thanks for staying with us. i m bill o reilly. let s get right to southern california miller is joining us from santa barbara. you re not a fan of hillary clinton. i know that. how do you see there s 20 people 19 guys one lady running for the republican nomination. any of them impress you, any of them broken out yet, in your mind? well when you say 20 are you counting chris christie as seven people? no. we re not going to do any chubby jokes for the governor. i didn t do a chubby joke. you re the one who said he spoke in the round. he speaks in the round. we have 14 people. it s gop circle referred to as a howard baker dozen. it s a moot point which one they pick because i think hillary
freedom for. they are against it. i think they want to get to a point where we no longer have first amendment religious freedom rights. for example, you heard during the court case the solicitor general was asked, if they ruled the way they did, would this impact for example, the tax exempt status for institutions within a religious affiliation. he said it might. you have dormitories for married people and there s a gay married couple attending college and you say it s against our religion and you might lose whatever advantage you have for being religious in the tax arena. but it s more than that. it s about individual liberty and you made a very astute point. in the beginning, the aclu was all for individual liberty. that s why they were established. freedom of expression freedom of this freedom of that. and now the baker and that analogy that i made is very very pertinent. because my religion says i can t
freedom for. they are against it. i think they want to get to a point where we no longer have first amendment religious freedom rights. for example, you heard during the court case the solicitor general was asked, if they ruled the way they did, would this impact for example, the tax exempt status for institutions within a religious affiliation. he said it might. you have dormitories for married people and there s a gay married couple attending college and you say it s against our religion and you might lose whatever advantage you have for being religious in the tax arena. but it s more than that. it s about individual liberty and you made a very astute point. in the beginning, the aclu was all for individual liberty. that s why they were established. freedom of expression freedom of this freedom of that. and now the baker and that analogy that i made is very very pertinent. because my religion says i can t
because they are privileged. it s dividing our students. it s very divisive. there must be a reason that they want to get this they want these teachers to admit, i am a racist. they want everybody to admit it. is that because they want them to teach minority students differently? yes. i believe so. i don t want to speak for teachers or for anyone but my own observation studying this and talking to administrators. yes, they want our teachers to frame every issue at the classroom frame issues in terms of race class and gender. and so they are going to divide the students. we all hear about, we want to celebrate diversity. i m advocating we want to celebrate harmony. what is the point, then in framing everything along racial lines? are they saying that hey, because you re a minority that you deserve better grades if you don t earn them? is that what the end game here is? i don t understand what they are trying to accomplish. well honestly i don t