

He suffers. in my place. He pays the debt on my behalf. And through what he did. I'm forgiven.

I'm freed. That is vicarious atonement. Dawkins said this is a completely unscientific idea, paraphrase his words. I think what. What do you mean scientific?

Science does not intersect with that. Science does not intersect. With the idea of God? All right. I mean, unless it could be demonstrated scientifically that a God or a deity does not exist.

Science does not intersect with that. Science does not intersect with the concept of human sin. Science intersects with aspects of human behavior. Is this behavior obsessive, compulsive? Is this behavior learned?

What can be done to modify this behavior? Is this behavior healthy or unhealthy? Science can ask many of those questions and answer some of them. But science has no Category about sin. Guilt?

It can talk about the emotions one experiences while feeling guilty or something, but it has no category for this. No category. And the idea of someone paying for the sins of someone else. It transcends science. It does not intersect with science.

It's in a different world from science. When Dawkins says it's unscientific, Again, I don't know the exact word he used, but it was... Very close to that. May have been that word. What Dawkins is saying is, I as a scientist, reject that idea, I as a scientist, Find that idea unacceptable.

I, as a scientist, find that idea morally repugnant or whatever. I, as a scientist, reject that because it sounds like Christianity, and I reject Christianity. That's all he is saying. That's all he could. Say Sigh out loud together.

So, a lot of the so-called March for Science was not about science, it was about ideology. And I've read other scientists who said that that It rejects On non scientific grounds, The ideologies it rejects, so is a march against science more than a march for. Science. We come back. Donald Trump.

How is he? Doing. in his first 100 days. It's the line of fire with your host, activist, author, international speaker, and theologian Dr. Michael Brown.

Your voice of moral, cultural, and spiritual revolution. Get into the line of fire now by calling 866-34TRUTH. Here again is Dr. Michael Brown. Thanks for joining us on the line of fire today.

Donald Trump. Almost completing 100 days in office. How is he doing so far? Moments ago, literally moments ago, I posted a Twitter poll. asking the question.

How is he doing in your opinion? And I just I just gave four Options, that's the max you can give, which were. Uh excellent. Pretty good? Pretty bad.

Terrible. All right, that was my poll question.

Now, why is it not appearing as a poll here? Yeah. Uh no.

Okay. Hopefully it will. 866-34TRUTH. What do you think? How is he doing so far?

Did you vote for him? Did you not vote for him? That's obviously going to uh... influence how you think he's doing. I'm looking at an article on CBS News.

Has Trump kept his promises for the first hundred days of his administration? And I'm looking at an article in the Washington Examiner. By Byron York, Trump's Hundred Days, an Executive Success. And then on the Daily Wire, we're nearing day 100. How's Trump doing so far on keeping his?

promises so um eager to You get a C. those results, but why is this not appearing as a As a poll. On Twitter. That's odd. I'm gonna have to...

Perhaps redo that. All right, so what's your take? What's your take? Do you think he's doing great, but the secular media, liberal media is blasting him day and night, hence? Hence, it looks bad?

Do you think he's making a joke of the presidency? Do you think finally someone's standing up doing the right thing? Do you think it's really a mixed bag? If you voted for him, is he living up to your expectations? Is he letting you down if you didn't vote for him or specifically voted against him?

Is he living up to your negative expectations? Is he surprising you in any positive ways? 866-348-7. Eight, eight, four.

Just some other political news. An article on Red State. That was posted yesterday afternoon by Terry Christoph. Democrats just confirmed. They are the party of Death.

Oh, they've done it. The Democrats have finally confirmed that they will no longer support pro-life candidates from their party. In a statement released Friday, Democratic National Committee Chairman Tom Perez said. Quote, every Democrat, like every American, should support a woman's rights to make her own choices about her body and her health. That is not negotiable and should not change city by city or state by state.

At a time when women's rights are under assault from the White House, the Republican Congress, and in states across the country, we must speak up for this principle as loudly as ever and with one voice. He had gotten lambasted by the far left wing of his party, according to this article, for supporting pro-life Democrat Heath Mellow. who's running for mayor of Omaha, Nebraska. The DNC chair had ironically enough voiced to support Formelo during a recent nationwide Unity tour. The pro-abort radicals at NARAL were having none of that, calling the DNC's support of Mello politically stupid.

There you have it. Pro-life Democrats, you've got no place in the party. That's self-evidence. to me for a while. Anyway.

Um The Actions Today, this is near our pro-choice America President Elise Hoag. The actions today by the DNC to embrace and support a candidate for office who will strip women one of the most critical constituencies of the party of our basic rights and freedom is not only disappointing, it's politically strong. Do bit. Ah.

So, Pro-Life Democrats, goodbye. Get out. We don't want you. You're not welcome. That's the message being sent.

The DNC's decision leaves pro-life Democrats in the lurch. This is especially an issue for Southern Democrats whose constituencies tend to be pro-life or at the very least favor restrictions on abortion. Democrats Keep destroying yourselves. Keep destroying yourselves. By God's grace, America is going to reject this mentality of death.

We'll be right back. It's the line of fire with your host, Dr. Michael Brown, your voice of moral, cultural, and spiritual revolution. Here again is Dr. Michael Brown.

Thanks friends for joining us on the One Fire. This is Michael Brown, delighted to be with you. 866-348-7884. Four. By the way, on the flip side with Democrats, Michelangelo Sigdarilli.

Or Michelangelo Signorelli writing on HuffingtonPost.com, Queer Voices. Are some Democrats going soft on LGBTQ rights in the age of Trump?

So not for everyone living in North Carolina, not only is there continued outrage over the partial repeal of HB2, which Gay activists say was no real repeal at all. They're angered with Roy Cooper, who was elected, with one of the major pushes being to get rid of HB2.

So, not only so, to add insult to injury for signarilli. there is the possibility that the Democratic Governors Association is actually going to hold a meeting in North Carolina, a policy conference in North Carolina. How could they do that? That would be rewarding North Carolina. We shall see how these things play out.

Will there be a pushback, a backlash against the LGBTQ extremism?

So Donald Trump, how's he doing? CBS News says Trump kept his promises for the first 100 days of his administration. He laid out 100-day plan to make America great again in October. He promised to work with Congress to introduce the following broader legislative measures. and fight for their passage within the first hundred days of his administration.

Ten measures were. 1. Middle Class Tax Relief and Simplification Act. 2. And the Offshoring Act.

3. American Energy and Infrastructure Act. 4. School Choice and Education Opportunity Act. 5.

Repeal and Replace Obamacare Act. 6. Affordable Child Care and Elder Care Act. 7. End Illegal Immigration Act.

8. Restoring Community Safety Act. 9. Restoring National Security Act. 10.

Clean up Corruption in the Washington Act.

Now, I just have a question. Would anyone? Even Donald Trump. Think that realistically. Realistically, they could Pull this off.

Would anyone think that in a hundred days you could pull up just there's no way you get all that through? Congress.

Okay. Oh For his part, Donald Trump told the Associated Press last week that he shouldn't necessarily be held accountable in these promises because much of the foundation has been laid. Things came up. I'll give you an example. I didn't put Supreme Court judge on the 100-day plan and I got a Supreme Court judge.

Judge.

So April 29th is. the 100th day in office. There's an evaluation here about how is he doing that comes out, you know, this basically the way it's going to be is the liberal news sites say he's not doing well. And the conservative website says doing well. basically, that's my just glancing at a number of articles today.

So the Washington Examiner, an executive success. That's how it rates his first hundred days. On the executive action front, Trump has kept a significant number. Oh, his promises. Campaign.

He promised to begin the process of selecting a Supreme Court justice. Gorsuch is now on the court. He promised to withdraw from the Trans-Pacific Partnership. As president, he did it. He promised to require that for every new federal regulation, two existing regulations must be eliminated.

As president, he did it. He promised to lift the Obama-Clinton roadblocks in the Keystone pipeline. He did it. He promised to remove Begin removing the more than 2 million criminal illegal immigrants. He's doing it.

And then it evaluates the others. Let's just see before I go to the phones. Ben Shapiro, Daily Wire.

Now I'd say this would be a pretty objective account because Ben's a strong conservative. And he was not never Trumper, but strongly opposed Trump in many ways. And by the way, just looking at a poll that says 96% of those who voted for Trump said they'd vote for him again. And interestingly, With all the negative press coming his way, and with the gaffes, and with his press secretary, Sean Spicer. Messing up at times and things like that.

What's fascinating. What's fascinating is that a recent poll said that if he ran against Hillary Clinton, he'd beat her today 43% to 40%, which means the percentage has even gone up. The percentage, because remember, he lost the popular vote but won the Electoral College.

So there's even been a shift. And maybe the reason is people realizing Hillary Clinton would have been an absolute disaster. And Trump's being Trump, the good and the bad. Interesting. Interesting.

How has Trump done? Let's see what Ben Shapiro has to say.

So he's got his list on cleaning up government. Uh First, propose a constitutional amendment to impose term limits on all members of Congress. No, he hasn't done it. Second, a hiring freeze on all federal employees. Yes.

Then lifted it. Third requirement that for every new federal Regulation 2 must be abolished to existing, done it.

So let's see. I'm just I'm not going to go through every one here. He's got it. No, hasn't done it yes, but lift it. Yes.

Yes. Yes, but undercut by his own administration. No. which complete ban on foreign lobbyists raising money for American elections. on protecting American workers.

Yeah. Although not totally clear in terms of let's say yes, yes, no, yes, yes. Just looking at this, it's okay mixed, but comes out with a lot of yeses that he has. done a lot of what he's promised. That's interesting.

Trump knows he hasn't fulfilled his largest campaign promise to easily fix government with the brilliant skill of a businessman. And that's why he blamed the presence of his 100-day plan on somebody. Yes, you really said that, but here's the bottom line: it's all too early to tell how Trump is doing.

Some of his actions have been terrific, some have been garbage, some haven't taken place.

Some of his rhetoric has been useful, more hasn't. The bag is mixed. Anyone who tells you anything different is selling you something. That sounds like a fair evaluation, as I expected it would be. 866-348-7877.

884. Let's go to Gerald and Lexington. Welcome to the line of fire. Yeah. Oh.

Very much, and I would agree. You stole my fire a little bit. I was going to name some of those things you named off. But he is definitely doing a great job. And if I may say, some of some people may like not like this out there, but honestly, I just just my opinion.

And I just think business wise, he's doing a great job. He just knows and I think Really, the honestly, I think the best businessmen in the world are from New York. And I'm from there originally, so maybe I got a bias, maybe so. I don't care for their attitudes up there, but they are great businessmen. And as a little side note, You're talking about the Democratic Party.

I've always said the D stand for death, the death of the unborn, the death of marriage, the death of God and now the death of gender. And they are fulfilling it big time. Party of death, just like. Devil came to kill, steal, and destroy. They're doing it.

And I hate to say it. Um but it's that's a fact. Absolutely. that do not support the radical agenda, it does raise a question because many say, well, I disagree with Republicans on this and this and this, but the agenda of the Democratic Party is increasingly radical.

So Gerald, give me one example. Obviously, you're a Trump supporter. Give me one example of where you think Trump has made good business decisions. The first one is the Keystone oil pipeline. That's the first one.

That is That they talked about it going through because environmental issues. Have you ever seen a map of all the pipelines in the United States? It is unbelievable. Where It's it's a spider ramp of pipelines.

So that was just a big lie. about what environmental issues, whatever.

So that, to me, Because of energy, we're trying to shoot for Energy America more so. And to me, that was the A number one first thing he did. I think that was A number one, business-wise. I would say that would be a number one. All right.

Hey, I appreciate the call. Thank you for weighing in clearly. And hey, I'm a New Yorker, so I understand about the good business and I understand about the attitude. 866-348-7884. There's an article on the stream, stream.org, from Rachel Del Guadiz.

Not sure I pronounced the name correctly. But what else is new? 11 Ways Trump has rolled back government regulations in his first 100 days. As he reaches his 100th day in the White House on April 29th, he will have worked with Congress to rescind more regulations using the Congressional Review Act than any other president. According to Representative Doug Collins in Georgia, we're excited about what we're doing so far.

We've done more than ever has been done in the history of Congress with the CRA, the Congressional Review Act. That's the tool Trump and lawmakers are using, allowing Congress to repeal executive branch regulations. Once the House and Senate passed the joint revolution, Revolution. Resolution disapproving of a particular regulation, the president signs. the measure.

Um And it gives a list of 11 regulations concerning the coal mining industry, regulations defining streams in the coal industry, regulations restricting firearms for disabled citizens, a rule governing the government contracting process, a rule covering public lands, and online. Of course, to be candid with you, I'm unfamiliar with almost every one of these resolutions here. Um but Apparently in deregulation, people are rating him well. And then let me just look at this polling data here. Americans size up Trump's first 100 days.

Let's see what polling says. We'll be right back. Oh, my conversation with alt-right folks. God, yeah, all right. Stay tuned, you're not gonna believe this.

Age the world O God of burning, cleansing flames. It's the line of fire with your host, Dr. Michael Brown. Get into the line of fire now by calling 866-34 TRUTH. Here again is Dr.

Michael Brown. So, within a few minutes on Twitter, I was accused of being an anti-white racist. and then accused of wanting to put blacks back in slavery. Oh yeah, uh-huh. Seriously.

Seriously. I'll explain in a moment. Michael Brown here. Thanks for joining us on the line of fire. Be sure.

Be sure to visit askdrbrown.org and check out my latest articles and videos. All right. You'll be equipped. You'll be encouraged. You'll be helped.

You'll be challenged. Askdrbrown.org. And do you get my weekly emails? With updates of latest videos, latest articles, or perhaps key things that are going on. If if uh for example, our our new T V broadcasts, you say, I don't know about those.

You don't know about Word on Fire? You don't know about Line of Fire T V? You don't know about how to watch in the States or around the world? Ah, you would have if you're getting the emails.

So here's how you do it. And when you sign up to get our emails, I want to send you a free e-book. I've got a fascinating e-book, Seven Secrets of the Real Messiah, based on many years of study, but put in simple, eye-opening terms. And it's free when you sign up to get my email.

So here's how you do it: you go to ask Dr. Brown, a-s-k-d-r-brown.org. And right there on the home page, just You'll see it. Get our weekly updates and free e-book. Just sign up for that.

Just take you a few seconds to do it. When you're there, check out our special resource offers as well, or find out how to become a torchbearer. And then we've got our recent articles and videos there all waiting for you. 866-348-7884. One of my recent articles asked the question.

Are universities producing spoiled brats?

So, before I get to my alt-right conversation. Let's see. Americans size up Trump's first 100 days in post-ABC polls, the Washington Post and ABC. Trump's disapproval is is fifty-three per cent All right, which getting close to this hundred days is is Much, much higher. Barack Obama says 26%.

George W. Bush, 32%. Bill Clinton, 39%. George H.W. Bush, 22.

Ronald Reagan, 19. Jimmy Carter, 18. Gerald Ford, 33%.

So it's the highest disapproval rating. for any president going back to Eisenhower.

Now, there's a simple answer for that. Two choices in my view. One, he's doing a terrible job. Two, secular media is blasting him day and night, and people have a certain perception based on that. But here's where it gets interesting.

53% see him as a strong leader, but most doubt his accomplishments, honesty and empathy. But then check this out. 88% of Trump voters think he's accomplished at least a good amount so far. But others, obviously a minority, are strongly critical.

So of Trump voters, do you approve or disapprove of the way Donald Trump is handling his job as president? Ninety-four per cent approve.

Okay. 94% approve. That's significant. 3% no opinion. Only 2%.

Disapprove.

So those who voted for him are speaking very strongly On his behalf. Again, we're early on, time will tell. But whether you voted for him or not, whether it's been a dream come true for you to for him to be present, or or the nightmare of your life. Either Way. Pray for him.

Pray for him. On my Twitter poll, which is what, 20 something minutes old?

So just getting the first few responses coming in. Uh Let's see. Where are we here? Ah, once again, it it appears as a pole and then it disappears as a pole. I'll find it.

Uh I'll I'll I'll get the data for you. But why? Phyllis says, Wonderful, fabulous, marvelous, fantastic, super grand, best ever, couldn't be better, superb, delightful, excellent, five stars.

Okay, someone else says can we choose eh? But we'll get those results for you. It's just, again, out of curiosity. But my dialogue... with some folks on the alt-right.

Oh, very, very interesting. Ah.

One gentleman said this about the anti-white Jewish activists. Dr. Michael Brown supports ethno-nationalism for Israel. But not for whites. And I mentioned this the first time in my life, I've been called an anti-white Jewish activist.

And then moments later, I'm told I want to re-enslave blacks. Seriously, from someone else.

So what's fascinating Was folks were responding to an article I wrote a few days ago. Again, you can see it at my digital library at sdrbrown.org. It's called Five Reasons Why I Categorically Reject the Alt-Right Version of Jesus. My reason is Jesus was a reconciler, not a racist. He was a servant, not a supremacist.

While not a racist, he was king of the Jews, not part of the KKK. While a devoted member of the people of Israel, he was not a hyper-nationalist. He did not equate military might with strength. That's What I wrote. Again, I nuance different points, explain things in further detail.

So based on that, I'm an anti-white Jewish activist. I support ethno-nationalism for Israel, not for whites. Israel has 20% Arab population. which is overwhelmingly Muslim. 20% Palestinian population within what is recognized as Israel.

20%. Nobody's arguing about that.

Okay. And when I say nobody, I mean the vast majority of Israelis, yeah, as long as we're living peacefully, that's fine. As long as we don't have a Jewish state. It's the only one on the planet.

So it means that you need a Jewish majority. But it's the only place on the planet. It it and it's nothing to do with race. Right. be because uh or or or a skin color or ethnicity because they're Jews from all around the world.

So it's it's it's race but not ethnicity, you could say, and it's religion as well. But you can be a secular Jew, you can be a non-believing Jew, you can be a Jewish Buddhist, you can be a practicing Muslim, you can be Palestinian. You can be Druze, you could be one of these minorities, you're perfectly welcome there. Just don't try to kill us and overthrow our country, and you're perfectly welcome here. If you're you live here for for decades, great.

You got big families, great, fine, just just don't try to kill us. That would be the position. and let us have our majority. What's that got to do with white supremacy in America? I'm all for healthy nationalism and secure borders.

But I believe we should have godly Christian values in the midst of what we do. And I I believe we continue to be a cultural melting pot. As long as you become part of America proper, embrace who we are and become part of us? One great What's the issue of your skin color? or ethnic background.

If if if we are more dark skinned in the future, more light skinned in the future, Yep. What what's that got to do with anything? as long as our fundamental values are preserved, which have nothing to do with white supremacy. You denounce ethno-nationalism for whites. Point me to an article where you advocate for open borders for Israel.

I said, white is not a nationality. I'm forced to cure borders for America and Israel, keep the terrorist murders out, for sure.

So you're saying that unlike ethnic Jews, whites do not deserve to have their own countries? And I said, you believe America should be white only? That's sick. And for example, Israelis do not believe Israel should be Jewish. Only And these folks say, Look, we're not racist We're not racist But you better believe they're espousing racist views.

And then, when I quote George Washington in a positive way in a letter he wrote to Jews. saying hey we don't tolerate bigotry and so on so it says oh well Washington's a slave owner you're trying to put blacks in slavery again Another day. in the life of yours truly. All right, friends. Join me again in tomorrow's broadcast and be sure to sign up at askdrbrown.org.

Get our emails.
Whisper: parakeet / 2025-07-05 06:12:23 / 2025-07-05 06:14:52 / 2

Get The Truth Mobile App and Listen to your Favorite Station Anytime