In what has now become known as Megyn Kelly’s infamous performance in her recent interview with Ben Shapiro, Megyn articulated some intriguing thoughts and defenses of certain individuals that merit a bit of scrutiny.
When Ben stressed the evil of some of Candace Owens’ positions, Megyn came to Candace’s defense by stating that it was “none of my business” what Candace says and does. When Ben pushed back on this, asking how this could possibly be, Megyn responded that she (Megyn) is not the “mother of the internet.” Then, when Ben got into the details of some of Candace’s positions, Megyn feigned ignorance and stated that she didn’t “have time” to watch Candace’s podcast.
This is all very intriguing. It’s a bit curious that a person who is renowned as a journalist does not have the time to investigate, or form judgments about, the positions that certain people have taken on an issue about which she herself is hosting a forum.
Years ago, Megyn interviewed Ward Churchill about his controversial beliefs on 9/11, and on America being a terrorist nation, and so on. Megyn appeared quite upset with Churchill and was pushing back on him regarding his views.
One can’t help but ask: Why was this her “business” at that time? Why did she, before that interview, have the time and desire to research what Churchill’s views were? What venues were giving Churchill a platform that allowed him to make his views widely known? Was she “the mother” of them? She must have been, since she apparently believed that Churchill’s views mattered and needed to be confronted.
It would be interesting to hear Megyn’s explanation today of why Churchill’s beliefs were her business at that time and why Candace’s beliefs today are not. Is it because, for some reason, only Cable TV matters? If something is said online, it shouldn’t matter to anyone?
This is a bit perplexing on numerous levels, especially in light of the fact that Megyn’s interview with Ben Shapiro is being watched and discussed online and Megyn is posting it on her X profile. Should all of Megyn’s content on the internet and on her X profile not be our business if we are not the fathers and mothers of the internet?
Speaking of mothers: Megyn has also come to Candace’s defense by saying that she (Megyn) is not going to criticize Candace because Candace is “a young mom. She’s under a lot of pressure.”
Absolutely fascinating. So all young moms who are under a lot of pressure should be off the hook about what they say and do? Even if their words have a lot of influence on the world? And even if that influence is malignant?
In Megyn’s world, should the female Nazi concentration camp guards Elisabeth Volkenrath and Dorothea Binz have been exempted from any criticism (and punishment) for the cruelty and torture they inflicted upon prisoners because they were young mothers? Or were they not young enough for exemption? Would the situation have been different if they were older mothers? What is the exact cut-off age where criticism of conduct can begin and end in this regard?
Also, if Irma Grese, known as “the Beautiful Beast,” who was the youngest SS guard at Auschwitz-Birkenau and other concentration camps, had been a mother, should she also have been exempted from criticism (and punishment) for her monstrous and sadistic barbarity towards prisoners? Surely she was also under a lot of “pressure.”
Speaking of young moms under pressure, Shiri Bibas had two young sons: Ariel (age 4) and Kfir (age 10 months). Hamas terrorists choked Ariel and Kfir to death. They also killed Shiri. Because they were Jews.
Unfortunately, Shiri doesn’t have the luxury of being here to muse about whether she can be the mother of the internet or not.
It is also very interesting that Megyn identifies as a Christian, and yet, with all of these recent developments, she appears to be mystifyingly uninterested and even intentionally oblivious to the clear escalation of the spiritual war that many of us, as Christians, can detect now taking place right before our eyes and especially in connection to Israel.
It is quite evident that there is a rising anti-Semitism in the world today, and that it is now not only escalating in the familiar and usual arenas, but also, troublingly enough, in the ranks of the American conservative camp. We see numerous well-known personalities on the U.S. Right, many of whom call themselves “Christian,” turning against Israel and increasing their efforts to drive a wedge between the U.S. and Israel.
All of this involves the resuscitation and escalation of Replacement Theology, which holds that the Christian Church is the new Israel and that God’s Covenant with Israel is no longer valid. This involves the attempt to separate the New Testament from the Old Testament, to take the Jewish roots out of Christianity, and to take the Jewishness out of Jesus.
Josh Hammer has very effectively explained and documented all of these developments and what many of the anti-Israel forces on the American Right are up to in this regard. And Robert Spencer, in his new book *Antisemitism: History and Myth*, reveals the sources of this rising Jew-hatred, and powerfully discredits the most common lies about Israel and the Jewish people.
As Christians, we know that, in terms of our theological understanding of the scriptures, Replacement Theology is blasphemy, and that Christ’s salvation is directly interlinked with the Jewish people and narrative. I have touched on this issue in my recent piece on Tucker Carlson’s Lies About Israel.
There is a reason why Paul stressed that God’s Covenant and promises to Israel are everlasting and have not been revoked (Romans 9–11). This is directly connected to the Christian theological perspective of the role Jews play in salvation and in Christ’s return, which Catholic convert and author Roy Schoeman powerfully explains and documents in *Salvation Is from the Jews: The Role of Judaism in Salvation History from Abraham to the Second Coming.*
And so, as Christians, it should not really be a great mystery for us what Hitler was trying to do to the Jews and what spiritual forces were propelling him and why. It should not be a great mystery to us what Islam has always been trying to do, and continues trying to do, to the Jews and why. (And this is aside from what it tries to do to Christians, for other obvious reasons.)
If Jesus Christ came into the world through the Jews, and His Second Coming will occur through them as well, which the Bible makes clear is God’s plan, then a certain evil entity might very well believe, in his hateful self-delusion, that the return of humanity’s Savior will be frustrated, distorted, and possibly even prevented if there were no Jews.
And how do you get around to there being no Jews? Nazism and Sahih Muslim 6985 have the obvious answer and solution for that.
God makes it clear in the prophecies of the Bible, in both the New and Old Testaments, that in the last days many or all of the nations of the world will rise up against Israel. But then certain things will happen, and to spare readers the long explanations—which belong in another forum after the darkness and terrible pain—the Redemption occurs.
Christians and Jews obviously believe in a different Messiah arriving, but they overall see a similar pattern in the context of Israel in the sense that things will get worse before they “get better,” so to speak.
Suffice it to say, and to say the least, in the end, the foes of Israel will not fare well.
I am saying all of this because there is clearly a rising hatred of the Jewish people and of Israel rising in the United States, and it includes a rising segment of American conservative ranks.
In a very short amount of time, these forces may very well take over the Republican Party. And then, in a very short amount of time after that, the Republicans who end up taking the White House may very well be of this Replacement Theology type. They will become the enemies of Israel, and be much harsher toward Israel than even Obama and Biden were.
There may just be something happening here that is falling in line with Biblical prophecy. And if all of this occurs, the United States will be attaching itself to something very bad. Something very evil.
And so… all of these things may matter, no? For Jews? For Christians? For Americans? For the world? For Megyn Kelly?
Megyn, a question for you: Could all of these things possibly be your business? As a journalist? As a Christian? As a human being?
Maybe it might be legitimate and important for you to find the time to tune in to people who may be extremely influential in shaping these narratives—and shaping them not for the better?
In any case, the “Christians” on the American Right, or anywhere else for that matter, who are today trying to de-Judify Christianity are, of course, not doing anything new. The Nazis tried to do the same thing with their “Positive Christianity” program, which involved their effort to remove all Jewish elements from Christianity.
As Christians, we know what they were trying to do, and why. Dietrich Bonhoeffer valiantly fought the Nazis’ blasphemous and evil efforts on this score—and he gave his life for it.
Megyn Kelly, is there a chance that what Dietrich Bonhoeffer stood against and for which he sacrificed his life might, in the end, be your business?
*Comments are closed.*
http://www.ruthfullyyours.com/2025/11/09/megyn-kelly-doesnt-have-the-time-and-she-isnt-the-mother-of-the-internet-by-jamie-glazov/
