Ep. 664 - The Hollow People
Episode Stats
Words per Minute
178.83183
Summary
Today on the Matt Wray Show: Merrick Garland says domestic terrorism doesn t count when it happens at night. Plus, five headlines including the head of the AFL-CIO arrogantly waving away concerns about the well-being of children, Coca-Cola continues its damage control efforts after its racist anti-white indoctrination of employees was revealed, and in our daily cancellation we'll discuss a recent study which claims that left-wing female politicians are the primary targets of abuse and harassment online.
Transcript
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
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
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
00:07:34.940
to participate fully and fairly in sports and is fundamentally unfair to female athletes.
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,
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
00:11:18.740
democratic officials and politicians actually believe in left-wing gender theory? How many guys like
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
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
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
00:16:30.780
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.
00:19:38.720
They're sociopaths. All right. This is from Newsweek. Coca-Cola facing mounting backlash from
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,
00:20:48.900
we know that, you know, that's synonymous with white is being arrogant and all those other things.
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.
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
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
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
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
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,
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
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
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
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,
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
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,
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
00:40:31.660
president would, would attract outsized assaults and venomous lies from social media's ugliest players
00:40:36.340
have now been validated. Research shows that Kamala Harris may be the most targeted American
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.
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
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
00:42:05.960
internet. 7 million by my account anyway, and my accounting method isn't any less scientific than
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
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
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
00:46:32.660
anti-constitutional as they come. This is a Republican or a public, not a democracy. If she
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
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
00:47:21.320
you can keep talking behind your phone in tweets? I'll smoke you, stupid ass. Take care of your ugly
00:47:25.920
white daughter. That was a message sent to me recently, threatening to hunt me down and murder
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.
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
00:49:08.620
not specially targeted, but they are targeted. Everybody is. And though many of the examples
00:49:14.600
provided in the study are pretty trite, I have no doubt that, you know, the people that are mentioned
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.
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
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
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
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.
00:51:00.760
And what we've discovered from the internet, which is maybe no big surprise, there are a lot,
00:51:05.160
a lot of cowardly, vile, disgusting dirt bags out there. They're not, they're not unique to one side
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.
00:51:39.620
And that'll do it for me today. Thanks for watching. Thanks for listening. Have a great day.
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,
00:52:31.400
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.