tv The Ingraham Angle FOX News December 1, 2021 7:00pm-8:00pm PST
possible. thank you so much for being with us tonight and every night to. we hope you set your dvr so you never miss an episode of "hannity." in the meantime, i have some good news, let not your hearts be troubled because the news continues, laura ingraham is standing by, she has a huge show. i don't know what it is yet but it's huge. >> laura: it always is. did you have a segment where it was brian kemp -- he can't run for governor. i didn't hear the whole thing. >> sean: he's not well-liked by republicans in georgia, it's just the fact. >> laura: are you announcing tonight that you're running? >> sean: i don't live in georgia, i'm an idiot, i live in new york -- i mean that. >> laura: now you've clarified it, awesome show.
i'm laura ingraham, this is the ingraham angle from washington the night. senators cruz and holly are both here on today's fascinating supreme court hearing on the future of roe vs. wade. plus there is a shocking story out of philadelphia were a democrat city leader seems to be excusing a brutal beating. you will find out why later on in the show. another cringeworthy white house tiktok video, what is it? raymond arroyo has it come all the details. but first, finally putting roe to rest, that is the focus. today's oral arguments in the biggest abortion case since kc versus planned parenthood, they were certainly fascinating to listen to but they confirmed what conservative legal scholars have been arguing for nearly 50 years. the reasoning in roe was pure legal fiction.
the court never should have waited into the abortion wars. perhaps the most revealing and disturbing part of the argument came during a discussion of darius isis, president of roe vs. wade should generally be expected to preserve a measurable predictable element of legal principles. left-wing justices and their supporters in the press have largely abandoned the notion that any textual provision of the u.s. constitution prohibits states from preventing the killing of the unborn. at this point their main argument is that roe has been on the books for a long time and it's too late to do anything about it. that is absurd. of the notion that the american people are stuck with a wicked decision just for the sake of tradition goes against everything the country stands for. by that reasoning plessy versus ferguson which is how loud a segregation for over 50 years would never have been overturned by brown versus board of
education. arguing in favor of the state's 15 week abortion band also argued against bowing to president when much has changed, including new imaging technology. >> i think it's advancement in knowledge and concern about such things as fetal pain, what we know the child is doing and looks like and is fully human -- >> 40% of dead people if you touch their feet, their foot will react your car there are spontaneous acts by dead brain people. i don't think a response by a fetus necessarily proves there is a sensation of pain or that there is consciousness. >> laura: how twisted, how callous, how uninformed. by justice sotomayor's logic,
mothers shouldn't get too excited when their baby kicks in the womb? after all the baby could be dead and nearly twitching. a couple of the liberal justices contended that overturning roe would destroy the court's legitimacy. justice breyer said overruling unnecessarily and under pressure would just lead to the condemnation of the court, loss of confidence in the judiciary, the ability of the courts to exercise judicial power and to function as the supreme court dedicated to the rule of law. justice sonya sotomayor basically said the same thing. she added that "will this institution survive the stench that this creates in the public perception?" the constitution is not just being interpreted as political acts by the court. justice sotomayor or is right to worry about a noxious stench but
it's the one the court created in 1973 when it robbed the states of their right to determine this issue for themselves. in the words of the late, great antonin scalia. >> regardless of whether you think prohibiting abortion is good or whether you think prohibiting abortion is bad, the constitution does not say anything about it. it leaves it up to democratic choice. some states prohibit it, some states didn't. what roe vs. wade said was that no state can prohibit it. that is simply not in the constitution, it was one of those many things, most things in the world left to democratic choice. >> laura: i wish he was there today. the late judge bork was even more blunt, calling roe an active judicial imperialism, and venting out of whole cloth constitutional rights that the framers never intended.
legal defenders contended a woman's right to privacy and bodily autonomy somehow trumps the right to the life of the unborn child. exposing the illogical core of this argument, justice thomas asked whether other actions beyond abortion are similarly protected. he said there was a case out of south carolina involving a woman who had been convicted of criminal child neglect because she ingested cocaine during pregnancy. the woman arguing for the center for reproductive rights says that those issues are posed in this case. she didn't answer the question because doing so would collapse the house of cards that roe was built upon. the american left has always used this viability argument to justify depriving infants of their own constitutional right to life. in other words, they are not persons under the constitution unless they are viable outside
the womb. justice samuel alito smashed this entire line of reasoning and he basically said does a woman not have the same interest that she had before the viability of the fetus, being free of the pregnancy? that she no longer wants to continue? a lawyer could not argue the point. she just said viability is the principal line. you get my point here. he was right to raise this, the viability standard is not what the court is tasked with doing. the fetus has its own individual rights. he's precisely right. democrats are just members of the party of death. basic logic and essential truths when life begins doesn't matter to them. abortion is their holy grail two joe biden who likes calling himself a catholic school kid is too unprincipled to take a stand. that led justice brett kavanaugh
at the end of the oral argument to raise the issue that the liberal justices conveniently avoided. he says there is also an interest in fetal life, that is at stake as well. his solicitor general gave an answer to cavanagh because there is no answer. in the framers who wrote the original constitution nor the drafters of the 14th amendment ever intended to create a constitutional right to abortion. indeed they would have found such a concept to be barbarous and evil. the left claims to care about democracy, so let's let the people decide the important questions presented by abortion and if a court with the majority of six republican appointees fails to put roe to rest, then it should expect a conservative led movement to shrink the court's power. it would also mean adios to
"the federalist" society, and that is the angle. joining me now is a josh hawley of the judiciary committee. if conservatives are let down once again, what do you think? >> i think this is the moment, we have waited 50 years for this, this is the case. that became clear today, we can't wait any longer. this is the time to overrule roe, the court badly damaged its legitimacy back in 1973. if the court really cares about its legitimacy the way the justices were talking about today they will follow the constitution and they will allow the people to start exercising democracy again. i say this is the moment, this is the time and this is the case to do it. >> laura: justice thomas started the questioning off today, this is a question where he hit on the right to privacy whether that is grounded in the constitution, watch.
>> in the old days we used to say it was a right to privacy that the court found substantive due process, what are we relying on now? >> when it comes to decisions related to family, marriage, and childbearing, the court has done the analysis and that makes sense because otherwise the constitution would reinforce the historical discrimination against women. >> laura: historical discrimination against women? in other words carrying a child as a punishment and a totally diminishes i guess any woman's ability to be free in the united states, that is a wild type of legal reasoning when you start to unpack that. >> it is wild and unfortunately something the left has bought hook, line, and sinker. what about the interest of the unborn child, what about the interest of the unborn woman in
the womb? this is something i thought justice kavanaugh pointed out brilliantly, there is an interest here throughout the pregnancy and the life of the child's. can i just say this? every justice on the united states supreme court has acknowledged in past years there is an interest in unborn life. the question is when did that interest become compelling? the answer is it is compelling throughout the pregnancy because the unborn child has rights throughout the pregnancy and it's time the court recognized that and got out of the business of imposing their moral views on the rest of the country. that is not the courts place, it has badly damaged their legitimacy. it's time to stop that and allow the american people to reclaim the basic promise of america. in this country, every person has inalienable rights and that includes the unborn. they too are valuable and protected and it's time to let the people make good on that promise. >> laura: kavanaugh went to great pains to reaffirm that the
court would not be outlawing abortion. a lot of people who read the headlines don't realize that this would merely be returning it to the states. as justice scalia said some states would have it be legal, other states would have restrictions in place and if the people didn't like that they would vote the state legislatures out and they would start over. i think a lot of people think that means there would be no abortion, a lot of conservatives want, but that's not what the court would be doing in overturning roe, correct? >> exactly right. this is about democracy, this is about the people of this country actually having a say for the first time in 50 years on this important question. this is a moral question. the abortion issue is a moral issue and that is exactly why the american people should get to have a say. nine justices shouldn't be imposing their moral views on the rest of the country and we can't do anything about it. this is about democracy and it's
about returning this issue where it belongs which is to the american people in the state's. the constitution commits it to the people, the people should have the final say here. >> laura: obama's former sg i guess he wants everyone to believe that a constitutional conservative are actually a danger to america and the courts, watch. >> these justices are not just conservative, they are far to the right of where republican party justices have been in the past. is not a mystery, it's because the court is out of the mainstream of american society. >> laura: he's talking about the more squishy justices like justice kennedy flipped vote, that was devastating for those of us who believe in states rights to determine these questions. what about that argument? the left is worried about the
court legitimacy now? they weren't concerned when they threatened court packing last year. >> what has destroyed the courts legitimacy in many ways and turn the court into a political football is roe, the court legislating from the bench with the rules are going to be for every state in the nation, every person in the nation and they change their minds all the time. the court is constantly rewriting the abortion rules, this is another fiction of the left -- it's been the same for the 50 years -- no it hasn't. the supreme court is constantly rewriting it. this is why the supreme court needs to get out of the business of imposing its views of abortion on the nation and let the people have their say. that is what the constitution commands and that is what restores the courts legitimacy. >> laura: thank you so much. we have a decent sense of how some of the justices will come down in this case. it's kind of a certainty that the three liberal justices
appointed by the democrats dutifully defend roe but where did the six republican appointed justices stand? joining me now is attorney robert dunn, let's break it down justice by justice. who was definitely voting to overturn roe and y? predicting the court is always tricky left if you had to guess today. >> it's good to be with you. we all know where justice thomas comes down on this, he has written many times that he thinks roe and casey were wrongly decided and he doesn't give it much weight in constitutional questions. there is no question he will vote to overturn. justice alito if there's any doubt i think dispelled at that argument today. he pressed it very hard on the question of is it ever okay to overturn a case that is egregiously wrong. he eventually got to the u.s. solicitor to admit plessy versus ferguson should have been overruled the following year had
you had new justices on the court that would have recognized how wrong that decision wasn't he pressed hard on that so i think he's in. justice gorsuch played it closer to the vest but i think at the end of the day he also seemed to be on the same page. the more interesting comment i saw was justice kavanaugh, he had an interesting soliloquy with the planned parenthood attorney in which he said you cannot accommodate the trickle interests here. the woman has a right to her bodily economy, he didn't deny that but he said there's a fetal issue and those two can't be accommodated, one has to win and one loses and it comes down to who makes that decision. do we get decide which interest prevails and should that be left for the people. he added a scrupulous neutrality by the court. it should be strike down laws like california, nor should it strike down laws in texas and
alabama that are more solicitous of fetal life, his position i think is going to be ultimately this does have to be a decision that is made by the people. justice roberts is on the record many times, he's a minimalist and wants to find the narrowest possible ground -- >> laura: i want to get to that because he really i think seem to focus on this 15 week timeline in mississippi, watch. >> i would like to focus on this 15 week ban because that is not a dramatic departure from viability. it is the standard that the vast majority of other countries have not a prohibition, it's a 15 week line. >> laura: he even cited north korea and china -- where is he on this? >> i think he is looking for a way to uphold the mississippi law without completely overturning roe and casey.
part of his dna as he doesn't like a big, bold, dramatic moves, he's always looking to make small, incremental decisions but i think he is of the view that roe and casey were wrongly decided to. he is probably squarely in that camp. he is going to have a difficult job. once you get rid of the viability line, everybody who stood at that podium and argued admitted there is no alternative. every single one of them said is there a line you can draw other than viability and they all threw up their hands and said we don't think so. i don't know how he is going to do that. if you want the site european law or something but it won't be grounded in the constitution. >> laura: he looked like he was fighting against himself and logic and essential constitutional principles in the way he went about that. of course it doesn't make any sense, 15 weeks doesn't make any sense -- they were started talk about pain -- not him but justice sotomayor york, whether the baby can feel pain.
her point made no sense. i think it was fascinating to watch and listen to this argument today because i think people who at least had the chance to listen to it went away -- their breath was taken away. if you take politics out of it and look at the principles, i don't think there is any question that this has to be overturned. you cannot split the baby for lack of a better phrase here. >> i think justice barrett, she is the last wild card. she's been on the court little time, she did make one point that i thought was suggestive where she will come out. she said in roe and casey we focused on the burden of not just pregnancy but being a parent to. your imposing this big burden on women who don't want to be pregnant and now they are parents and that's going to change the course of their life. she said every state that has abortion restrictions now has laws in place that allow parents to terminate their parental rights at birth, nobody has to be a parent who doesn't want to be a parent.
>> laura: every catholic church that i know of will take any baby that is unwanted. thank you, fascinating. senator ted cruz has identified the most dangerous bureaucrat in the history of america. he's here to tell us who it is. plus he's going to spill the details on whether senate republicans are going to shut down the government to thwart biden's mandate, stay there.
>> how is your interest anything but a religious view? the issue of when life begins is hotly debated by philosophers since the beginning of time. it's still debated in religions. when you say this is the only right that takes away from the state the ability to protect a life, that is a religious view, isn't it? >> laura: our next guest might have a thing or two to say about that, texas senator ted cruz a member of fiduciary committee, also the author of one vote away, how a single supreme court seat can change history. i would like you to respond to
what you just heard from justice sotomayor, she gave up a lot of gems today, plus your reaction to today's arguments as a whole. >> unfortunately the left when it comes to abortion has gotten more and more radical, and you see that from the questioning of justice sotomayor, she is suggesting that to protect a life is somehow taking a religious view. for most of human history, life has been protected to. if you look at where the courts really started to go wrong, the 1973 decision in roe versus started the supreme court down this very dangerous road of being deeply, deeply politicized. what the justices said in roe, you silly voters, you don't have a right to make any decisions regulating abortion. it doesn't matter that what you may vote to do, what your citizens vote to do, we nine unelected judges are going to create the rules for you.
that decision more than any decision in modern times has produced enormous division in our country. and i am hopeful and i think there is some reason to be optimistic that the result of today's argument will be the court finally admitting that was a mistake, overruling roe which is the right thing to do, it's what i've urged the court to do and returning that decision to the state legislatures. >> laura: if we have six republik and appointees on this court after all the money that has been raised. "the federalist" society, all of these big fat cat dinners, i'm sorry, i'm pissed about this. if these six justices cannot do the right thing, i think it's time to do it robert bork said we should do which is circumscribed the jurisdiction of this court and if they want to blow it up, that is the way they can change things finally. this is insane. >> i would do that in a
heartbeat, as you know the constitution gives congress the authority to restrict the jurisdiction of the court, i think we should do that to. it is something sad looking at this court as you guys were going through counting noses, there are only two justices that i'm confident how they are going to vote on overruling roe and that's justice thomas and justice alito. i'm hopeful we get to five. but i am not at all certain and that is really unfortunate. you mentioned a minute to go the book i wrote last fall one vote away, there is an entire chapter of the book talking about life and walking through the history starting with roe vs. wade, the decision making and that came from it and also talking about the three most recent supreme court justices. we'll and see how they vote to but there is a reason at least to be concerned. i hope they do not disappoint so many of us that have put our faith that they will follow the law because there's a right
outcome here. that is to follow the law and overturn roe which the result of that -- and this is something a lot of people misunderstand -- if and when roe is overturned, it doesn't mean suddenly abortion is illegal. it means the state legislatures can decide what the rules are and some states -- california is going to continue to have wildly permissive abortion laws. other states will protect life far more vigorously and that leaves it to the democratic process. >> laura: senator hawley made that point and it's absolutely correct. your friend texas congress one sheila jackson lee used the roe argument to attack texas' abortion restrictions, watch. >> it's a health crisis that's going on in texas. it's a travesty two it is sadness and it has women
fleeing. the actual crisis takes me back to the bounty hunters of who were attempting to free themselves out of the bondage of slavery. we are living in the 1800s. >> laura: now babies are bondage. your response. >> that is a sad and extreme argument and i've got to say today's democratic party wasn't that long ago when bill clinton was president where he said he wanted abortion to be safe, legal, and a rare. i disagreed with him on that but he at least was proposing some degree of moderation. today's democratic party, the position of virtually every democrat in congress is they support unlimited abortion on demand up until the moment of birth, they support partial-birth abortion with government funding, with no parental notification, no parental consent, that is a radical and extreme position supported by fewer than 10% of americans and it's the position of joe biden, kamala harris,
chuck schumer, nancy pelosi. the democratic party has gotten extreme on this and it's really striking -- i think it's unfortunate sheila did that comparison to slavery because as you know planned parenthood when they actively advocated for abortions one of the reasons margaret sanger the founder of planned parenthood activated for abortions because she said it would be a good thing to abort more african-american children. horrible, eugenic, racist justifications, that was much of the foundation behind planned parenthood being formed. >> laura: i want to get to an exchange between our own peter doocy and the man you have called the most dangerous bureaucrat in american history. >> have you advised the president of the possibility of new testing requirements for people coming into this country two does that include everybody? speak of the answer is yes anybody and everybody who has committed the country needs to get a test within 24 hours of getting on the plane to come
here. >> what about people who don't take a plane and border crossers come again in huge numbers. >> that is a different issue. >> laura: and other words, nothing to do with actually controlling the virus, at all. >> the hypocrisy from anthony fauci seems to know no limits. the damage he has done -- in a time of a medical crisis, we would like the leadership at our health agencies to be based on science, to be based on medicine and fauci has demonstrated he is a democratic talking head. he will go with the politics and he will change on the flip of a dime. you look at his answer where he says 2 million illegal immigrants coming across, not testing them, releasing them covid positive, that's no risk whatsoever. on the other hand when the teachers unions asked the biden administration require kids to wear masks in schools, giving it of the teachers union because they are political allies of the
democrats, that is science too. there is a level of dishonesty that i think has done real damage to the credibility of the cdc and of the nih and i've got to say, dr. fauci in particular there are very serious questions about whether he committed a felony in lying to congress where he stated categorically that the nih had not funded gain-of-function research at wuhan. the nih has contradicted that in writing. not only that, he communicated with mark zuckerberg an email asking facebook to censor anyone suggesting the virus came from the wuhan institute of virology. that's politics and its dishonesty and he's done an enormous damage. >> laura: he's a political hack, his time has come and gone. expiration date on fauci has long since passed. senator cruz, great to have you
♪ ♪ >> laura: it's time for seen and unseen segments where we reveal stories behind the headlines. we turn to the author of the spider who saved christmas, raymond arroyo. you have some unseen items for us tonight. >> i sure do, this first one should never have been seeing. the white house is so desperate to pass its $1.7 trillion spending bill that is now gathering celebrity endorsements. enter bill nye, they call him a science icon in this video. at least that is what the graphics said the. >> please consider the following. if you are like me, you want the u.s. to be a bit better. for that we have two bills and
i'm not either one of them. i'm not an infrastructure bill. that's where our roads, power lines, for upgrades and improvements so we can have better infrastructure. next would be for addressing climate change, providing people the means to weatherize their house to make it more resilient to climate change and establish a civilian climate tour. >> when did bill nye who was a mechanical engineer, become a budget or climate experts? this goofy civilian climate core is going to cost a $10 billion to set up and no one knows exactly what it is going to do. no matter, bill nye brought on a special guest star to help close the deal for a skeptical public. >> you are using my lines here. >> i'm a believer in this, i'm old enough to remember when the u.s. was the leader in innovation. >> that's what we are driving at. >> we love driving!
>> yes we do! >> that was like a cognitive quiz. i think bill nye is what you call a personal booster. he talked about booster persons yesterday, that is what bill nye would constitute. >> laura: i thought i was watching a remake of cocoon -- that was terrifying. it's like 4 trillion, don't say 1.75. that is brandon, it's like 4.75. >> when you play it out over the years. he is just the latest in a string of celebs the white house as deployed to push their agenda from tiktok influencers to songster's, i'm waiting for eva longoria and billy porter to show up -- remember them from the democratic convention? >> laura: that doesn't make -- none of this worked last time they tried it. it doesn't move public opinion
at all. i thought we were going to see billy porter there, sorry. >> that's what i was waiting for but we press on. as biden pushes the climate core, do you remember how the media reacted when trump unveiled his space force? >> we finally learned about chain of command, it will go et, yoda, then grouped. >> a picture of money being threaded and thrown at the moon. >> they may have been onto something, talk about unseen and uncovered. this is what could be what is happening in space right now. [laser blasting] "the washington post" reports china and russia are attacking our satellites. general david thompson of space force says the threats are growing and expanding every single day and it's an evolution of activity that has been
happening for a long time. they are using lasers, they are using radio-frequency jammers, the chinese have even launched a satellite with a robotic arm that destroys our satellites. this is unbelievable what is happening and we are worried about spending more money. >> laura: china is not our enemy, right? come on, they are not our enemy. we are doing all sorts of deals over there. we have big banks doing big deals to make big money and we don't care if america goes down. talk about unseen story, the jussie smollett trial is on now in chicago, it's not getting a lot of coverage. >> police and prosecutors allege the actor faked what he claimed at the time was a homophobic racist attack. he allegedly hired two brothers who he took to the site of the crime for a dress rehearsal. the jury was shown video of that
dry run today. >> actor who was underpaid on the show empire who was very famous. [laughter] this is a maga country! >> that was from the daily show but it's not much of an exaggeration. he's facing three years in prison for this hoax, i hope he gets six. the hate that he stirred up, the political division and the police work that engaged as a process is enraging, that is the least he should get at this point. >> laura: i remember we were pretty skeptical of this story but the media really jumped on that. they left that waukesha, wisconsin, that story is gone, they left that story in the dust but they stuck on jussie smollett's. that going to show that maga people were horrible and all the
rest. >> they said that two brothers attacked him because they were homophobic, they were on his payroll. >> laura: thanks for the updates, disturbing video shows the brutal beat down of a teenage girl in philadelphia but what is worse is a city leader is justifying this attack. i'll tell you why, the shocking video and a report when we return. hey i'm joe montana. when you get to be our age, you have little patience for nonsense and inefficiency. after years of practice you become a pro at pretty much everything. so when i qualified for medicare, i got wellcare. they're pros at making things streamlined, efficient and convenient. wellcare offers great benefits like free grocery,
meal, and prescription delivery. and if you need to see a doctor, you can get in-home visits and 24/7 virtual visits. wellcare is no nonsense. just great benefits and none of the hassles. [ doorbell rings ] i have your delivery. appreciate it. ♪ ♪ wellcare is committed to getting rid of the nonsense and inconvenience associated with health insurance. instead, they're just focusing on giving you great benefits. so don't delay, act now. wellcare. it's medicare done well.
♪ ♪ [bleep] [shouting] [bleep] >> laura: that horrific attack was captured on a philadelphia subway car earlier this month and got no play. the four black teens who brutally beat that 18-year-old asian girl are now facing ethnic intimidation charges, police say black teens were hurling racial slurs before they attacked the victim. what is just as shocking, the
words of the city council member, she was explaining away the attack saying the assailants are trying to articulate out what they need to see done better by institutions including the school district to address racial bias and intimidation, what? the issue of race, the left has gotten so radical on it, they are now essentially justifying racial violence. joining me now is horace cooper, sadly what they are doing now, what they are saying is entirely predictable. >> i am outraged upon watching the video and seeing the response of the elected officials in that community. yes it's true, i should have expected to see this kind of bad behavior. but unbelievably, how elected
officials can say that we are going to explain away, cover-up, and even reward this kind of violent behavior, we will anticipate seeing this problem all across america if this mind-set was allowed to continue. >> laura: one is also sickening here is that this woman attended an anti-asian violence protest that was sparked out of this incident and this was just yesterday. >> it is what this nation has been doing around anti-asian violence whether it started from the top -- from the highest levels of elected office with whole elected parties generating anti-immigrant, anti-asian
rhetoric that needs to end now. >> should the democratic council member who is essentially justifying the violence as a creative, frustrated expression of disaffected youth, then she was hopping on the protest on the other side trying to cover all bases essentially blaming republicans. >> what needs to end is excusing violent behavior. there has been a little bit of time in more than a few years a growing problem of minorities attacking nonminorities -- attacking other minorities in the media completely ignoring it. here is what the rule needs to be. you don't hit people, you don't slap people, you don't beat them down. if you do, we don't care why, we are going to hold you accountable.
that's the message that stops this from happening and that is the message that doesn't have to come from the white house, it doesn't have to come from the outhouse or anywhere else, it's a common sense answer. shame on this council member who happens to be asian not being willing to stand up for common sense mind-set. >> laura: i could not have said it better myself, thank you so much. joe biden keeps repeating one specific ally, the last bite explains, next. l needs... giving us confidence in our future... ...and in kevin's. voya. well planned. well invested. well protected.
>> laura: i was going to play joe biden but we know he has no clue about what's going on so instead i'm going to play something we just got in. before we go anywhere in colleges today, look at the mind-set that these universities are producing. >> not just any random killer, he's a white supremacist killer,
he is a descendant of white americans who killed black and brown people. >> laura: i think they would've attacked him physically too if he would've shown up on campus. don't forget to set your dvrs, never forget to show that you understand what is at stake. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> greg: happy wednesday everyone. or as the cuomos collette, hump day. how is cnn covering the chris cuomo scandal now? he was once their big star but now how do they feel? >> honestly, i never lik