The Matt Walsh Show - Ep. 404 - Socialist Fight!

00:00:00.000 I know a lot of people are worried about the state of the world and of the country,

00:00:04.780 and you get the feeling that we're teetering on the edge of a cliff. We're on the precipice of

00:00:10.380 something. You don't know if it's too late for us to be saved. Well, fear no more because help is

00:00:17.220 here. Cardi B is running for Congress. Not yet, I mean, but she's going to run for Congress. She 0.79

00:00:22.440 said yesterday, she tweeted, I do feel like if I go back to school and focus up, I can be part of

00:00:28.940 Congress. I dead ass have so much ideas that make sense. I just need a couple of years of school and

00:00:35.500 I can shake the table. Yeah, she dead ass has so much ideas. Dead ass, that's one word, 1.00

00:00:43.940 has so much ideas. And I think that's a great campaign slogan for her. Cardi B,

00:00:50.800 I dead ass have so much ideas. Or maybe just Cardi B 2024, so much ideas.

00:00:57.700 It'll be great. And she'll fit right in, I think. I mean, this is the woman, remember,

00:01:04.040 who bragged about drugging and robbing men. So she admitted to committing that crime on multiple

00:01:12.680 occasions, a whole series of violent felonies she admitted to, and bragged about it. So as a thief,

00:01:20.180 she'll fit right in in Washington. So I'm looking forward to that. Speaking of which,

00:01:24.660 Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, they dead ass have so much ideas as well. It's just that

00:01:31.500 their ideas, like Cardi B's, not always the best. They finally turned against each other. And in a

00:01:37.820 not very shocking turn of events, these reports have surfaced. Reports have surfaced, just surfaced,

00:01:45.000 surfaced like a dead fish floating up to the top of the water. Nobody caused it, just happened on its

00:01:51.540 own. The reports just sort of, oh, there they are. They surfaced. Reports surfaced that Bernie

00:01:56.980 Sanders in 2018 met with Elizabeth Warren and said in that meeting that a woman cannot win the 0.97

00:02:03.300 presidency. Now, Bernie, of course, has strenuously denied this, but Warren has come out, issued a

00:02:08.400 statement. And without trying to sound like she's accusing him of being a sexist, she basically is

00:02:16.540 accusing him of being a sexist. This is her statement. She says, Bernie and I met for more

00:02:20.140 than two hours in December, 2018 to discuss the 2020 election, our past work together and our

00:02:24.520 shared goals, beating Donald Trump, taking back our government from the wealthy and well-connected

00:02:29.080 and building an economy that works for everybody. So these are wealthy, well-connected people who want

00:02:35.420 to take back the government from wealthy and well-connected people by taking control of it

00:02:39.700 themselves. All right. Among the topics that came up was what would happen if Democrats nominated a

00:02:44.820 female candidate. I thought a woman could win. He disagreed. I have no interest in discussing this

00:02:50.640 private meeting any further. Then she goes on. I have no interest in discussing the meeting,

00:02:55.960 but let me discuss it for a minute. So after she's confirmed that part of it, she said, I'm not

00:03:02.300 going to. Yeah, yeah, no, he's totally a sexist, but I'm not going to confirm it. I mean, we're not

00:03:05.700 going to talk about it, okay? I don't want to talk about it. I'm just saying that Bernie is a

00:03:12.460 backwards, bigoted, uh, uh, misogynist. I don't want to talk about it. That's all I'm saying.

00:03:17.720 Okay. I'm just going to say that. And then we're not going to talk about it anymore. Now, um,

00:03:22.980 Bernie fans have, of course, not been too happy about, about, uh, about all of this. And they have

00:03:31.440 presented what I think is pretty compelling evidence to exonerate their man. Here is, um,

00:03:37.760 and this was, this, this was, this is now making its rounds on, on, on social media,

00:03:42.820 but this is a clip of Bernie apparently back in 1988 with a still remarkably the same haircut

00:03:49.460 in 1988. Um, and here he is talking about women presidents.

00:03:55.400 The real issue is not whether you're black or white, whether you're a woman or a man, 0.66

00:03:59.640 in my view, a woman could be elected president of the United States. The real issue is whose side 1.00

00:04:04.720 are you on? Are you on the side of workers and poor people or are you on the side of big money

00:04:10.240 and the corporation? Okay. So there you go. He dead-ass had the same ideas. He had, he had so

00:04:16.240 much ideas, even in 1988, the same exact ideas, same hairstyle, same, you know, ranting and raving,

00:04:22.340 which you got to respect. So there has been consistency from Bernie Sanders. The only thing

00:04:26.480 that he's not consistent on is the whole thing of, you know, rich people are evil. And then he goes

00:04:30.360 out and buys three houses. So that's a little bit of inconsistency, but in terms of his rhetoric,

00:04:34.320 he's been saying the same things, uh, for forever, uh, uh, presents, you know, since,

00:04:39.920 since the revolutionary war approximately. And, but in 1988, he says that, yeah, there could be a

00:04:46.740 woman president. And now Warren claims that in 2018, 30 years later, he's changed his mind

00:04:51.600 even after, and he's saying, and she is saying that he changed his mind even after he had the evidence

00:04:58.220 of a woman running for president, Hillary Clinton in 2016 and winning 3 million more popular votes

00:05:03.420 than Donald Trump. So would seem to be pretty good evidence that people are willing to vote for

00:05:09.780 a woman. Um, even a woman like Hillary Clinton, God help us. So now I have no dog in this fight

00:05:17.760 between kooky socialists, but I have to say a couple of things here. First of all, who cares if he said

00:05:25.020 this, you know, even if he said that a woman can't be president, which I don't believe he said.

00:05:31.800 And I, and again, I have no reason to take his side other than it's not like I, I like the guy,

00:05:37.180 but I don't believe he actually said, but even if he did, even if he dead ass did say that.

00:05:43.020 Okay. Eventually I'm going to use that, this, this slang in the proper context. I don't even know

00:05:47.700 what it means. I don't know what it means. Dead ass. What is that supposed to mean? How? So in the,

00:05:52.740 in the context she used it, it sounds like a replacement for literally or something the way

00:05:56.620 people use literally. Now we're doing dead ass. Even if he dead ass did say that, um, it's not

00:06:05.020 sexist. There's nothing sexist about it because that would be a statement of his opinions of his

00:06:10.380 opinion about, about the voting public, not about women. So if he said that, then what he would be

00:06:16.120 saying is that he thinks the voting public is sexist, which is sort of an insult to the voting

00:06:21.400 public, but we're used to liberals insulting people that way. I mean, it'd be the same sort

00:06:28.460 of thing if, as if Bernie Sanders were to say that he doesn't think a black man can get a fair trial

00:06:34.500 in an American court, which is the kind of thing that he probably would say. And, you know, for all

00:06:40.340 I, he probably does think that, but would that be a statement about the black men or is that a

00:06:46.860 statement about the court system? So he's accusing the court system of being racist in that case,

00:06:51.000 in that hypothetical, if you were to say that in this case, he'd be accusing the voting public of

00:06:55.020 being sexist, which is not, which is insulting and demeaning to the American public, but again,

00:07:01.260 not insulting and demeaning to women. But in any case, the real problem for Warren is that she's a

00:07:06.460 known liar. So there's no reason at all to believe what she says. Um, we already know that she's not

00:07:13.380 above lying to get what she wants. Bernie on the other idea, on the other hand has bad ideas, uh,

00:07:20.040 is a hypocrite, would be a dead ass disaster for this country if elected, but there's no reason to

00:07:28.180 think that he's a, that he's a liar the way that she is. I mean, she's just a liar. We know that,

00:07:33.080 but I don't think we necessarily know that about Bernie Sanders. As I said, though, I have no dog in

00:07:38.440 this fight and I'm sure that Trump is glad to see them fighting because here's the irony between

00:07:42.920 Bernie and Warren. There are certainly enough votes there to, to, to win the nomination. I think

00:07:49.820 the last, uh, poll I saw the real clear politics average had, uh, the, the combined, um, the combined

00:07:58.480 average for Sanders and Warren together was about 35 points combined, which is well above Biden at 26

00:08:05.960 or 27 points. So if one of them were to drop out and endorse the other, or even one of them were to

00:08:10.480 drop out and join the other's ticket, then I think they would sail to the nomination.

00:08:16.120 And this is exactly what, this is what exposes them both as frauds really, because this is what

00:08:21.340 they would do if they really cared about the ideas and about beating Donald Trump and all of that,

00:08:25.880 um, as Elizabeth Warren claims to care about, then they would, that's what they would do.

00:08:31.500 But instead they both stay in because it's really about the pursuit of power. Um, they both stay in

00:08:40.080 and now they're going to start eating each other alive and Joe Biden's going to win the nomination

00:08:46.160 and then probably lose to Donald Trump. That's what's going to happen. Bernie Sanders, 78 years old,

00:08:52.420 probably only a few years from death. I say that because he's 78 years old. The average life

00:08:56.900 expectancy for a man in this country is 84, I think, uh, or not much higher than 84, at least.

00:09:02.540 So, you know, however long he lives, uh, it's not that much longer, probably at his age. He's been

00:09:08.720 a politician forever. And rather than retiring and enjoying his last few years on earth, he's grasping

00:09:16.620 desperately for power because he wants it and he needs it. And he will sabotage his own party in

00:09:22.300 pursuit of it. Same for Elizabeth Warren. It is just, it's pathetic, a pathetic display.

00:09:30.160 But as I said, great for Trump. Now, before we move on a word from LifeLock, if you want a new

00:09:35.900 year's resolution, that's easy to keep. Here's one resolve to help protect your identity and personal

00:09:40.440 info with LifeLock identity theft protection. Look, getting your identity stolen. It's one of those

00:09:46.100 things that people think won't happen to them, but then it does. Right. And you learn the hard way.

00:09:52.740 But this is, this is a, one of those lessons also that you don't want to learn the hard way because

00:09:56.980 it's very difficult to recover from. And there's no reason to learn it the hard way, uh, because you

00:10:01.540 can always get LifeLock. LifeLock alerts you to potential threats to your identity. They see more

00:10:05.800 than, uh, than you're able to see by just monitoring your own credit. Um, like they can see your info on

00:10:11.360 the dark web. So they're able to, they're, they're able to do a better job of monitoring things for you

00:10:16.060 than you can do for yourself. And if you have a problem, LifeLock's US-based restoration

00:10:19.240 specialist know the steps to take to help resolve your case. Only one in five identity theft victims

00:10:23.980 who had accounts open in their name, discovered their theft through a bank or credit card company.

00:10:28.360 Of course, no one can prevent all identity theft or monitor all transactions at all businesses.

00:10:33.860 But LifeLock is the New Year's resolution that's not only easy to keep, but it'll help you protect

00:10:38.840 what you've worked so hard to gain in the first place. So if you've worked hard to build a life

00:10:43.420 for yourself and all the things that you have, um, just to leave it out in the open for someone

00:10:47.860 to come and take is not a smart move. Get LifeLock for up to 25% off your first year. Go to

00:10:53.040 lifelock.com slash Walsh. That's lifelock.com slash Walsh for up to 25% off. So you remember

00:10:59.500 that Jessica Yaniv, um, fellow, he's the guy who tried to sue a bunch of salons to force them to 0.99

00:11:05.920 wax his genitals, even though he has male genitals and is a male. Um, and so it makes sense that he has 0.94

00:11:11.640 male genitals. Males tend to have those, but he claims to be a woman. And so thus he says he has a 0.53

00:11:17.540 human right to have his genitals waxed somehow. And the fact that they wouldn't do it is an infringement 0.54

00:11:22.240 on his basic human rights. Um, so you remember that. And he's also the guy who, uh, allegedly has

00:11:28.120 sexually harassed girls, minors online. And he's generally just a creep and a bad person in so many

00:11:33.940 ways. Anyway, he's in court again, uh, after another dust up with the law and a reporter on his way out

00:11:40.600 of the court, a reporter tried to come up and talk to him. And here's how that went down.

00:11:48.240 You need, will you, will you be pleading guilt? What? No, don't touch me. Don't touch me.

00:11:52.240 Hey, stop. Go away from me. Go away. Go away from me. Get away from me. Get away. Get the 1.00

00:12:07.000 away from me. Stay away from me. Get away from me now, right now. You heard me calling the police

00:12:14.620 on you. I don't give a get away from me. You stay away from me. I'm so the reporter says that he was

00:12:19.840 punched in the back of the head and assaulted, which you can't see that, but you can kind of

00:12:23.820 hear it. Uh, and, um, here's all I want to say about this. We've, we've seen these kinds of videos

00:12:29.660 so often, not just with Yaniv, but these SJWs assaulting people, whether it's at an Atifa rally or,

00:12:37.680 or it's, it's, um, somebody assaulting pro-lifers or whatever it is. We, we, we see these videos all

00:12:42.300 the time with SJW bullies, assaulting people at will and getting away with it. And when I say

00:12:49.080 getting away with it, I don't mean legally now legally, they do often get away with it in that

00:12:53.180 there's no legal repercussions in the end, but I'm talking about physically and I'm really tired

00:12:59.440 of this. So I don't mean to victim blame here. The, the, the guy, the reporter, the journalist

00:13:05.800 who was being assaulted, but all I'm saying is if you're being assaulted by a raging psychopath, SJW

00:13:13.620 fight back. Okay. It's not like you saw Yaniv there, not exactly a UFC champion. We're talking

00:13:19.680 about here. So fight back, hit back. This reporter would have been entirely within his rights to knock

00:13:26.160 Yaniv's teeth out. If somebody is assaulting you, you can hit them. You should, it's not just,

00:13:31.540 you can, you should do that. Stand your ground, stand up for yourself. You don't have to run away

00:13:38.300 or just, you know, start calling for help or try to just get it on video. Yeah, fine. Get it on

00:13:44.760 video, but you can also at the same time defend yourself. So defend yourself. Don't allow yourself

00:13:51.460 to be hit in the head. You know, respond with force. You have every legal and moral right to do so.

00:13:57.540 That's what I'm saying. People have gotten way, way, way too comfortable doing this.

00:14:05.260 You see these videos all the time and it just seems like people in this country today,

00:14:09.180 they're so comfortable. You see someone, you know, you don't like, or they're making a political

00:14:15.000 point you don't like, or they're annoying you. Just go up and punch them. At least on the left,

00:14:20.320 that's what they've gotten very accustomed to responding that way. And I guess why not? Because

00:14:25.320 nobody ever seems to respond. They just do it and then they walk away. And, you know, we get the

00:14:31.340 video goes viral and we talk about, oh, those violent leftists. I'm sick of that. Just why? I mean,

00:14:38.620 this guy of all people, this Yaneve guy, you're going to let him hit you in the head? You let him do that?

00:14:46.660 This is, uh, it's, it's the only way. This is the same thing, you know, that parents used to tell us

00:14:55.600 and parents don't say this anymore, I guess, because it's, it's endorsing violence. But

00:15:01.280 back in my day, you know, when I was a kid, we, we used to be told that you got a bully on the

00:15:07.320 playground. Uh, maybe the, the one thing that bully needs is a, is a sock to the nose. You know,

00:15:13.480 sometimes people need that. And, um, I think that's what we're seeing here. And if they, if

00:15:21.340 they never get that, if there's never any immediate repercussion for acting this way,

00:15:26.720 then they'll just keep doing it. And it's for their good anyway, because, you know,

00:15:33.080 um, not everybody in the world is quite so willing to be hit in the face or attacked.

00:15:40.260 And, um, you know, the, the, the, you never know when, when you go up and treat somebody the wrong

00:15:47.620 way, or when you treat the wrong person that way, you never know how they'll respond.

00:15:53.800 Sometimes it could be for their own good. You respond in kind, you know, just physically defending

00:16:00.460 yourself proportionally. Maybe they learned their lesson and maybe that stops them from in the future

00:16:06.700 going after someone who maybe will respond. Not so proportionally. You never know.

00:16:14.640 So just, just defend yourself, everybody. That's what I'm saying. All right. A certain, um,

00:16:21.360 a, uh, uh, professor, college professor. And once you see the clip here, you're not going to be

00:16:27.040 surprised that this is a college professor we're dealing with, but, uh, her name, Dr. Shola 0.99

00:16:32.780 Mos, uh, Shag, Shag, Shagbamimu, I think, Shagbamimu, I think, I think I'm pronouncing that 1.00

00:16:37.940 correctly. Dr. Shola, we'll, we'll call her for short. Uh, she was on, on TV this morning, British

00:16:42.840 TV talking about the reaction that Megan Markle and, and, uh, you know, the, the reaction to the

00:16:50.160 Megan Markle and Prince Harry situation. And she said that the people criticizing Markle

00:16:55.020 are not only racist, but so obviously racist that she doesn't need to explain why they're racist.

00:17:02.500 And in fact, if you ask for an explanation, that only proves that you're racist. Watch.

00:17:08.720 I think the difficulty here for a lot of people is that they do not understand this thing. And the

00:17:13.840 thing is that it is not the job of black people and ethnic minorities to educate white people on

00:17:20.980 racism that is perpetrated by white people. White folks need to go educate themselves on the racism

00:17:26.860 they perpetrate. The reason why the racism experienced by Megan feels so personal and it 1.00

00:17:34.300 deeply resonates with a lot of people is because it's symptomatic of the culture of racism in the

00:17:39.640 United Kingdom. What, what, what examples do you have? You see, that is another problem. When people

00:17:44.160 ask, keep asking what examples, it makes me question, it, it makes me question, where have you been the

00:17:49.100 last two years? What have you been reading? What have you been, what have you been listening to?

00:17:52.400 I've been reading, I've been reading some criticism. I haven't personally read anything that I could

00:17:55.880 say was based on racism. And this is, and this is part of the problem. And let me explain what racism

00:18:00.640 looks like from a, the lens of white privilege. White privilege whitewashes racist and inflammatory

00:18:07.680 language as unconscious bias. So this is great. You see how, you see how the game is played and you

00:18:14.540 couldn't ask for a better illustration of it. You couldn't ask for a better explanation of the

00:18:20.960 left-wing playbook that you get here. So you've got Dr. Shola claiming that the criticism of Meghan

00:18:28.300 Markle is racist. And then you've got this very careful, very hesitant white guy just ever so

00:18:35.920 cautiously asking. He's very cautious about it. Ever so cautiously saying, Hey, I mean, do you have

00:18:42.720 an example of this? You're saying racist? I mean, can you give one example just so we understand?

00:18:49.060 We don't, you see, that's the problem. Only racists ask for examples. Oh, okay. Well, nevermind.

00:18:53.880 Nevermind. And then she goes into this whole spiel using a lot of big words and a lot of lingo and

00:18:59.120 jargon about whitewashing and unconscious bias and the camouflaging of racist behavior and so on and so

00:19:04.640 forth. And all of this just to herself camouflage the fact that she has no evidence for what she's

00:19:11.040 saying. No examples to provide. She's saying all of this criticism of Meghan Markle is racist. Okay,

00:19:17.320 well, just get, there's a lot of it apparently. So can you cite one example of racist criticism

00:19:23.480 against Meghan Markle? I'm not even saying that it doesn't exist, but just tell me what you're

00:19:27.360 talking about. I want to understand what you're saying. I'm trying to listen to you. I'm being an

00:19:32.220 active listener. And so there's a phenomenon that you're describing. And so I'm saying,

00:19:38.500 give me a few more details on that phenomenon so I can understand it.

00:19:43.200 But no, we're supposed to take her at a word on face value because she's black and we're white. 1.00

00:19:48.220 And that's all there is to it. And that's it. Just that's it. You can't, that's all that you need to

00:19:52.900 know. Meanwhile, personally, I'm not even, I'm not a critic of Meghan Markle. I don't care about the

00:20:00.980 issue. They can do whatever they want as far as I'm concerned. But what, and as I said, a few days

00:20:07.100 ago, I sort of admire the fact that she was able to get her spouse to break up with his, with his,

00:20:12.660 with, uh, you know, with he was, she was able to, she was basically able to break up with her in-laws,

00:20:17.640 which I think at some level, all spouses across the country can sort of watch with, uh,

00:20:24.380 with maybe a tinge of, of envy. But anyway, um, from what I've seen, the criticism of Meghan Markle

00:20:33.640 is based on the belief that some people have that she wants to sabotage the royal family. 1.00

00:20:38.720 And she's a gold digger basically in it for attention and fame and whatever else. Now, um, 1.00

00:20:44.400 I don't know if that's true or not. And I think if there's any bias against her,

00:20:50.100 or if there was any bias in the, in the first place, it's probably more of an anti-American

00:20:54.880 bias from a British. If there was ever any British bias against her from the beginning,

00:21:00.300 before all this happened, maybe there was a little bit of an anti-American thing going on,

00:21:04.780 which even that, I don't have a problem with that. I understand. I, and I don't care if,

00:21:10.300 if, if some of the Brits felt like, Hey, we don't want an American in the royal family. Yeah,

00:21:14.080 whatever. Fine. Uh, they want it to be their own little special club. It's say, you know, I I'm fine

00:21:19.760 with that, but, and it is true that Meghan Markle did succeed in tearing Prince Harry away from the

00:21:27.440 family. So the, the people, uh, you know, in, in Britain who, who, who said that they're concerned

00:21:34.280 that she's some sort of on some sort of sabotage mission. Well, it seems like they were vindicated

00:21:39.540 in that view because of what happened. And it is a pretty unusual thing, right? What's happened

00:21:46.700 here. So the woman on the show is sitting there and saying, Oh, well, the moment a black woman 1.00

00:21:53.160 dismantles the royal family, suddenly it's a problem. Well, I don't know. I think the Brits

00:21:59.160 would have a problem with that no matter who did it, no matter what their race is. It's, it's,

00:22:05.260 it's kind of a really unusual and unprecedented thing. And they, and to a lot of British people,

00:22:10.780 that's a big deal. And they probably react this way no matter what.

00:22:18.980 Um, I think to them having a Prince, Prince Harry stepped down from the family, whatever that means,

00:22:24.660 that's, that's, as I said, it's a big deal. So people are reacting to an unprecedented

00:22:30.660 dramatic move in a dramatic way, but all this person sees is race. Of course. Now in a follow-up

00:22:39.200 post on Twitter, uh, Shola says people triggered by true, the truth of racism or sorry, people

00:22:46.700 triggered by the truth of hashtag racism and hashtag white privilege can't handle the truth. It's

00:22:52.640 reprehensible that we not only have to defend ourselves from racism, but then we're expected

00:22:57.360 to explain it and also bear the brunt of denials of our lived experience.

00:23:03.420 How dare you ask us to explain we've made a claim. And now you expect us to justify that claim

00:23:12.720 to present, present evidence. No evidence is a racist conspiracy,

00:23:17.900 by the way, lived experience. Can we, can we forever and always do away with that?

00:23:25.380 Is it racist for me to say this? Can we do away with the lived experience phrase?

00:23:30.740 Or maybe don't do away with it because it's, it's, it is, it is one of those key words. One of those

00:23:35.520 red flags. If you ever hear somebody unironically use the phrase lived experience, then you know

00:23:42.760 that this is a pretentious gas bag and you can probably ignore everything they're saying.

00:23:47.320 Lived experience. This is my lived experience. Let me ask you, is it possible to have, for you to

00:23:53.660 have an experience that you didn't live? Is there such a thing as an unlived experience?

00:24:00.700 This is my unlived experience.

00:24:04.980 Yeah, I experienced it, but I wasn't living at the time.

00:24:09.580 I guess, I don't know, maybe zombies. Maybe we need to stipulate between lived experience and

00:24:14.920 undead experience in case of a zombie apocalypse. I don't know. I can't figure it out. I can't figure

00:24:19.080 out why you need the lived in front of that. Except that this is just one of those dumb things that you

00:24:23.900 get from, especially from pretentious college professors, where they just add in extra words

00:24:27.760 to make something sound more profound. So we're going to add the lived on experience because it

00:24:33.140 sounds more profound than just saying experience, like a normal person.

00:24:39.300 Let's, well, before we move on, a quick word from Rock Auto. You know, going to the auto parts store

00:24:44.400 is not always the most fun experience, right? Speaking of experience, my lived experience of

00:24:49.740 going to auto parts stores, not always the best because you drive all the way there, you go in,

00:24:54.560 things aren't always the best organized. And, um, at least in my opinion, I never agree with the way

00:25:01.280 that stores are organized. I always think I'm always judging the way they've organized, whether it's

00:25:06.240 a grocery store, auto parts. And then I write angry letters, as you might expect to the management.

00:25:14.300 Um, anyway, but you go in, you know, things aren't well organized and, uh, nine times out of 10,

00:25:18.460 what happens is that you're looking for something and they have to just order it anyway.

00:25:22.980 So what's the point of that? Why, why not just cut out the middleman? Go to rockauto.com.

00:25:27.460 Rockauto.com is a family business serving auto parts customers online for 20 years. Go to rockauto.com

00:25:32.600 to shop for auto and body parts from hundreds of manufacturers. They have everything from engine

00:25:36.420 control modules and brake parts to tail lamps, motor oil, new carpet for the car, whatever they,

00:25:41.340 whatever it is you're looking for, whether it's for your, your classic or your daily driver,

00:25:44.600 you get everything you need in a few easy clicks delivered directly to your door. The rockauto.com

00:25:48.940 catalog is super easy to navigate, which is especially, um, important for me as someone who,

00:25:55.560 you know, I wouldn't necessarily call myself a car guy. I have a car. I can change the tire. I can do

00:26:00.340 stuff like that, but, um, uh, not exactly a car expert. And it's one of my, you know, it's,

00:26:06.080 it's, it's one of my failings as a man, I admit, but I don't like to have my failings,

00:26:10.400 you know, thrown in my face all the time. And so you go to rockauto.com. It just makes it really

00:26:14.920 easy to navigate and, uh, you know, where you're going there and you don't have to be a car expert

00:26:19.180 to navigate the site. Best of all prices at rockauto.com are always reliably low and the same

00:26:23.880 for professionals and do it yourselfers. Amazing selection, reliably low prices, go to rockauto.com

00:26:29.780 right now, see all the parts available for your car or truck, right? Walsh in there. How did you

00:26:33.940 hear about us box? So that they know that, uh, we sent you. Well, Stephen King is about to be

00:26:41.660 canceled. Everybody JK Rowling was canceled. Now it's Stephen King's turn. So all of the mega rich

00:26:47.440 liberal authors are, are getting their turn in the cancellation chamber. So, um, of course the,

00:26:54.960 the Oscar nominees were released yesterday and, um, there's always a problem, right? Every

00:26:59.760 time the Oscar nominees come out, there's always some group that's been persecuted. There's not

00:27:04.180 enough black people nominated, or there's not enough women, or there's not enough gay people,

00:27:07.520 or there's not there, you know, maybe they forgot to nominate a representative number of gender fluid

00:27:12.600 Mexican pansexuals, whatever it is, whatever the case may be. Um, there's always some group that's 0.80

00:27:18.120 been less left out. So this time around it's women, uh, women get to be the victims this time. So 1.00

00:27:23.560 they won the contest. If you're a woman, congratulations, you won the victimhood contest with the Oscars 0.99

00:27:28.180 this time around. And maybe you didn't, if you are a woman, you may not realize if you've just been,

00:27:33.100 I don't know, outliving your life and not worried about the Oscars, you may not realize that you've

00:27:38.500 been victimized by the Oscar nominee list, but I, it is my pleasure to inform you that in fact you have

00:27:43.380 been. So you have, you know, you can notch a couple extra, a couple other notches in the belt,

00:27:48.060 um, of victimization there because no woman was nominated for best director. Now the best director

00:27:57.100 nominees are apparently Martin Scorsese, Quentin Tarantino, uh, Bong Joon-ho, Sam Mendes,

00:28:05.120 and Todd Phillips. Those are the, the five nominees for best director. Greta Gerwig directed, uh,

00:28:11.220 Little Women and was not included. And that's the issue. That's where the persecution comes in.

00:28:18.600 Stephen King got himself canceled because he had the nerve to suggest that with art,

00:28:23.220 all that matters is quality, not diversity. He had the, the gumption. Now, of course he tweeted

00:28:29.580 this out. He said, well, don't you think that, uh, and they always do it so innocently and like they,

00:28:36.060 they, it's like they really don't realize what's about to happen.

00:28:39.100 So Stephen King tweeted and said, you know, it seems like with art, all that really matters is

00:28:43.980 the quality. It's not so much about diversity. He's just sort of whistling past the graveyard,

00:28:49.820 just sort of strolling along, doesn't realize that he's saying something that's about to get him,

00:28:54.640 about to get him gang tackled by the pitchfork mob. And so he says that, and then predictably,

00:28:59.540 uh, they all descend upon him. I'm just wondering, of course, you know, there's, there's no point in

00:29:05.980 even, and even, uh, analyzing what he said, of course, he's a hundred percent right.

00:29:11.660 Obviously it's, it's when it comes to art or whether it's film or music or books or whatever

00:29:19.040 it is. Um, I, I think what should matter to us as readers or viewers or listeners is,

00:29:26.540 does it speak to us? Is it, is it, is it, is it good? You know, you look at the quality and

00:29:32.600 especially when it comes to rewarding, to handing out awards, the idea is what's the best. Now that

00:29:38.240 can be hard to judge with something like a film and there's a lot of subjective elements to it,

00:29:43.080 but the concept is supposed to be with best director. Who, who, who are the five people who

00:29:49.660 did the best job of directing? Makes no difference. Their, their demographic group makes no difference,

00:29:58.120 obviously. But I'm wondering the people saying that Greta Gerwig should be, should have been

00:30:03.240 nominated for little women. Who, who, who are we kicking out? Okay. So you've got Scorsese and 1.00

00:30:08.800 Tarantino, two of the best directors of our time, and they both released highly acclaimed films this

00:30:14.620 year. I didn't think either of those films, whether it once upon a time in Hollywood and, uh,

00:30:19.080 the Irishman. I didn't think either of them were close to their best movies, but they still,

00:30:24.200 these are still great directors, two of the best still alive today with, with, uh, two movies that

00:30:31.740 were good movies that were certainly very well received by critics. So obviously they're going

00:30:37.080 to be in. And then you've got, uh, Bong Joon-ho who did Parasite, which I haven't seen yet. I'm

00:30:41.160 planning to watch it tonight. I've heard that it's, I mean, it's, it's, it's being hailed as a

00:30:44.900 masterpiece. And anyway, he's not white. So I would think that he's okay to nominate. 0.86

00:30:50.620 Then you've got Sam Mendes and he did 1917, which I did see a few days ago. And I thought it was

00:30:55.880 spectacular. If you haven't seen that movie yet, you know, it's, it's, I know there are a lot of

00:31:00.020 people, especially if you're married and you have kids, you don't get out to the theater very often,

00:31:03.380 even if you don't have kids, maybe you don't go very often because it's expensive and it's just not

00:31:07.660 worth the trouble. And besides, you can just watch it on Netflix, right? When it comes out,

00:31:10.580 uh, or watch it on demand. But this is one of those movies that it'll be, it'd be enjoyable to

00:31:15.660 watch on your regular TV at home. But it's one of those movies that I think the theater experience

00:31:21.620 is worth, is actually worth the price that you pay for it. And, um, I thought it was, was great.

00:31:28.900 Um, one of the criticisms of 1917 that I've read is that, well, the two criticisms, number one,

00:31:37.020 you've got the, what is called a gimmick, what the critic would call a gimmick of the whole movie

00:31:43.480 is presented as if it's one long shot where you're following these guys and, uh, the camera

00:31:49.180 doesn't really break away from them. There's no cuts and it's, it's one long extended shot for two

00:31:54.980 hours. Now, of course, in reality, there were, there were cuts, but they just edited it together.

00:31:59.980 So they didn't look like it. I didn't think it would, I didn't, to me, it didn't come across

00:32:03.060 like a gimmick. I thought that that method really helped to immerse you in the experience.

00:32:10.480 And, um, I don't think it'd be the same movie. I don't think it'd be quite as good if without that.

00:32:15.080 Then the other criticism I've read is that the characters aren't very fleshed out. And so it's

00:32:20.480 sort of like, you're watching a video game. It's like, you're watching a first person shooter.

00:32:23.680 You're watching somebody else play a video game for two hours. And I, you know, the people saying

00:32:27.200 that, I don't know what movie they watched. I thought that these characters were very well fleshed out

00:32:31.540 in subtle ways. Um, this is a problem that war movies have, you know, offense. It's something

00:32:38.340 that something you run into with war movies. It can be difficult while you're trying to tell the

00:32:43.480 story to also make these characters, real characters and not just caricatures. Um, yeah,

00:32:52.080 that's a problem that even I think saving private Ryan had to a certain extent where a few of the

00:32:56.980 characters like Tom Hanks is can, I think it's the greatest war movie of all time. Uh, one of my

00:33:01.400 favorite movies of all time, saving private Ryan, but even that movie, I think Steven Spielberg

00:33:05.400 struggled a little bit to, uh, give, to, to, you know, uh, give some real layers to these characters

00:33:12.840 and to some of them to turn them into real people and not just cartoons basically. So it's always a

00:33:18.840 struggle with war films. I thought that, that Mendez did a, a good noble job of it in a, in a subtle

00:33:25.840 way. You know, there's a few that you get a few scenes with these guys that kind of show you the

00:33:31.480 development of the character and it shows you extra layers there that weren't immediately obvious.

00:33:35.620 So anyway, that was a great movie. Um, and I think deserves to be, deserves to be nominated.

00:33:43.020 And then Todd Phillips with, with Joker, one of the most talked about films of the decade,

00:33:46.720 a huge success, obviously, uh, which of course, just because a movie is a huge success, doesn't

00:33:50.660 make it a great movie, but this is also, I think in my view, a really good film. And, uh, I think

00:33:56.320 it'd be weird to, to, and, and, and also Todd Phillips is presenting a very different take on

00:34:01.680 this iconic character, an iconic, well-worn character. He's presenting a different take.

00:34:08.780 So I think that deserves as well. Who, who, which of these guys do you kick out just so you can

00:34:12.660 nominate Greta Gerwig? I haven't seen Little Women, I admit, and I don't plan to watch it. I admit

00:34:17.620 that too, but it, I'm, I'm skeptical that the, that, that film and the directing job done there

00:34:27.000 is, is really better than any of the five we just, I just mentioned.

00:34:34.080 All right. Um, let's move on to emails, but seriously, go watch 1917 if you haven't watched it

00:34:40.220 yet. Okay. Uh, by the way, I don't want to forget to mention if you're not already a subscriber,

00:34:44.320 you're, you're really missing out on right now using promo code Walsh, you'll get 10%

00:34:48.180 off any plan that you choose. Head over to dailywire.com slash subscribe and pick the plan

00:34:52.960 that's right for you for as little as 10 bucks a month. Members, uh, we'll get our, our articles

00:34:57.040 ad free. You get access to our live broadcast, get the show library, the full three hours of

00:35:01.320 Ben Shapiro every day. Select bonus content. You get access to a mail, mailbag, much more than

00:35:05.760 that as well. Plus, um, our new all access tier gets you live online Q and a discussions with

00:35:11.640 me, Ben Shapiro, Andrew Klavan, Michael Knowles, plus our, uh, our daily wire writers and special

00:35:16.800 guests. We bring them all in. And, uh, it's always a really interesting discussion there.

00:35:20.800 So don't forget, you also get the greatest of all beverage vessels as well. The leftist

00:35:25.200 tiers tumbler. So, uh, you want to get on that now. Okay. This is from Jason says you got on the

00:35:31.340 topic of free will. Again, you had mentioned that you make the decision to lift a mug or make

00:35:35.820 a grilled cheese. What if those are decisions? What if those decisions were allowed to be made

00:35:41.020 as they are inconsequential? You mentioned you could go kill someone if you wanted, but really

00:35:44.800 you can't, your moral code wouldn't allow it. Now morality is subjective to a degree within each

00:35:49.680 person and changes through time. What if God guides us through morality? What if those lacking morals do

00:35:55.420 so because of God putting events in motion? We know morals come from God. What if this is why

00:36:00.940 curious as to your thoughts on this? Okay. So I'm going to try to home in Jason on, uh, what I think

00:36:07.280 are your, your, is your primary point talking about free will. You say that, well, I really can't do

00:36:14.100 whatever I want because my moral code is there. And I guess part of your point is, you know, I'm not the

00:36:20.260 one who put my moral code in place necessarily. So, um, so then I don't have free will. I guess maybe

00:36:26.260 that's your point. So when I say that I'm, I'm choosing to lift my mug. Yeah, I could choose to do

00:36:30.600 that. That's an inconsequential thing, but I can't really go out and kill somebody because

00:36:33.960 my moral code would prevent me. But that's the point, Jason, that my moral code, which does,

00:36:40.880 uh, rule out and prohibit killing someone. Um, it, it actually cannot prevent me from doing it.

00:36:50.000 I could, if I wanted to make the decision in spite of what my moral code says to go out and kill

00:36:55.820 somebody contrasting that with like computer programming. Now your computer is programmed to

00:37:01.940 do a certain thing and, uh, it is prevented then from doing other things that it's not programmed

00:37:07.440 to do unless it malfunctions and something goes wrong, but a more, but a computer can't say to

00:37:12.520 itself, well, I'm programmed to do such and such, but I really don't want to do that. So I'm going to

00:37:17.180 do this instead. We can do that. We can say to ourselves and all of us have said it, hopefully with

00:37:22.260 not with something as serious as killing somebody, but we've all said to ourselves at times in our

00:37:26.240 life, well, I know this is wrong. I shouldn't do it, but I'm going to do it anyway, because I want

00:37:31.020 to, because I've decided that there's something else that I want and it's worth breaking my moral

00:37:36.720 code to obtain it. And then we always find out that it wasn't worth it in the end, but you know,

00:37:40.020 we're stupid. So we keep doing it anyway, but the, but the, we still have free will because we still

00:37:44.740 have that choice. So the fact that I can theoretically, the option is open to me to go into

00:37:52.240 a killing spree if I want to, but I don't. So I don't. Right. Um, and that's the difference.

00:37:58.980 That's where free will, I think, uh, still applies. This is from Santiago says, hi, Matt. I love your

00:38:05.680 show. I listen to it every day. I'm like a mute commute from work. I find myself in the rare

00:38:09.120 position of disagreeing with you in relation to your counter argument to Sam Harris's refutation of

00:38:15.220 free will. I agree with your conclusion that free will exists, but I think that you got Harris's

00:38:19.640 argument wrong. As I understand it, his argument is not that if you had the same mental illnesses

00:38:25.580 and bad home environment of a serial killer, you would also be a serial killer. What he is saying

00:38:29.620 is that if you had exactly the same brain down to the neural, uh, connections and all the same

00:38:35.180 neurotransmitters and other chemical molecules in the exact same position, you would do exactly the

00:38:40.380 same thing. In other words, he is saying that our decisions boil down to just one big complex

00:38:45.240 chemical reaction going on in our brain. As such, if you knew every single molecule in every single

00:38:51.280 position, you would theoretically predict every, every decision or could theoretically predict every

00:38:57.000 decision. Actually, the whole argument of determinism is that the universe itself is one

00:39:00.960 big chemical reaction that should be predictable. If we know all the variables, this idea is represented

00:39:06.020 by the concept of Laplace's demon. Therefore, Harris argues free will is just an illusion that arises

00:39:11.880 from the fact that the chemical reaction in our brain is so complex that making exact predictions

00:39:16.880 of the outcome is hard. However, in theory, even your decision to lift your mug should be predictable

00:39:21.840 if you have enough initial information. This is indeed a powerful argument, but I think it has a big

00:39:26.620 flaw. The burden of proof is on him. The claim that the universe is deterministic and that all that

00:39:31.620 influences the physical world is just matter and physical energy is a tremendously strong one. I do not

00:39:37.320 think there is a way to scientifically or philosophically prove it. What I'm saying is that

00:39:41.940 I do not think that your argument refutes Harris's, but I also do not think that Harris's argument is a

00:39:46.220 valued refutation of free will. In fact, I think that there is no way to conclusively prove that our

00:39:50.880 decisions are deterministic or that free will exists. Yeah, and that is an aspect of Harris's argument.

00:40:00.080 I don't think I thought that I provided a relatively accurate summary of his argument. Now, he did say,

00:40:09.740 I think there was one line in his book, in his argument, I think maybe it was encapsulates it. And

00:40:19.220 it was the strongest line in the book where he's talking about, you know, if I, you know, talking about

00:40:24.680 a, I think it was a murderer, you know, he said, well, if I were to change places with a murderer,

00:40:30.400 would I do the exact same thing? Would I also commit those murders? And then he said, you know,

00:40:35.040 if I were to switch places, Adam for Adam, like what you're talking about here, like I were to switch,

00:40:41.240 switch, even, even right down to my Adams, we were to switch. Well, then in that case,

00:40:44.680 I would just be that other person and I would do everything that they're doing.

00:40:48.000 Which I think is what you're talking about here. But I still say my response to Harris, I think is

00:40:58.140 correct. And I have to say, Santiago, I'm a little bit biased. I think I like my response better than

00:41:04.180 yours because getting into this burden of proof thing. See, I don't like that. I don't, both theists

00:41:10.460 and atheists, no matter what the discussion is, both theists and atheists will try to get into the

00:41:15.120 burden of proof argument. And then you get into this food fight back and forth where, no, the

00:41:19.280 burden of proof is on you. No, it's on you. And then it's back and forth. Who is the burden of proof

00:41:24.100 on? I just, I don't think that's the strongest platform on which to have this discussion.

00:41:34.060 And I think that Harris or someone who's a determinist could just as easily say that,

00:41:39.400 no, the burden of proof is on you. I say that everything is determined by physical matter.

00:41:45.120 You're saying that there's some other force out there, like a soul and spiritual force that we

00:41:51.760 can't see. Burden of proof is on you to prove that because we can't see it. And according to

00:41:57.360 everything we know from science, it's all comes down to matter. So no, the burden of proof is on you.

00:42:03.160 I think that would be his response. And I think it's a pretty fair response. If you want to get into

00:42:07.860 the burden of proof contest, I'd rather not get into that contest. And so I still say my answer

00:42:15.560 is pretty simple, but it remains in place that whether we're talking about chemical reactions in

00:42:24.380 the brain or we're talking about how you were raised and those sort of external factors, the fact

00:42:31.340 remains that as a human, as a human being, when we're deciding what to do, we have met, we have

00:42:40.180 countless infinite, really theoretical options. And we could theoretically do any of those things.

00:42:46.960 So if I'm holding a gun in my hand, it is a theoretical option that I could pick up the gun and shoot

00:42:56.720 somebody. But if I don't, it's because I decided not to. And to me, that's what free will is.

00:43:07.560 There are a whole lot, as I said yesterday, there are a whole lot of things that will influence

00:43:12.620 my decision one way or another. And if I do decide to pick it up and shoot somebody,

00:43:19.000 you could, you could, you know, you could probably start looking at my background. You could look at

00:43:22.760 the way that I was raised. You could, you could look inside my brain and you could find a lot of

00:43:26.560 things that pushed me in that direction. But at the end of the day, that was an option of many

00:43:31.940 different options. And it's the option that I chose.

00:43:34.720 Um, and that's all, I think that's all free will is. It's just, it's just, it's a, it's a, it is a,

00:43:44.260 it is a, um, based on the fact that as human beings, we have many theoretical options for what

00:43:53.640 we do and what we say. And so the only way that I could see to disprove free will is to

00:44:00.660 disprove that those options even exist. You would have to say that, you know, I have the gun. I

00:44:09.840 decide not to shoot someone. You have to say that shooting someone wasn't even a theoretical option.

00:44:14.340 It wasn't an option at all. But, um, I think that's just on the face of it. Clearly incorrect.

00:44:24.440 All right. Uh, so, but it's an interesting discussion at any rate. And, you know, we talk

00:44:34.820 about determinism and free will and everything. And how we've been talking about the last few

00:44:39.980 days, it's, it's been sort of an atheist versus theist thing, but it's not just that because

00:44:45.240 of course, in the past, we've talked about this, uh, with, you know, the different Christian

00:44:51.020 views of this. And there are Christians who say that there's no such thing as free will. So

00:44:55.020 it doesn't have to break down on atheist versus, uh, theist lines. Okay. Uh, we'll leave it there

00:45:01.040 though. Thanks everybody for listening. Thanks for watching. Godspeed.

00:45:06.800 If you enjoyed this episode, don't forget to subscribe. And if you want to help spread the

00:45:10.280 word, please give us a five-star review and tell your friends to subscribe as well. We're available on

00:45:14.400 Apple podcasts, Spotify, wherever you listen to podcasts. Also be sure to check out the other

00:45:19.360 Daily Wire podcast, including the Ben Shapiro show, Michael Knowles show, and the Andrew

00:45:23.320 Klavan show. Thanks for listening. The Matt Wall show is produced by Sean Hampton, executive

00:45:29.300 producer, Jeremy Boring, senior producer, Jonathan Hay, supervising producer, Mathis Glover,

00:45:34.640 supervising producer, Robert Sterling, technical producer, Austin Stevens, editor, Donovan Fowler,

00:45:40.100 audio mixer, Robin Fenderson. The Matt Wall show is a Daily Wire production, copyright Daily

00:45:45.380 Wire 2020. The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences is under

00:45:49.180 fire from the race focused left for once again, snubbing performers of color in the Oscar

00:45:54.440 nominations. But in the Academy's defense, there will at least be more black candidates 0.51

00:45:59.280 in the running at the Oscars than there will be at tonight's all white democratic presidential

00:46:03.740 debate in Des Moines, Iowa. We will examine the incoherence and hypocrisy of racial identity 0.95

00:46:09.660 politics. Check it out on the Michael Knowles show.

The Matt Walsh Show - January 14, 2020

Ep. 404 - Socialist Fight!

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript