The Matt Walsh Show - Ep. 664 - The Hollow People

00:00:00.000 Today on the Matt Wall Show, Joe Biden's attorney general nominee claims that domestic terrorism

00:00:04.480 doesn't count when it happens at night. We'll talk about that in some of his other

00:00:08.280 bizarre statements during his confirmation hearings. Plus, five headlines, including

00:00:11.760 the head of the American Federation of Teachers arrogantly waving away concerns about the well-being

00:00:16.400 of children. Also, Coca-Cola continues its damage control efforts after its racist anti-white

00:00:22.020 indoctrination of employees was revealed. And in our daily cancellation, we'll discuss a recent

00:00:26.060 study which claims that left-wing female politicians are the primary targets of abuse 1.00

00:00:31.540 and harassment online. Is there any truth to that? No, there isn't. But we'll discuss all of that and

00:00:36.780 more today on the Matt Wall Show. Yesterday, Joe Biden's attorney general nominee, Merrick Garland,

00:00:48.320 began his confirmation hearings. Biden aims to give Garland the attorney general position as kind of

00:00:53.100 a runner-up prize after the Senate Republicans famously and correctly chose not to give him a

00:00:58.160 hearing as a SCOTUS nominee in 2016, a decision that remains one of the Republican Party's greatest

00:01:03.200 achievements of the 21st century, which probably tells you what you need to know about the Republican

00:01:07.580 Party in the 21st century. In any case, Garland did get a hearing this time. Now, normally, a

00:01:12.780 confirmation hearing for a cabinet official is the last thing that I would waste time talking about

00:01:18.140 on this show. Not because it doesn't matter, but because, frankly, I find it incredibly boring.

00:01:22.860 This hearing has been no exception to the incredibly boring rule, though there have been a couple of

00:01:27.920 clarifying and perhaps instructive moments to come out of the otherwise painfully dull spectacle.

00:01:33.280 Moments that clarify and instruct because they reveal just what sorts of people we have ruling over

00:01:40.000 us. And that is hollow people, empty people, the sorts of people who C.S. Lewis described as

00:01:45.240 men without chests. Now, before we get to the two exchanges that capture this so clearly,

00:01:51.040 I want to play one other brief clip that was interesting for a different reason.

00:01:55.040 Here, Garland is talking to Cory Booker about the incident at the Capitol on January 6th. And I want

00:02:00.500 you to pay attention to what Garland says. Listen. Is this something that you will look at in terms of

00:02:05.260 the degree of the resources of the agency? Yeah. As I say, I think the first thing I should do

00:02:10.560 as part of my briefings on the Capitol bombing are briefings with Director Wray as to where he sees

00:02:19.020 the biggest threat and whether the resources of the Bureau and of the Department are allocated

00:02:24.620 towards the biggest threat and the most dangerous and direct threat. We do have to be careful across

00:02:31.020 the board. We can never let somebody sneak around the end because we're not focusing. But we also

00:02:40.000 have to allocate our resources towards the biggest threat. Wait, the what now? The Capitol bombing?

00:02:47.540 You might say this was a slip of the tongue and maybe so, but it does raise an intriguing question.

00:02:51.320 The Capitol was not bombed on January 6th. Nothing was bombed. However, there were two bombs placed

00:02:56.880 outside of both the RNC and DNC headquarters. Originally, we were told that these bombs were

00:03:00.940 put there during the chaos, during the riots by a rioter. Now we know that it happened the night

00:03:06.620 before. The bombs have always been tied and by the media are still tied to the riot as part of the

00:03:12.820 media's effort to make the riot sound as insurrection-y as possible. And yes, that's a real

00:03:17.740 word. I just decided. But it doesn't seem like they had anything to do with each other, given that the

00:03:22.060 bombs were put there the night before. So who did put the bombs there? I mean, now that you bring up

00:03:27.160 the bombs, who put them there? What was that all about? It's a month and a half later. We still

00:03:32.140 don't know. How can that be? Someone put bombs outside RNC and DNC headquarters in the middle of

00:03:37.700 Washington, D.C. There's been an army of federal agents working this case, and they still don't know

00:03:42.880 who did it? Cameras, DNA, fingerprints, witnesses. I mean, these lines of evidence have produced

00:03:48.600 no results. How could that be? Of course, the other possibility is that they do know who did it,

00:03:54.440 but they aren't publicizing that fact for whatever reason. Anyway, that's a bit of a sidetrack. Let's

00:04:00.620 go to a different clip now that gets closer to the point for our purposes today. Here is Senator

00:04:05.080 Hawley questioning Garland about the Antifa slash BLM rioting and asking whether those riots qualify as

00:04:13.480 domestic terror attacks. And here's Garland's answer to that. Let me ask you about assaults on

00:04:20.160 federal property in places other than Washington, D.C., Portland, France, and Seattle. Do you regard

00:04:25.040 assaults on federal courthouses or other federal property as acts of domestic extremism, domestic

00:04:29.860 terrorism? Well, Senator, my own definition, which is about the same as the statutory definition,

00:04:37.320 is a use of violence or threats of violence, an attempt to disrupt democratic processes. So an attack

00:04:45.600 on a courthouse while in operation, trying to prevent judges from actually deciding cases, that plainly is

00:04:54.800 domestic extremism, domestic terrorism. An attack simply on government property at night or any other

00:05:07.220 kind of circumstances is a clear crime and a serious one and should be punished. I don't mean,

00:05:12.640 I don't know enough about the facts of the example you're talking about, but that's where I draw the

00:05:17.200 line. One is both are criminal, but one is a core attack on our democratic institutions.

00:05:25.500 Wait a second. I'm sorry. What? If I'm hearing this correctly, it sounded like he just claimed that

00:05:37.780 the definition of domestic terrorism depends on the time of day. Yes, that is what he said, isn't it?

00:05:43.380 Am I hallucinating? Or did the guy who's going to be attorney general just say that it doesn't count

00:05:48.820 as domestic terrorism if you do it at night? I guess this means the 9-11 attacks wouldn't have

00:05:55.680 been terrorism had they occurred a few hours earlier. Now, one might argue that attempting to,

00:06:02.300 for example, burn down a courthouse at night is also an attempt to interfere with its normal

00:06:07.500 operations during the day. I don't think the BLM terrorists had in mind that the courthouse or any 0.95

00:06:12.820 other building that they attempted to torch or succeeded in torching would be rebuilt in six hours.

00:06:17.280 What about the police station in Minneapolis that was invaded and then set on fire and incinerated?

00:06:23.000 Yeah, that happened at night, but there were police occupying it and working inside it until they fled

00:06:27.780 for their lives. Does that count as interrupting the democratic process? I'd say that setting a police

00:06:34.120 station on fire is a bit of an interruption. Call me crazy. But this is what we get from guys like

00:06:39.620 Garland, bureaucrats, you know, empty suits, empty heads. They don't even bother to be convincing.

00:06:44.160 He offered the lamest possible rationalization for exempting Antifa and BLM from the domestic

00:06:49.640 terrorist label. He wasn't even putting effort into it. Well, no, they see they they're at night,

00:06:55.340 so it's different. And it doesn't matter because when you have the institutions on your side,

00:07:02.000 you don't have to lie convincingly. Speaking of lame responses, nothing can beat this. Here's Garland

00:07:08.220 when asked whether males should be allowed to take part in female sports. Here's what he said.

00:07:14.600 In my last 20 seconds, I'm going to ask you if you agree with this statement, allowing

00:07:20.480 and I'm not suggesting the answer one way or the other. I just want to know what you believe.

00:07:26.840 Allowing biological males to compete in an all female sport deprives women of the opportunity 1.00

00:07:34.940 to participate fully and fairly in sports and is fundamentally unfair to female athletes. 0.89

00:07:43.040 This is a very difficult societal question that you're asking here. I know what underlies it.

00:07:47.440 I know, but you're going to be attorney general.

00:07:49.360 Well, but I may not be the one who has to make policy decisions like that, but it's not that I'm

00:07:54.600 adverse to it. Look, I think every human being should be treated with dignity and respect.

00:07:59.440 And that's an overriding sense of my own character, but an overriding sense of what the law

00:08:04.760 requires. The particular question of how Title IX applies in schools is one, in light of the

00:08:13.400 Bostock case, which I know you're very familiar with, is something that I would have to look

00:08:18.180 at when I have a chance to do that. I've not had the chance to consider these kinds of issues

00:08:23.500 in my career so far, but I agree that this is a difficult question. Thank you, Judge.

00:08:30.720 No, no, it's not. It's not a difficult question at all. It is, in fact, the easiest question society

00:08:37.920 has ever faced. I can't think of an easier one. There are some issues that are difficult because

00:08:43.460 good arguments can be made on either side of them. Even if you fall firmly on one side of an issue of

00:08:49.080 that sort, the difficult sort of issue, you still have to admit that the people on the other side are

00:08:53.000 making respectable, intelligent, even compelling arguments. The death penalty, for example, is an

00:08:57.460 issue that you might call difficult because there are respectable, intelligent, coherent arguments

00:09:01.760 you can make on either side of it. Those are truly difficult societal questions. This question,

00:09:06.820 though, is not difficult. It's not difficult because all of the coherent arguments are on one side.

00:09:12.500 The people in favor of putting males in female sports, or female locker rooms for that matter, 1.00

00:09:16.500 have never made a single good argument. That's not an exaggeration. It's not hyperbole.

00:09:20.280 They've just never made a good argument. There is no good argument. It's never been offered. It's

00:09:24.540 never been discovered. They have not offered one compelling reason to convince us to go along with

00:09:28.820 their plan. Their argument is simply to shout the word bigot and then rattle off a series of bumper

00:09:33.380 sticker slogans like you just heard him there do there. Well, I think all people should be treated

00:09:37.220 with dignity and respect. What the hell does that have to do with this? Yes, of course, everyone should

00:09:41.580 be treated with dignity and respect. Obviously, that has nothing to do with this question.

00:09:45.880 And if it does have anything to do with this question, then it relates to the fact that we

00:09:50.320 should treat these girls with dignity and respect by not letting men, boys, into their locker rooms.

00:09:57.980 See, the people on that side of it, they have never made an argument that can be stated in the

00:10:02.940 form of, I believe that X is the proper course of action for the following reasons. That's basically

00:10:09.940 the form that a real argument should take. Here's what I believe. Here are my reasons for believing it.

00:10:15.880 It's never been done because they're wrong on every level. Morally, ethically, scientifically,

00:10:20.980 logically. This is not difficult. Garland may as well say it's difficult when I ask him whether

00:10:26.020 flying, fire-breathing dragons exist. Well, the issue of whether these creatures from fantasy novels

00:10:31.760 exist in real life is deeply controversial and far too difficult to determine one way or another.

00:10:36.080 I'd really have to research it further before I can speak on any length on this issue.

00:10:45.480 But Garland perfectly represents many of our bureaucrats, politicians, members of the ruling

00:10:49.180 class. It's not that they're radical ideologues. This is something that I think sometimes people

00:10:53.120 on the right don't fully understand or miss the real point. Now, some of them are radical ideologues,

00:10:59.520 sure, but not all or even most. They are merely empty, hollow, spineless nothings. They have

00:11:07.820 attached themselves like barnacles onto the system. They care only for power, power for its own sake.

00:11:13.820 This gender stuff is the perfect illustration. How many democratic officials, I ask you, how many 1.00

00:11:18.740 democratic officials and politicians actually believe in left-wing gender theory? How many guys like 0.71

00:11:24.620 Garland? Garland is whatever, 97 years old. He's been doing this forever. Do you think he really

00:11:31.320 believes this? Do you think he actually, in his heart and mind, thinks that a 17-year-old boy who

00:11:37.220 says he's a girl should be treated like one? How many guys like Garland? I'd wager that answer is,

00:11:43.340 the answer to that question is close to zero. But they're happy to go along with the insanity and

00:11:48.740 facilitate it and impose it on the rest of us if it means that they can cling to their positions of power.

00:11:53.620 The best example of this is the guy at the top, Joe Biden himself. He's not a radical. He's not an

00:11:59.160 ideologue. He's not an Antifa sympathizer deep in his soul. But he's happy to play that role,

00:12:05.620 happy to let the radicals run roughshod over our culture, inflicting whatever damage they're going

00:12:09.740 to inflict. It's okay with him because he has the power, power for its own sake. That's all that

00:12:16.460 these people care about. Now let's get to our five headlines. Speaking of empty, pathetic, soulless

00:12:29.380 people, the head of the American Federation of Teachers, Randy Weingarten, was asked if shutting 0.98

00:12:35.640 schools for a year or more will do permanent damage to our children. It's clear that Randy Weingarten

00:12:44.620 isn't too concerned about that. That's already been clear that the teachers union doesn't care

00:12:51.440 about the damage that they're doing to kids. But to hear it so explicitly acknowledged can be maybe

00:12:58.640 even a little shocking. So let's let's listen to this. Is there a point and maybe you think we've

00:13:02.680 already passed it. Is there a point in which kids have been out of physical in-person school for so long

00:13:08.660 that the education that they've lost isn't really recoverable? That the third grade, the fourth grade,

00:13:14.900 the kindergarten they lost, you can, they can take extra semesters in the summer, they can do, but it

00:13:19.980 can't really be fixed. No, I don't believe that. I believe that kids are resilient and kids will

00:13:27.360 recover. But we as adults have to meet their needs, their emotional needs, their social needs,

00:13:34.800 their learning needs. And that's who America's educators are. That's who America's bus drivers

00:13:40.920 are. That's who America's paraprofessionals are. That's who America's food service workers are.

00:13:47.180 And we are pained about what has happened in this pandemic. The crises that have enveloped our kids,

00:13:56.680 our communities, ourselves. But at the end of the day, we have to believe that this is recoverable.

00:14:05.340 And we have to believe that virtually all our kids will thrive with the opportunities that we put

00:14:13.020 before them. We have to believe we have to believe it. Is it true? Well, it's a different question

00:14:18.240 entirely, but we have to believe it. What an absolute nothing of a person you just saw there. She was

00:14:24.960 giving a stump speech. She's a teacher's union. This is the issue that she's been

00:14:31.220 knee deep in now for a year. And she's asked to talk about the kids and the effect this is having

00:14:39.940 on kids. And that's all she's got. She's got a stump speech. She has nothing to say. It's like she

00:14:45.120 hasn't thought about it at all because she hasn't, because she doesn't care. She's not thinking about

00:14:49.400 what this is doing to kids. She couldn't give less of a damn. So she gives a stump speech, like a 0.97

00:14:53.900 politician giving a campaign speech. That's what our food service professionals are all about.

00:14:59.340 What? What does that have to do with anything? That's who our food service professionals? Who asked

00:15:04.120 about food service professionals? What are you talking about? I wish just once I'd watch an

00:15:11.500 interview like this and the person giving the interview would react like that. This is why I don't

00:15:15.140 get, this is why I don't get the interviews. Just interrupt her and say, Hey, listen, you're

00:15:19.220 babbling right now. Can you, can you speak to me like a human being? Are you capable of that?

00:15:26.000 Now she says that kids are resilient. Well, kids are resilient. They'll be fine.

00:15:31.580 Would it, would it be okay? Could I, I couldn't give that response about teachers.

00:15:36.500 We can't put teachers back in the class and say, teachers are resilient. They'll figure it out.

00:15:41.580 Well, of course we know that a lot of teachers are not resilient. That much is clear.

00:15:45.140 But this, this idea that the kids are resilient and, and, and so they'll, they'll be okay. And

00:15:50.240 we can take away a year of education or two years. Um, and, and, you know, we can psychologically

00:15:55.500 traumatize them and tell them that there's a disease out there that's going to kill them.

00:15:59.540 And we have to muzzle them when they're out in public and we can do all that. We can, we can deprive

00:16:03.060 them of, um, not just physical contact with other people, but, uh, even, even the, the opportunity to,

00:16:08.920 to see the faces of strangers out in public. You know, a lot of kids, they have not seen a stranger

00:16:15.000 face in public in a year, but we can do that because they're resilient. We're told by this

00:16:22.260 person. Um, yeah, but here's the thing.

00:16:30.780 So we say kids are resilient. They're not resilient so much as adaptive. Okay. I don't think resilient

00:16:40.420 is exactly the right word because resilient makes it sound like you can do whatever you want to a

00:16:46.340 child and they'll bounce back and be fine. That is not true. They, they are adaptive though. They

00:16:52.440 adapt very quickly to almost any situation. And that could be a great advantage with kids. You know,

00:17:00.260 we're all like that as kids, we kind of need to be like that, especially as children, we're going

00:17:04.840 out into the big wide world. We don't really understand as a young child, you don't really

00:17:09.500 know anything about the world. And so you have to kind of go with the flow. Um, and so, and so kids,

00:17:17.460 kids can do that, but there's also a dark side to that, to that, uh, adaptability that, uh, of children

00:17:24.540 is that whatever's happening to them, they'll accept it as normal. They're not going to question it

00:17:32.980 because they're kids and they're going to say, well, this is just what it's, what it's supposed

00:17:36.960 to be. That's why a lot of kids who are being horribly abused don't tell anybody because they

00:17:45.240 don't understand that this isn't supposed to happen to them. They figure, Oh, mommy and daddy

00:17:49.620 treat me like this. Well, this is just what mommy and daddies do. This is what, this is what it means

00:17:54.500 to be a person. This is what it means to be a kid. I deserve this. This is what kids are saying to

00:17:58.840 themselves. And this is why they don't come forward. It's why they, it's why they endure the abuse for so

00:18:02.780 long and don't tell anybody. Um, does that mean that they're resilient? They'll just bounce back.

00:18:11.060 It's not affecting them. Not at all. All it means is that the real effect is something that, that

00:18:17.520 they're not able to deal with right now, but they're going to be in therapy for the rest of

00:18:21.760 their lives, dealing with it as adults. I worry about that a lot with what's happening right now,

00:18:27.880 with all the lockdowns and everything and schools being shut down. I worry about how adapted our

00:18:35.300 kids are to it. They simply accept it as normal. This is the world now. Education is something that

00:18:43.720 we can take away for a year. It's no big deal. We wear masks when we go out in public. We're afraid

00:18:48.800 to talk to strangers. We're afraid, we're afraid to be around other people. It's dangerous to be on a

00:18:54.020 playground. That's why they got them covered in caution tape. Kids adapt to that. And they say,

00:18:58.600 well, that's, that's just how it is. That's normal. It's not normal. It's not how it's supposed

00:19:02.980 to be, but they're being conditioned to see it that way. And that is doing enormous damage to them.

00:19:10.960 And it's damage that they won't fully understand themselves until they're adults.

00:19:17.840 It's damaging them in ways that they certainly don't understand. And we don't understand.

00:19:21.260 And we won't even begin to understand until years down the line. That's the reality.

00:19:28.520 But I'm saying this as someone who actually gives a damn about what happens to our kids.

00:19:33.100 The people that are running teachers unions, they don't care at all about our kids. 0.99

00:19:38.720 They're sociopaths. All right. This is from Newsweek. Coca-Cola facing mounting backlash from 0.98

00:19:44.600 conservatives online has responded to allegations of anti-white rhetoric after an internal whistleblower

00:19:49.380 leaked screenshots of diversity training materials that encourages staff to try to be less white.

00:19:54.740 By the way, starting here in the very first sentence, you notice how Newsweek says that it's

00:19:59.000 conservatives who are the, the ones who are causing this backlash over the anti-white racism

00:20:05.580 from Coca-Cola. Now that's correct. It is mostly conservatives, but you see how readily the media

00:20:12.260 admits that conservatives are the only ones who care about racism against white people.

00:20:17.260 The media will readily accept. In fact, it's happy to give that issue to conservatives.

00:20:26.880 On Friday, it's back to the articles. It says on Friday, Carolyn Baransenko, an activist who

00:20:32.440 supports banning critical race theory, shared images from an internal whistleblower of the company's

00:20:36.660 online racism training. The slides include, included tips to learners on how to be less white,

00:20:42.120 less arrogant, less certain, less defensive, less ignorant, and more humble. Because of course, 0.72

00:20:48.900 we know that, you know, that's synonymous with white is being arrogant and all those other things. 0.84

00:20:55.740 Now, so this is the part you probably heard about all this. A Coca-Cola spokesperson confirmed that the

00:21:00.540 course is part of a learning plan to help build an inclusive workforce, but also noted that, quote,

00:21:05.280 the video circulating on social media is from a publicly available LinkedIn learning series and is not a

00:21:10.440 focus of our company's curriculum. They said, our Better Together global learning curriculum is part of

00:21:16.580 a learning plan to help build an inclusive workforce. It is comprised of a number of short vignettes, each a

00:21:22.040 few minutes long. The training includes access to LinkedIn learning on a variety of topics, including on

00:21:26.620 diversity, equity, and inclusion. Okay. So that's, uh, that's your classic non-denial denial. Um,

00:21:34.880 because they're saying they're not coming out and saying this is totally made up and photoshopped.

00:21:40.300 It's not real. They're saying, yeah, this is part of the curriculum. It's just, that's not our focus.

00:21:43.860 We're not focused on that part of it. Well, if we want to know whether that excuse should wash, then all we

00:21:51.220 have to do is like, I always say with something like this, if you want to know whether it's racist and if it's

00:21:56.240 not immediately clear to you, like something like this should be, uh, all you have to do is take white

00:21:59.940 out and put another race in. So if Coca-Cola was putting their employees through a training course

00:22:09.340 that at any point included the instruction to be less black, there would be no controversy at all.

00:22:17.920 We wouldn't be calling this a controversy. There'd be nothing like that around just everybody would

00:22:24.420 agree across all aisles would agree that it's, uh, that it's inexcusable racism and it's racism,

00:22:30.500 by the way, just straightforward racism. Because the other thing that I've seen in response to this,

00:22:35.220 um, Coca-Cola story is, uh, the claim that this is reverse racism. In fact, there are still some,

00:22:43.800 I think most conservatives have, have wised up on this issue, but there are still some conservatives

00:22:50.060 that I've seen saying, this is reverse racism. Coca-Cola is committing reverse racism. No,

00:22:55.960 this is not reverse racism. Let's be clear about that. Coca-Cola is not guilty of reverse racism.

00:23:01.680 They are guilty of racism. Straightforward, regular old racism. There's no such thing as reverse racism.

00:23:09.280 There's just racism. That's it. Reverse racism implies when you say reverse racism, you are,

00:23:19.380 you're surrendering the point. You're ceding ground. You're agreeing with the left's premise

00:23:25.720 that racism itself is a white thing and that white, white people own racism. And so if a black person

00:23:34.800 or if a non-white person is racist, they are, all they're doing is reversing the racism. 0.54

00:23:40.600 Which has a hint, the phrase itself has a hint of kind of giving them a taste of their own medicine.

00:23:46.580 Right? Or just, we're reversing the racism back on you. No, there's no race that owns racism.

00:23:53.300 Racism is racism. Reverse racism is not a thing. This is simply racism. All right. Um, this is from

00:23:59.300 the independent. It says a South African farm owner has been strongly criticized after posing with the

00:24:03.980 heart of a giraffe that she shot and killed during a trophy hunting trip earlier this month. In a

00:24:09.280 series of photos posted on, um, her Facebook page, the 32 year old was shown clutching the bloodied

00:24:15.140 organ. Uh, she wrote in the caption, ever wondered how a big, how big a giraffe's heart is. I'm

00:24:22.960 absolutely over the moon with my big Valentine's present. So she was brought by her, I don't know if

00:24:29.060 it's her husband or her boyfriend, uh, is a Valentine Valentine's gift to go cut, shoot a 0.96

00:24:35.760 giraffe and cut its heart out. Um, you know, this is everyone has their own ideas of romance.

00:24:43.900 That's not my wife's idea of romance. If I told her her Valentine gift, she gets a cut an animal's 1.00

00:24:48.160 heart out. She, you know, would be very concerned, but, um, let's see. It says in a separate Facebook

00:24:54.280 post, she said she has been waiting to hunt a big black giraffe bull since 2016 and was pictured

00:25:01.260 holding a gun next to the lifeless body of a large giraffe and then, uh, et cetera and so forth. And

00:25:05.760 of course there's been a huge backlash. This was trending online. Um, and she's getting, I think

00:25:10.840 probably all of the, the reaction that she expected and I guess partly wanted. That's why she posted the

00:25:16.480 pictures in the first place. I'm realizing as I read this story that there's nothing I can say about

00:25:21.400 it that won't get me in trouble. Um, um, I'm not the guy to comment on any animal rights type issues

00:25:28.500 because I care so little about those issues. Now with trophy hunting for one, I don't know a lot

00:25:35.000 about trophy hunting, so I'll admit that from the start. Um, one thing I will say is that if you're

00:25:42.200 going out and killing an animal as a trophy and whatever, whatever, cutting its head off and mounting

00:25:48.060 it on the wall and then all, all of the meat and everything goes to waste, I don't think hunters

00:25:53.000 are doing that, but if that's what's happening, I'd be totally against that. Uh, my understanding

00:25:57.080 with trophy hunting is that these animals are, the meat is then given to the villagers. And, and,

00:26:02.520 and so there's, there's food provided. Um, and if that's what happens in the case of trophy

00:26:08.100 hunting, if there's food being provided to people who need it, I got no problem with it.

00:26:13.800 As long as it's not a waste, as long as we're not wasting an animal's life for no reason other

00:26:20.060 than taking the picture. I think we all should be against that, but you're harvesting the meat,

00:26:24.960 you're feeding hungry people, human beings who need the food. I got no problem with that. And, um,

00:26:30.700 and I'm always going to go back to the fact anytime there's outrage over an animal being killed,

00:26:37.200 you know, I can't help, but, uh, but think that we are a country where a million human babies are 0.97

00:26:45.800 murdered every single year. And I don't see how we have the time to talk about animals being killed

00:26:53.420 given that I think whatever effort or energy anyone is putting into animal rights, all of that should be

00:27:03.040 directed towards unborn children who are being slaughtered 60 million since Roe v. Wade until

00:27:09.480 we stop that from happening. I don't think we have the time to worry about any, about animals

00:27:13.000 who are being killed. That's, that's my perspective. I know you could say we could do both.

00:27:19.000 Yeah, but the, the issue of 60 million babies being slaughtered, 60 million, so vastly outweighs

00:27:25.920 the concerns of animal rights that I don't see how we can do both, frankly. All right. Uh, let's see.

00:27:34.560 NBC news reports an explosive prop being built for a gender reveal party accidentally detonated and

00:27:40.160 killed a father to be in New York state. Uh, the, the tragic mishap occurred in Sullivan County,

00:27:45.420 uh, village of Liberty. And this was, let's see, Christopher Peckney, 28. He died in the blast.

00:27:52.600 His brother was injured and this was not actually at the gender reveal party. They were, they were

00:27:57.480 building the prop and testing it so that they could then bring it to the gender reveal party.

00:28:01.820 And this tragic accident occurred. This, I think is the second gender reveal death in the last couple 1.00

00:28:07.960 of weeks. And those two are not the only, I mean, this, this is something that we see every spring,

00:28:14.880 basically, it seems to be a seasonal thing. Every spring and summer, we see these stories, um,

00:28:19.580 gender reveal cannons, gender reveal pyrotechnics and, uh, uh, everything. Fireworks going off, 0.88

00:28:26.720 people dying, forest fires being set. When are we going to get to a point where we're done with this?

00:28:34.980 I'm not necessarily asking for the government to step in and ban gender reveal parties.

00:28:38.960 Uh, I don't think we're quite at that point, but as a society, I think we should

00:28:42.720 be ready to move on from gender reveal parties. Um, really one person dying because of a gender

00:28:49.080 reveal party is way too much. That is a cost not worth paying. But when you've got multiple deaths

00:28:55.180 and forest fires starting every year because of gender reveal parties, come on. And what it comes 0.98

00:29:02.340 down to is, is we, you have to keep in mind if you're, if you're thinking of staging a gender reveal

00:29:09.220 party. And even if you're not involving any pyrotechnics, which hopefully you aren't,

00:29:13.700 nobody really cares about the gender of your child, your friends and family. They care about

00:29:20.460 the fact that you're having a baby. That's a wonderful thing, but they don't have a preference

00:29:24.340 for what gender it is. They don't really care that much. So this idea of dramatically revealing

00:29:32.300 the gender. And then everyone has to be excited either way. So it's, it seems like the most useless 1.00

00:29:40.580 sort of a pageantry, save all the celebration for the birth and all that kind of stuff. It's exciting

00:29:45.600 to have a baby. Congratulations. But, um, I don't think the gender reveal parties are have much point

00:29:51.780 to them. Five. Finally, Cancun gate, the lamest political scandal of the modern era has not gone

00:29:56.980 away just yet. Some activists, uh, showed up outside of Ted Cruz's house to play mariachi music

00:30:03.240 as a way of trolling him for going to Cancun for less than 24 hours. Let's listen to a little bit

00:30:08.420 of that. Here it is. Okay. A couple of things about the mariachi music. So they're standing around

00:30:24.880 playing mariachi music outside of Ted Cruz's house to just two quick points. Number one,

00:30:30.600 mariachi music. Every time I hear it, I am shocked anew by how terrible it is. It is the worst genre of

00:30:36.740 music. I'm sorry, but it simply is. I can't tell you how many nice dinners at Mexican restaurants have

00:30:42.520 been ruined because of mariachi music. It is really, really bad music. It's simply, it's like polka music

00:30:47.900 level. It's, it's on, it's, it's that tier of the dregs of, of music genres. That's the first thing,

00:30:56.020 which, which actually makes it, I guess, effective trolling because it's so terrible. Um, and the

00:31:02.320 second thing is if, if, if you're worried that Ted Cruz is not contributing enough, not helping out

00:31:08.480 enough with, um, you know, getting Texas back and running after the, uh, after the disaster last week,

00:31:15.300 if you're worried about that, then maybe you should be chipping in and going to volunteer somewhere

00:31:22.060 instead of standing around Ted Cruz's house, playing mariachi music. See, you're, you're worried

00:31:28.180 Ted Cruz isn't doing anything. You're standing outside of his house, either holding a sign or

00:31:32.740 playing terrible music. So get your own house in order. Stop throwing stones when you're living in

00:31:40.260 that glass house with the terrible music. All right, let's go to our comments. Now we go to our,

00:31:47.080 uh, most recent beloved segment, reading the YouTube comments. This is from user name, the Q and A. He

00:31:53.720 says a better name for these new Puritans would be impuritans. We discussed yesterday. The left is 0.98

00:31:59.840 there are the new Puritans impuritans. I like that and I will steal it. And I'll tell you right now, 1.00

00:32:05.360 I'm not going to give you credit. Uh, this is from username. I like, I look like the word lacrosse.

00:32:11.580 That's the username. Walsh, I have to admit, I tried out your burrito recipe and it was actually

00:32:17.600 pretty good. Well, thanks for trying it out. And, and, uh, or I go, well, I guess really you should

00:32:21.220 be thanking me because I'm the one who gave you that delicious recipe. If you haven't seen my burrito

00:32:24.600 recipe yet, you can go to Instagram or on YouTube, my YouTube channel and find, um, I did kind of a,

00:32:30.780 uh, there was a viral burrito recipe and I did my own version of it. And I think rave reviews from

00:32:39.460 everyone who's tried it. So you should go check that out. John Kirkwood writes the original Puritans

00:32:44.140 wouldn't celebrate Christmas either. The Puritans feared that somewhere someone was having fun.

00:32:49.080 You nailed it, Matt. Well, I think that's probably a gross simplification of the Puritans and what

00:32:55.000 they believed. Uh, I believe it's true that they didn't celebrate Christmas, but actually the word

00:33:00.500 Puritan comes from purified. They were trying to purify. What were they trying to purify? What

00:33:06.320 they were primarily wanting to purify is, um, Christianity of Catholicism. They were very

00:33:12.680 anti-Catholic and they wanted to purify, uh, Catholic influence in Christianity. That's where

00:33:20.760 the name comes from. And being anti-Catholic, I guess that's another thing they have in common

00:33:25.240 with the modern left. In fact, this is from Gullwings. He writes our whole lives. We have

00:33:29.920 appropriated literally everything that's ever existed. That's how we survived. This generation 0.93

00:33:34.040 didn't discover fire, farming, cars. You can name, you can name anything really. We've been creating

00:33:39.480 and improving on past creations and inventions. If you have a better tequila recipe, then by all

00:33:43.860 means, appropriate it and improve it and sell it. We all win when we are, when we are, when there are

00:33:48.680 more choices in the market, this is all absolutely absurd. Um, it is, that's very well stated. These

00:33:56.600 are all things. This is how society, this is how cultures develop. Society evolves through

00:34:04.480 influencing each other. You know, there was a time long ago, it seems now when the claim was that we,

00:34:13.600 you know, we wanted America to be a melting pot. And so all different cultures would come here and,

00:34:17.840 and we assimilate and influence each other. And it would be one big happy family. Um, that was the

00:34:23.940 claim. And in fact, people that were advocates for immigration. So like the left winger is a 30 years

00:34:31.580 ago. That's what they said. You'll notice though, they don't talk about the melting pot anymore.

00:34:36.040 They don't want a melting pot. No, they want people to come here and then set up their own

00:34:40.640 segregated communities with no influence from the outside world. So that there is no one unified,

00:34:48.840 coherent America. That's their goal. And they're succeeding. Finally, Dave says, come on, Matt,

00:34:53.840 you can't hide from me forever. As a fellow banjo player, I have to hear you play the banjo just so

00:34:58.220 I can find out how pathetically inferior your banjo skills are to mine. If you continue to ignore me, 0.84

00:35:03.980 you will be canceled. Well, first of all, I've played the banjo before on, on the air. I'm not going to

00:35:09.400 be goaded to playing it again. Uh, first of all, I'm not a trained monkey here to amuse you.

00:35:14.700 I mean, I am here to amuse you. And some would say that I'm basically a trained monkey, but still

00:35:18.460 that's not the point. Second of all, I play the banjo every day. All right. All day in my heart,

00:35:24.380 the banjo music of my heart. That's what matters the most. Third of all, you are a disgrace and a

00:35:31.200 scoundrel. And you're banned from the show. You know, one thing we desperately need in our 1.00

00:35:35.760 country, in our culture today, are companies out there that are working for us in the culture,

00:35:41.880 not against us. And that's why I'm so grateful for 40 days for life. Um, the state of our culture

00:35:47.040 frustrates all of us. We have politicians lobbying for infanticide, uh, and, and we have, you know,

00:35:52.780 far left, we know all of that going on, but you know, where I see real progress is at the

00:35:58.360 grassroots level in 40 days for life. And I've talked about this many times. This is the fact

00:36:02.780 that we have to, we have to focus on the most localized level possible work in our own communities,

00:36:07.460 try to get a handle on that. We can't make, we have no hope of making any changes on a national

00:36:11.800 scale. If we can't make changes on a local scale first, 40 days for life. That's what they're all

00:36:16.020 about. 40 days for life went from one peaceful prayer vigil in the front of a Planned Parenthood in Texas

00:36:20.280 to now a thousand cities in 66 countries, 40 days of prayer, fasting and law abiding vigils have

00:36:26.140 saved 18,000 babies from abortion. They're saving lives are making a real difference. They've helped

00:36:30.640 211 abortion workers leave their jobs. They've closed 107 abortion facilities, including the Texas

00:36:36.360 location that now serves as the headquarters for 40 days for life. So they shut down an abortion facility 0.75

00:36:40.300 and they took it over and, uh, they turned it into a headquarters to fight for life, which is just

00:36:46.200 awesome. You can be a part of the beginning of the end of abortion by joining 1

00:36:50.120 million volunteers and sign up for your location at 40 days for life.com. You can also stay updated on

00:36:55.400 the number one pro-life podcast, 40 days for life. The largest spring campaign ever is happening from

00:37:00.480 February 17th through March 28th. So it's going on right now. You got to get involved. Um, I have,

00:37:06.480 you know, been a, been a big supporter and fan of 40 days for life for a long time. I can vouch for this

00:37:12.260 organization and you want to be a part too. So don't wait for Washington to heal our culture. Go to work

00:37:16.940 in our neighborhood at 40 days for life.com. Also join us tomorrow, February 24th for this month's

00:37:24.520 backstage. You know, we entered 2021 with our debut into the world of entertainment and we've kept the

00:37:29.940 big news coming. It's pretty, pretty busy already. It's only the, the, the year is less than two

00:37:34.320 months old. Most recently we announced our movie deal with Gina Carano. We'll be talking about current

00:37:38.700 events and all of our daily wire highlights of the month. And as always, we'll be taking questions

00:37:42.620 from our members at this, at this, uh, week's backstage. So make sure you go to dailywire.com

00:37:47.760 slash subscribe and join us before backstage starts. So you can ask questions and maybe get

00:37:52.720 on air with your question. We'll also be talking about Ben Shapiro's new series debunked. There are

00:37:57.080 so many narratives around hot topic issues. It's hard to keep track of all the newest controversies

00:38:01.740 that let the left decides to get offended by, which is why, uh, you're going to want to tune into

00:38:06.540 debunked to see Ben expose leftist fallacies in 15 minutes or less climate change, universal healthcare,

00:38:12.200 COVID policies, all of that versus facts and logic. Ben's new show will be available exclusively to

00:38:18.620 dailywire members. So if you aren't already a member, go to dailywire.com slash subscribe

00:38:23.080 and use code debunked to get 25% off the reasons to join daily wire, keep piling up. So use code

00:38:28.780 debunked for 25% off today. Now let's get to our daily cancellation. So today we're going to cancel

00:38:37.640 the LA times for this article from Noah Bierman titled black female and high profile. Kamala Harris

00:38:43.260 is a top target in online fever swamps. The article is meant to perpetuate the myth that left-wing

00:38:48.860 women, especially left-wing non-white women are special victims of abuse and harassment online.

00:38:53.740 Of course, there's no doubt that they are targeted for abuse and harassment online. Everyone is more

00:39:00.120 high profile you are, the more of a target you become. Nobody doubts this, but the claim is that

00:39:05.340 women of color to use the momentarily preferred PC moniker are more often victims of this kind of 0.99

00:39:11.040 treatment than anyone else. The reasons that the media is so determined to push this narrative,

00:39:16.260 I think are pretty obvious. For one thing, if, if, if left-wing minority women are most often 1.00

00:39:21.460 victimized by online harassment, that would mean that white right-wing males presumably are most often

00:39:27.000 the ones committing online harassment. Of course, in reality, women harass each other way more often 1.00

00:39:32.040 than men harass women, but we're talking about the media narrative here and what they want us to

00:39:36.160 believe. The media is eager for any opportunity to cast their most despised group in the villain role.

00:39:42.280 So that's one thing. For another thing, this is all part of the ongoing effort by the media and the

00:39:46.400 Democrat party to push social media to, to, and, and the social media platforms to ramp up their

00:39:51.200 censorship. And that's made clear at the very start in the article. It says, quote,

00:39:55.600 Soon after Joe Biden announced last year that he would pick a woman as his running mate,

00:40:00.780 Democratic Congresswoman Jackie Spire began warning Facebook executives. Female politicians 0.96

00:40:05.800 receive the most vile online attacks and the company's filters were falling, failing to stop them.

00:40:12.540 Spire said, uh, we showed them 20 examples that were disgusting and they were still up.

00:40:17.840 She was talking about a meeting, uh, with chief operating officer, Sheryl Sandberg at Facebook.

00:40:22.460 Facebook response gave her a little comfort. Keep sending us these horrific examples. She said,

00:40:27.160 executives told her, and we'll take them down. Spire's concerns that the first female vice 1.00

00:40:31.660 president would, would attract outsized assaults and venomous lies from social media's ugliest players 0.96

00:40:36.340 have now been validated. Research shows that Kamala Harris may be the most targeted American 1.00

00:40:41.360 politician on the internet. One who checks every box for the haters of the fever swamps. She's a woman,

00:40:46.480 she's a person of color and she holds power. Okay. Now already we know that this cannot be true. 1.00

00:40:53.180 The idea that Kamala Harris attracts more venom than Donald Trump is absurd on its face.

00:41:00.360 There are not, there cannot possibly be a more targeted American politician on the internet than

00:41:04.760 Donald Trump. The only way they could justify this claim is if they hinge it on the technicality

00:41:09.000 that Donald Trump is out of office at the moment. So he's, he isn't technically a politician,

00:41:12.540 but even putting Trump aside is Kamala Harris more targeted than say Ted Cruz. And what do we mean by

00:41:19.320 targeted? What counts as abuse and harassment? What is meant by venomous lies? Well, let's keep

00:41:27.100 reading. It says quote, abuse directed at women is highly personalized, often attacking them based on

00:41:33.160 their appearance and denigrating their intelligence. Said Cecile Gorin, a researcher in London at the

00:41:39.420 Institute for strategic dialogue, a think tank that sinks to, that seeks to counter extremism,

00:41:44.160 disinformation, and polarization. She said, it's also more likely to imply that they should quit

00:41:49.640 politics and that they don't belong in the public space. Oh, abuse directed at women is highly 1.00

00:41:55.740 personalized. You say yes, as opposed to abuse directed at men, which we all know is not personal

00:42:00.220 at all. It wasn't personal when Trump was called fat and ugly, approximately 7 million times a day on the 0.95

00:42:05.960 internet. 7 million by my account anyway, and my accounting method isn't any less scientific than 0.55

00:42:10.740 whatever method they're using. There are currently hundreds of memes comparing Mitch McConnell to a

00:42:15.520 turtle. That's an attack based on appearance. It's also kind of true, but that's beside the point.

00:42:22.140 And the claim that women are uniquely insulted based on their intelligence is, well, the kind of

00:42:26.380 claim that only a person of low intelligence could believe. Woman or man. More from the article, it says,

00:42:32.240 Gorin led a recent study that did not include Harris, but showed that American female politicians 1.00

00:42:36.320 were two to three times more likely to receive abusive Twitter comments than male counterparts.

00:42:41.480 Such findings elevate widespread concerns that women still significantly underrepresented in political

00:42:46.280 and corporate offices will avoid or give up leadership jobs that leave them vulnerable to online abuse.

00:42:51.820 It certainly discourages women from getting engaged in politics, Spire said, given worries about family 0.99

00:42:56.500 and personal safety. Okay. A study. Well, here we go. It should be clear to you now that it should be

00:43:05.300 clear to you by now that whenever a study is referenced in a mainstream media article, the person making the

00:43:10.600 reference is counting on you not actually reading the study. That's the great thing about studies.

00:43:15.940 Many people seem to think that that a point can be proven simply by saying the word study.

00:43:20.860 The word study is enough. This is what passes for an argument nowadays. Oh yeah, you don't believe me?

00:43:26.080 Well, a study says I'm right. Oh, a study. Well, if the study says it, then nevermind.

00:43:33.440 I happen to be one of those annoying people who actually wants to read the study.

00:43:37.080 See, when you tell me about a study, I'm going to say, I want to see it. Show me the study. I'm

00:43:41.000 going to read it myself. And in reading studies, I have found, and I have no studies to prove this,

00:43:46.720 I admit, but I've found that most studies are, to put this scientifically, bullcrap. Keep in mind that

00:43:52.300 you can call anything a study. There's no required standard methodology for a study.

00:43:56.460 That's why reading the study itself is so important. So let me, let me read a bit of this study to you.

00:44:02.000 The title of the study is Public Figures, Public Rage, Candidate Abuse, Candidate Abuse on Social Media.

00:44:08.240 That's the title. Skipping ahead to page 12, it says,

00:44:12.600 We analyzed the language most often used to target candidates over the 11-day period of study and

00:44:18.880 extracted a list of surprising keywords and phrases for each individual in a three-step process.

00:44:24.760 One, we obtained 20 keywords by contrasting the data from tweets to a sample of standard English

00:44:30.300 Wikipedia data, helping identify uncommon vocabulary. Two, we extracted 20 keywords by contrasting the

00:44:36.900 individual of interest Twitter data with that of other candidates to identify language

00:44:40.340 specifically targeting that person. Three, we filtered these 40 keywords out through a blacklist

00:44:46.520 likely to generate background noise. For this research, we blacklisted the terms Trump, COVID,

00:44:51.540 the individual's name and common aliases, political party names, and common state names.

00:44:55.320 We ordered keywords and phrases by their degree of unexpectedness and selected the top 20.

00:45:01.860 Now, what? What does any of that mean? Degree of unexpectedness? How the hell do you measure that?

00:45:09.200 I mean, doesn't this whole process sound extremely arbitrary and subjective? They're also only taking

00:45:16.060 into account public comments made to these figures. In my experience, by far the worst abuse comes

00:45:21.860 through email and private message. Any study of online abuse that doesn't factor private messages is

00:45:27.460 pretty worthless, it would seem. It's like measuring the amount of bullying in school, but not counting gym

00:45:32.340 class or the cafeteria. Those are like the bullying factories. You can't take that out of it.

00:45:39.200 At any rate, on the next page is a table listing keywords and phrases used to target candidates.

00:45:45.680 Here are some of the keywords and phrases for Ilhan Omar.

00:45:48.340 Shameful. Defund the police. And Somalia. Wow, how abusive. Now for Nancy Pelosi. Hypocrites. Unverified. Antifa.

00:46:03.200 Yes, apparently to call out a woman's hypocrisy or to say that her claims are unverified is abusive now.

00:46:07.820 The study then gives real world examples of abusive comments made to Nancy Pelosi. So here's one. This

00:46:13.200 is a, this is an actual abusive comment that the study shows. And this shows us what they consider

00:46:18.120 to be abusive. So somebody, some abusive scoundrel said to Nancy Pelosi, she's not doing a very good

00:46:25.340 job. Better get on that nan. Here's one to Ilhan Omar. She's an anti-American. She's as anti-American and 0.97

00:46:32.660 anti-constitutional as they come. This is a Republican or a public, not a democracy. If she 0.94

00:46:38.000 doesn't understand that, she'll never understand the Constitution or the Bill of Rights.

00:46:43.460 That's the abuse. But no, this is not abuse. This is not harassment. This is called criticism.

00:46:49.660 She's not doing a good job is a very civilized, very understated, very polite way of criticizing a 0.52

00:46:56.540 politician who, in fact, is not doing a good job. The comment about Ilhan Omar is also a criticism

00:47:01.660 and also well-deserved. But this is what the study, which spawned the LA Times article,

00:47:07.540 categorizes as vile, anti-woman, misogynistic abuse. Do you want to know what an actual abusive

00:47:14.380 comment sounds like? I'll give you one. Here it is. I know what city you in, white bitch. You think 1.00

00:47:21.320 you can keep talking behind your phone in tweets? I'll smoke you, stupid ass. Take care of your ugly 1.00

00:47:25.920 white daughter. That was a message sent to me recently, threatening to hunt me down and murder 1.00

00:47:32.240 me along with my seven-year-old daughter. That checks all the boxes, doesn't it? Racist, insulting,

00:47:37.940 explicitly threatening. If you want a more recent example, here's one that came to my inbox just this

00:47:43.140 morning. I went online first thing, as I always do, had my cup of coffee and, you know, starting the

00:47:49.580 day and had the pleasure of reading this. F you. I hope you die like the rest of your pathetic ilk you

00:47:54.580 support. Now, pretty tame compared to a lot of the stuff I get, but even so, wishing death on me. 1.00

00:48:01.120 I've received literally thousands of messages, emails, and comments like this. Thousands.

00:48:07.300 Threatening death, wishing death, threatening harm against my children, wishing harm against my

00:48:11.480 children. Comments merely mocking my appearance are so utterly banal at this point that I don't even

00:48:17.120 notice them. If I do notice them, I'm tempted to send a message back thanking the person because at

00:48:22.020 least they didn't promise to burn down my house with my family trapped inside. Compared to that

00:48:26.540 kind of feedback, calling me ugly seems downright polite. Now, do I receive more than my fair share

00:48:33.280 of this kind of vitriol? I don't know. Probably not. I have no way of knowing. What I do know is that

00:48:39.320 being a white male with a platform on the internet does not in any way protect you from, quote, abuse.

00:48:44.780 I can tell you that from experience. Trust me. Now, the unfortunate thing is that the insistence

00:48:50.660 on focusing on the gender and racial components of this issue, the effort to fit online harassment

00:48:56.220 and abuse into the standard mainstream victimhood narrative prevents us from having what could

00:49:01.440 otherwise be a valuable and necessary conversation. No, women are not specially targeted. Black people are 1.00

00:49:08.620 not specially targeted, but they are targeted. Everybody is. And though many of the examples 0.91

00:49:14.600 provided in the study are pretty trite, I have no doubt that, you know, the people that are mentioned 0.98

00:49:19.080 in the study receive plenty of the sort of, I hope you die, go kill yourself type comments, just as I do. 0.83

00:49:25.400 We're used to people saying that kind of stuff on the internet. I'm used to people telling me that 0.99

00:49:30.280 they hope my family dies painfully because they disagree with my political opinions. I'm used to it.

00:49:34.280 We're used to it, but we shouldn't be. I mean, it does say something quite disturbing about humanity

00:49:41.260 that this is how we treat each other when we have the cloak of anonymity to protect us.

00:49:47.300 That's a conversation I would really like to have. That's a conversation we should be having

00:49:50.800 because there are a lot of people who want to dismiss all of this and say, oh, it's just the

00:49:55.260 internet. It doesn't count. No, it's not just the internet. These are people, the person who threatened

00:50:01.100 to kill my seven-year-old daughter because he doesn't, he doesn't agree with my opinions.

00:50:04.920 That's an actual person. Now he's, he's not actually going to do it. I'm not going to assume 0.90

00:50:10.600 he's not going to do it. I did. We did contact the police and we reported it because you make a

00:50:14.600 threat against my family. That's what's going to happen every time. But, um, I'm not, I don't

00:50:18.820 actually think he's going to do it. Thousands of messages of this sort, nobody, they don't really do

00:50:23.760 it. But, but these are, these are people though, behind these messages, actual people talking to

00:50:31.120 other actual people. The fact that they'll only speak this way on the internet, you know, that,

00:50:39.480 that doesn't make it better. That only makes it worse because what it tells you that is that on top

00:50:44.420 of being vile scumbags, these are also cowards. You know, you tell someone to kill themselves because 1.00

00:50:50.420 you disagree with their opinion. You would never say that to their face, but that's because you're

00:50:54.340 a coward. The fact that you would say it at all still makes you a vile, disgusting dirt bag. 1.00

00:51:00.760 And what we've discovered from the internet, which is maybe no big surprise, there are a lot, 1.00

00:51:05.160 a lot of cowardly, vile, disgusting dirt bags out there. They're not, they're not unique to one side 0.98

00:51:13.440 or the other, but there are a lot of them. That is a conversation I would like to have. We should be

00:51:19.400 having that conversation, not to push for censorship or anything like that, but just to say what the

00:51:24.140 hell is going on with humanity right now. But we can't have it because it always has to go down to

00:51:31.200 race and gender and the standard victim of narratives. And that's why the LA times is canceled. 0.99

00:51:39.620 And that'll do it for me today. Thanks for watching. Thanks for listening. Have a great day.

00:51:42.840 Godspeed.

00:51:43.580 Well, if you enjoyed this episode, don't forget to subscribe. And if you want to help spread the

00:51:52.340 word, please give us a five-star review. Also tell your friends to subscribe as well. We're

00:51:56.720 available on Apple podcasts, Spotify, wherever you listen to podcasts. We're there. Also be sure to

00:52:01.320 check out the other daily wire podcasts, including the Ben Shapiro show, Michael Knowles show,

00:52:05.260 the Andrew Klavan show. Thanks for listening. The Matt Walsh show is produced by Sean Hampton,

00:52:09.420 executive producer, Jeremy Boring. Our supervising producers are Mathis Glover and Robert Sterling.

00:52:14.800 Our technical director is Austin Stevens, production manager, Pavel Vadosky. The show is edited by Danny

00:52:20.000 D'Amico. Our audio is mixed by Mike Coromina. Hair and makeup is done by Nika Geneva. And our

00:52:25.280 production coordinator is McKenna Waters. The Matt Walsh show is a daily wire production,

00:52:29.200 copyright daily wire, 2021.

00:52:31.400 Merrick Garland comes back from the political grave. Dr. Fauci wants masks through 2022

00:52:36.440 and CPAC cancels a bigot. Check it out on the Michael Knowles show.

The Matt Walsh Show - February 23, 2021

Ep. 664 - The Hollow People

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript