Ep. 405 - It's Sexist Not To Believe Warren, According To Her Supporters
Elizabeth Warren's supporters are defending her claims about Bernie Sanders on the basis that we should "believe women." According to them, women literally never lie about anything. This is the dumbest kind of emotional blackmail. Also, an art exhibit in New York seeks to prove that "abortion is normal." The effort fails in spectacular fashion.
If you like The Matt Walsh Show, become a member TODAY with promo code: WALSH and enjoy the exclusive benefits for 10% off at dailywire.com/Walsh
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Well, while the debate was happening last night, a debate that excluded Mike Bloomberg, Bloomberg was spending his billions of dollars coming up with a brilliant marketing campaign that would outshine what any debate could put forward.
I mean, this guy's worth $58 billion.
$58 billion.
Do you think he needs a stinking debate to get attention?
No.
No, not at all.
So, last night, during the debate, Bloomberg unveiled his brilliant strategy.
The strategy that only a man with $58 billion to spend could possibly devise or afford, and here it is.
This is the tweet that he sent out, that was sent out by his campaign during the debate.
It says, test your knowledge.
Spot the meatball that looks like Mike.
And then there's a bunch of meatballs, and one has his face imprinted on it.
Wait, so this, you're comparing yourself to a meatball.
You are comparing yourself to a meatball.
That's the plan.
That's the marketing plan that $58 billion comes up with.
Compare yourself to a meatball.
I mean, I'm trying to imagine how this conversation went.
There had to have been a conversation, and so it must have been something like, you know, Bloomberg comes in, okay folks, I'm very rich.
If you didn't know, I want the best possible PR strategy.
I need a killer plan, something revolutionary.
Then someone raises their hand.
Well, Mr. Bloomberg, you know, we could... Yes?
Yes, Johnson?
What is it?
What's your plan?
Well, we could compare you to a meatball.
Meatball, you say?
Yes, yeah, a meatball, like with spaghetti.
We could, you know, we could point out that you look like a clumpy, lumpy clump of ground beef.
Because that's the case we want to put forward to the voters.
Genius!
Somebody buy this man a Ferrari.
And you know what's unfortunate about this?
You see that picture and you're like, well, you know what?
He actually does look like a meatball.
I never noticed that before, but now I do.
So now every time I see Mike Bloomberg, I'm going to think about meatballs.
I don't know if that's really the association he wants us to make.
But, um, oh well, what are you gonna do?
I tell you one thing, if Trump, if Donald Trump, and I'm serious about this, if Donald Trump does not nickname Mike Bloomberg Meatball after this, then he should be impeached on that basis alone.
Mike the Meatball, Meatball Mike, or just Meatball, any of those.
The possibilities are endless.
I've been saying for a couple of years now, it's concerned me.
I think Trump's nickname game has slipped considerably since the 2016 election.
Now's a chance to reclaim it.
Meatball.
You gotta go with it, Trump.
Okay, as for the debate itself, it was easily the least entertaining debate yet.
And that's saying something, of course, because the bar for entertainment with these debates is very, very low.
I think part of the problem is that CNN kicked out every candidate who might have something different, something interesting to say.
Anyone who might stir things up a little bit, they kicked out, and all we got were the boring talking point spewers.
Like, the most boring people in the field are the only ones left at this point.
No Yang, no Gabbard.
Interestingly enough, the only candidates invited on the stage were white.
Sure, it's just a coincidence, right?
I mean, that stage was whiter than a wine and cheese festival.
It looked like a Tupperware party up there with all the whiteness.
Now, I mean, I guess we have to conclude that CNN is racist.
Those are the rules, right?
Those are their rules.
So, you know, it's not my rules.
I'm just saying we have no choice.
According to CNN's rules, according to liberal rules, CNN is racist.
The DNC is racist.
Along with being racist, CNN is also unabashedly in the tank for certain candidates against others.
And that came out last night, especially when the discussion turned to this dispute between Warren and Sanders about whether Sanders said in a private meeting between himself and Warren that a woman can't win the presidency.
He was asked about this.
A comment, by the way, that I don't believe he made, but even if he did, who cares?
It's not sexist.
Okay, so it doesn't even matter.
This whole dispute is completely ridiculous.
Who cares if he said it?
It means nothing.
But I don't think he did. He was asked about this, he denied it, he pointed out that he's
always said, going back 30 years, he's always said publicly that he thinks a woman could win
the presidency. He also pointed out that Hillary Clinton ran for president in 2016, got 3 million
more popular votes than Donald Trump, which obviously proves that the American people are
willing to vote for a woman. Not only a woman, but they're willing to vote for the worst woman
So only imagine what they would be willing to do if it was a slightly better woman than that.
So his denial is perfectly plausible and believable.
Well, he didn't say the thing about Hillary Clinton being the worst woman in America.
That's me.
I'm editorializing a little bit.
If you were watching the debate under the delusion that CNN is a legitimate news operation, then you probably were expecting that after Sanders said, no, I didn't say that, CNN would turn to Warren and ask her directly if he did say that, and then ask her to justify or explain that claim.
Right, that's what you would expect.
If CNN is a real news outfit, that's what you would expect.
But that's not what happened.
Here's what happened instead.
Senator Sanders, I do want to be clear here.
You're saying that you never told Senator Warren that a woman could not win the election.
That is correct.
Senator Warren, what did you think when Senator Sanders told you a woman could not win the election?
I disagreed.
Bernie is my friend, and I am not here to try to fight with Bernie.
But look, this question about whether or not a woman can be president has been raised, and it's time for us to attack it head on.
And I think the best way to talk about who can win is by looking at people's winning record.
So, can a woman beat Donald Trump?
Look at the men on this stage.
Collectively, they have lost 10 elections.
The only people on this stage who have won every single election that they've been in are the women, Amy and me.
So true.
So true.
Holy wow.
That... So to review what happened here, the moderator asked Bernie about this thing he supposedly said.
He denied it strenuously.
Then the moderator blatantly dismissed everything he just said, directly contradicted him, openly took Warren's side, and asked her about it on the assumption that it actually happened, thus saving her from having to actually directly address the claim or justify it.
So she, the moderator, contradicted Bernie, dismissed it, and then bailed Warren out.
Amazing.
I mean, it's not amazing.
It's it's it's not amazing that CNN would act with such partisanship and with such a lack of integrity What is maybe a little bit surprising is that they'd be so unabashed about it.
They'd be so open about it after after the debate Hashtag CNN is trash was trending and it wasn't because of Trump fans It was it was these even liberals are starting to catch on now I have more to say about this Warren Sanders thing, but I don't want to skip over or forget the comic relief of the night.
And this is the part that I think, I said it was not entertaining.
This was the only entertaining part of the entire night.
And maybe, maybe the most awkward moment I've ever seen at a debate.
I can't think of a more awkward moment than this.
And this even includes all of the GOP primary debates in 2016 and 2015.
All the debates including Jeb Bush, he's just the personification of awkward.
Even more awkward than that, even more awkward than the famous fight between
Trump and Marco Rubio about the size of Trump's situation.
Even more awkward than that was this.
This is like something straight out of The Office or something.
It's comically, comically awkward.
Watch this.
Just to set the record straight, I defeated an incumbent Republican running for Congress.
When?
1990.
That's how I won.
Beat a Republican Congressman.
Number two, of course, I don't think there's any debate up here.
Wasn't it 30 years ago?
I beat an incumbent Republican congressman.
And I said, I was the only one who's beaten an incumbent Republican in 30 years.
Well, 30 years ago is 1990, as a matter of fact.
But I don't know that that's the major issue of the day.
That is brutal.
Just the awkward pause there.
Everything.
This really has vibes of being at a dinner table with a married couple when their marriage is kind of on the rocks, and they're contradicting each other at every turn, and having these awkwardly hostile interactions, and you're just sitting there like, ugh, and trying desperately to change the subject.
That's what it reminded me of.
But before we change the subject from Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, one other thing about this.
This, uh, this he-said-she-said between Warren and Sanders.
Warren's supporters are, perhaps not surprisingly, utilizing Me Too rhetoric to defend her.
Now, remember, Me Too is supposed to be, allegedly, about sexual assault.
Well, they're going in that direction with this.
They have actually defended her on the basis of the Believe Women slogan.
That's what they're saying.
Remember, believe women was the thing that they said during the Me Too movement.
We should believe women when they accuse someone of sexual assault or harassment.
Well, Warren supporters are using that now, in this case, against Bernie Sanders, who is not being accused of anything approaching sexual assault.
He's being accused of, at most, making a slightly rude comment to Elizabeth Warren, which I actually don't think is rude at all.
So just a few examples here.
Julia Loft, a correspondent for GQ apparently, wrote last night, still thinking about the Warren-Bernie squabble, and I have a question to people who have accused Warren of lying.
Isn't the lesson of Me Too and the last few years that we believe women and don't call them liars?
Other variations on this theme from Neera Tanden, the president of Center for American Progress, She says, believe women unless it doesn't work for your
ambition apparently.
From the always insane Amanda Marcotte, she says, I think that Warren got the better of Sanders in that exchange, but
who knows how it will play out.
I also thought that eight women accusing Al Franken of groping was rock solid evidence that he's a groper, but apparently
a lot of people prefer to believe that women love lying.
From Jessica Ellis, who's an actor or something like that I think, said, just FYI, I double checked and there is no
except with Elizabeth Warren clause in that whole believe women deal.
you From Natalie Montelongo, a former Obama staffer, Elizabeth Warren is fire right now, quickly confirming what was said in the private conversation, then pivoting to pointing out that only the women on the stage have won all their races.
But all I gotta say is, Believe Women.
Uh, Maura Donegan, a self-proclaimed angry feminist writer for The Guardian, said, Okay, so you get the idea.
She wrote a book laying out point by point how women are denied and demonized when they come forward with a sexual
assault allegation.
So watching Warren be disbelieved and blamed using the same tactics after saying a man said something sexist to her is
pretty surreal.
Okay, so you get the idea.
And you see what's happening with Believe Women.
It went from Believe Women because they wouldn't lie about sexual assault, specifically, to Believe Women because they wouldn't lie about anything.
It went from Women are always credible on this one subject of sexual assault, to Women are morally flawless saints who are above reproach on all subjects.
So now, when you accuse a woman of lying about anything, You've got wackos like Amanda Marcotte saying, oh, so you think women just love lying, huh?
Think about how dumb and crazy that would sound if you tried it with any other demographic.
Imagine if, I don't know, I was in a parking lot and I hit somebody's car with my car and I tried to drive away.
And they come running out.
They say, hey, hey, did you just hit my car?
And then I respond with, oh, so you think Catholics just love hitting cars, huh?
Well, I didn't hit it, but I saw you hit it.
Oh, so now you think that Catholics are all a bunch of liars, huh?
By the way, I'm six foot tall.
What does that have to do with anything?
Well, because now you think that all tall people are a bunch of liars.
Of course, it sounds just as dumb and crazy when you apply it to women.
When you try to make a statement of skepticism about one woman's claim about one thing into a sexist attack on all women everywhere, this is the dumbest kind of emotional blackmail.
But it works.
I mean, it works on a lot of people.
A lot of people can be successfully shouted down this way.
Where they timidly will suggest that, Oh, you know, I don't know if I believe her about this.
Oh, so you think women are liars?
No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, yeah, she's probably right, she probably
did say it.
But here's the point, the progression from believe women about sexual assault to believe
women about everything was totally inevitable.
Because if we're going to accept that somehow, for some unknown reason, women never lie about
sexual assault, if we're going to accept that there is any subject where women are always
honest, then why not every subject?
Right?
Because on whatever basis, by whatever justification, we argue for the 100% credibility of all women on this particular subject, that same argument could apply to any other subject.
So, these Warren supporters are really just extending the argument in a logical way.
The problem is that the argument itself is the height of illogic.
Doesn't make any sense whatsoever.
Do I think that women can lie?
Yes, of course I do.
Because women are human beings.
And human beings are flawed.
I think women are just as likely to lie as men.
It could go either way.
And in this particular case, You know, when you know something about the people, and you can look at their track record, well, then you can make hopefully even more accurate judgments.
And in this case with Elizabeth Warren, we know that she's a liar.
We have documented evidence of her lying.
So, that's going to weigh against her here.
And yeah, you know what, I'm not even gonna get into the fact that, once again, as I always point out, you can't even do this anymore, this whole thing about women, these blanket statements about women, you can't do this anymore because you don't know what a woman is and a woman doesn't mean anything, the whole term means nothing anymore.
Men can be women, women can be men, so I gotta throw that in as well.
Just one more layer of nonsense to all of this.
All right, before we move on, let's check in with stamps.com.
You know, time is precious and you don't need to waste it at the post office.
Think about all the stuff you could be doing if you weren't at the post office wasting your time.
You could be, you could be, you could learn a new language, you could start building model ships, you could I mean, I could learn how to play that banjo that's been hanging in my office for years.
So stop wasting time going to the post office and use Stamps.com instead.
With Stamps.com, you can do anything that you're able to do at the post office right from your computer.
Plus, Stamps.com gives you something you can't get at the post office, which is big discounts on postage.
Stamps.com brings all the services of the U.S.
Postal Service right to your computer, whether you're a small office sending out invoices or an online seller shipping out products or you're A warehouse sending thousands of packages a day, whatever it is, stamps.com can handle all of it with ease.
Simply use your computer to print official US postage 24-7 for any letter, any package, any class of mail, anywhere you want to send it.
Once your mail is ready, just hand it to your mail carrier or drop it in the mailbox, and it's as simple as that.
With Stamps.com, you get five cents off every first-class stamp and up to 40% off priority mail.
So, give yourself a resolution that you can actually keep this year, because it's an easy one.
Just make things easier on yourself.
Your New Year's resolution should be convenience.
I mean, that should be an easy one to keep.
Stop going to the post office and go to stamps.com instead.
There's no risk.
And with my promo code Walsh, you get a special offer that includes a four-week trial plus free postage and a digital scale.
No long-term commitments or contracts.
Just go to stamps.com, click on the microphone at the top of the homepage and type in Walsh.
That's stamps.com, promo code Walsh, stamps.com.
Never go to the post office again.
So, a man in Kansas is in the middle of a divorce with his wife and he's made an interesting suggestion.
He's requested from the judge that he be allowed to settle the divorce with swords.
Trial by combat is what they used to call it back in the day.
He's requesting that the court battle turn into a battle with Japanese swords.
Though he will allow his wife to use a stand-in.
So it could be her attorney or Someone else?
I mean, I can imagine if you're going through a divorce, the possibility of being able to get into a duel with swords with your wife's attorney is probably rather a fun thing to think about.
But anyway, very gentlemanly of him, I have to say, that he's allowing his wife to use a stand-in.
And we'll see how this shakes out, but dueling is technically legal in many US states.
It hasn't been officially abolished or prohibited.
And I have always said, I mean, I've been saying for years that I unironically support dueling.
I think it's a, I always have.
I think that, I think we should bring it back.
I think it would make for a much kinder, more polite society.
In fact, we were just talking yesterday about how especially SJWs, leftists, feel, feel totally entitled to just walk up to people and hit them in the face.
We saw that video of this Yaniv character assaulting a journalist who tried to ask him a question.
Well, you bring dueling back, not so much of a problem anymore.
So that's something.
I would like to see, you know, this is what we need our political candidates to be talking about.
I'll vote for the first one of them that seriously suggests we should at least consider maybe, you know, form some sort of exploratory committee You consider the pros and cons?
That's all I'm asking for.
Okay, well, moving on, there's a new art exhibit that you can go check out if you want.
Just opened in New York.
It's called Abortion is Normal.
That's the name of the art exhibit.
And the point of the art exhibit is to send a message that, well, abortion is normal.
Here's a little propaganda piece that speaking of Bloomberg.
This is a propaganda piece that Bloomberg News put together for it
The reason the show is important aside from I guess the obvious
which is we're continuing to fight and ensure that our
reproductive rights are maintained.
It's important because we're trying to make a statement that reproductive rights are not just a women's or cis
women's issue, but an issue that affects everyone.
We're in a time where although a lot of progress has been made, until progress stops at a point where everyone
actually has equal reproductive rights and the ability to...
to choose whatever they would like to do with their own bodies.
Alright.
We need to continue to fight and make a splash.
Some people think the title is provocative, but honestly, women have been getting abortions
for millennia, and it's only in the last hundred years or so it's been hijacked by the right wing.
Right, all right, first of all, can we go back to the first second of this video?
Just freeze frame it right there.
Okay, so you're doing normal wrong.
This is, that's not normal.
Feminists, the problem with feminists, they have no idea what normal is.
So they want to call things normal.
They don't know what that means.
They say abortion is normal and the first image they show us is one of a large naked woman in a weird, in a weird mask, squatting on a stool and leering at the camera.
That's not You know, when I think normal, that's not where my mind goes.
I would call that image many things.
Normal probably is not on the list.
Besides which, why do they need abortion to be normal?
What's the point of that?
It's like the left can't decide if normal is good or bad.
They kind of waver back and forth on this.
One minute they're justifying something on the basis that it's normal, and the next minute they're tearing things down on the basis that they're too normal.
So, for example, could I argue, would any leftist find it persuasive if I argued for traditional gender roles on the basis that it's normal and many societies have had them going back thousands of years?
Would that work for a leftist?
Of course not.
No, but killing your baby is okay, because lots of people have done it for thousands of years.
I think here's a general rule that holds true most of the time.
And that is this.
If you have to go around insisting that something is normal, that's a pretty good indication that it isn't.
That's sort of the whole point of a normal thing, is that you don't have to tell people it's normal.
So, I wouldn't need to start a campaign or have an art exhibit called, Blue Jeans Are Normal, where I'm insisting that it's normal for people to wear blue jeans, because everybody knows it's normal because everybody wears them, and so you don't need to tell people.
But besides that, like I said, it's irrelevant, because normal doesn't mean good.
Is abortion normal?
I mean, in a sense, yeah, it is.
In the sense that you've got, you know, hundreds of thousands of babies are killed every year.
60 million have been killed in this country since Roe v. Wade.
So it is kind of a normal thing in the sense that it happens regularly.
Across the world, you've got, you know, 50 million abortions every single year.
50 million.
And yes, you go back thousands of years.
There have been societies, barbaric societies, that have murdered their children.
So, if by normal we just mean lots of people do it, then yes, abortion is normal, quote-unquote, but also by that definition, then lots of other bad things are normal.
Lying is normal.
Even for women, as we've covered.
Stealing is normal.
Murder is normal.
Gossip is normal.
Gluttony is normal.
Envy is normal.
All of the seven deadly sins are normal.
All of these things are normal, but that doesn't make them good, or right, or preferable, obviously.
But this is the kind of sort of grasping at straws that you see the supporters of abortion do, because they can't... It's very difficult for them to present an argument that abortion is actually a good thing, or actually morally acceptable.
So they're grasping for other things.
And in this case, they're saying it's normal.
Yeah.
Who cares?
That is not the point at all.
In fact, I would say, yes, it's normal.
That's the problem.
It's a problem that it's normal in this society for us to look at children as cancers or inconveniences As obstacles in the way of our greater fulfillment.
And it's a problem that a normal solution for that issue is to kill them.
That's a problem.
All right, we'll get to emails in a second, but first, if you're not already a subscriber, you're really missing out.
And right now, using promo code Walsh, you'll get 10% off any plan that you choose.
Head over to dailywire.com slash subscribe and pick the plan that's right for you for as little as 10 bucks a month.
Members get all of our articles ad-free, access to all of our live shows.
The full show library, three hours of Ben Shapiro every day, select bonus content, access to the mailbag, much more than that even.
Plus, our new all-access tier gives you live online Q&A discussions with me, Ben Shapiro, Andrew Klaven, Michael Knowles, plus all of our Daily Wire writers and special guests.
And don't forget, you'll also get the greatest of all beverage vessels, the glorious, beautiful, wonderful, iconic, legendary Leftist Tears Tumblr.
Alright, we'll go to emails.
MattWalshow at gmail.com.
This is from Lynn, says, Hello Matt, I was wondering if you happened to see this statement from somebody on your favorite site, Twitter.
It is my favorite site, I hate to say.
And then she provides a link from somebody named Morgan Jerkins, and apparently a best-selling author, and she says, well that's what she says about herself in the bio anyway, and the tweet says, Writers, do not date or invest any significant amount of energy into a person who does not read your work.
So that's Morgan Jerkins.
Now back to Lynn.
Says, I've often wondered if your wife listens to your show slash reads your work.
If so, how does that affect what you say and write, if at all?
If not, do you agree with the tweeter that this is a problem?
Yeah, Lynn, first of all, I did see that thing that somebody tweeted.
And I disagree with the tweeter, as you call her.
I totally deadass disagree.
I mean, that sounds like excellent advice for anyone who wants to be alone and miserable forever.
Because if your litmus test for a potential mate is that they have to be a fan of yours, Well, that's just called narcissism.
That is called pathological narcissism and also insecurity, and it is not a recipe for relational success, to put it mildly.
My wife, since you asked, does listen to my podcast sometimes.
She does read some of my stuff.
She's not the most loyal listener or reader that I have, and that's perfectly fine.
It's more than fine, actually.
I think I'd be kind of uncomfortable If my wife was a huge fan, I mean, if I was like her favorite writer and her favorite podcaster, actually favorite, I'd be uncomfortable with it.
You know, I like for her to have interests outside of me, personally.
Now, when I say that your spouse shouldn't be your fan, I mean that in a certain sense.
In another sense, if by fan we just mean supporter, encourager, somebody rooting for you, then yeah, obviously you should be a fan of your spouse and your spouse should be your fan in that sense.
But not fan in the sense of like somebody who asks for your autograph, okay?
So I'm talking about that sense of fan.
And in that sense, no, I wouldn't want my spouse to be that.
That's weird.
And by the way, writers aren't special.
That's just one way to make a living.
So if the spouse of a writer has to read everything that they write, then it stands to reason that the spouse of a plumber has to take a real interest in plumbing, and the spouse of a mechanic has to love cars, etc.
But obviously it's perfectly fine if you're a mechanic and your wife knows nothing about cars and doesn't care.
It's fine.
It's like it's perfectly fine if you're a writer and your spouse isn't a big reader and maybe isn't really interested in the stuff that you write.
Who cares?
I think what's important is respect.
And if I want to be gracious and generous to the person who wrote this tweet, I would say maybe that's what she was going for and she just communicated it awkwardly.
Which, as a best-selling writer, according to her, she should be able to communicate better than that through the written word.
But maybe that's what she was going for.
We talk about respect.
Okay, so it's crucial that your spouse respect what you do.
If my wife had no respect for my work, well, that would be hard to handle.
I don't need her to love all of it.
I don't need her to read all of it.
But in general, I do need her to have respect for what I do, just like she needs me to have respect for what she does.
And if you don't have that in a marriage, and there are, you know, that's, there are marriages where that's the case.
Where there's no respect between the spouses, and that's obviously deadly for a man.
You just, you can't, you can't survive very long in a circumstance like that.
Okay, this is from Dolph.
Says, oh great, bearded one.
Deadass is New York City slang for serious, for real, or not joking.
Examples.
I'm deadass equals I'm serious.
Wait, I could just say I'm deadass?
Okay.
Also another example.
He deadass ate that whole cake equals he really ate that whole cake.
It can also be applied as a question, but the context as a question implies if it's a threat or if you're deadass asking if they're deadass.
I'm confused.
Okay, so he says, if you and I are having a conversation and you tell me your kid broke a window, I'll use deadass to ask if you're 100% serious about them.
However, if you step on somebody and the response is them asking if you're deadass or just a simple deadass, this has now escalated to the threat of a fight.
I hope this helps you understand.
Well, Jeremy, or, uh, Dolph, I don't need help understanding.
I get it.
Okay?
Look, fam.
It's lit, bro.
Okay?
I deadass, I get it.
I'm, you know, I'm the coolest dad on this block for a reason.
Main reason being I'm the only dad on the block because we live in the middle of nowhere.
But still.
But my kids are teenagers.
They're gonna be raising the roof, as the kids say, at how cool their dad is.
They're gonna know their dad is the bomb.
Bruh.
Fam.
This is from Jeremy.
Says, I'm the classic long-time listener, first-time emailer, and wanted to ask you for some personal advice.
I wanted to know whether I should delete Twitter, keep my cartoon avatar account, or change the account to my real name.
I must preface that I live in Canada, and that's the biggest reason I ended up creating a cartoon avatar account.
I do fear the potential social and government reaction to my thoughts.
As I know, recently I was banned temporarily for stating that there are two genders or even putting out tweets questioning the bias of the RCMP when they put up rainbow flags and emblems in place of the normal Canadian flag, which also got me banned temporarily.
Personally, I'm leaning towards deleting my account.
However, I have a sort of love-hate relationship where I do like being able to vent sometimes about the insanity from the left.
Rather than going to my friends or family, I greatly admire your thoughts and feel free to reach out to me anytime.
Thank you for Very much for your time.
Well, Jeremy, I'm, you know, and I'm dead-ass serious about this.
I guess I don't need to add.
Okay, that's redundant.
So I'm serious, serious about this.
I would say delete your account.
I mean, if those are the options that you're weighing, then I would say just delete it.
And honestly, it's got nothing to do with your being afraid of backlash or reprisals or anything.
I think if you're posting anonymously, you're probably pretty safe from that.
But I think just in general, social media is an enormous waste of time.
And I think it's eating our souls and our lives.
And if you can escape it, then I would definitely say escape it.
And I say that as someone who makes a living on the internet and on social media.
And, uh, you know, I, I give this advice to people all the time.
If everybody took my advice and stopped going on the internet and stopped using social media, or at least cut way, way, way back, that would destroy my livelihood.
And I'd have to go and get a real job.
I don't want to have to do that, but I'm still, I still just have to be honest with you.
So selfishly, I want you to stay on Twitter and I want you to stay, you know, use the internet as much as possible.
That's my selfish feeling.
But in reality, if I'm being honest, I think it'd probably be better for you and for everybody if you didn't.
I'll tell you the honest truth of it, okay?
And I know you could say it's easy for me to say this, and it is, but it really is true that if I didn't have to be online for my job, I wouldn't be on Twitter if I didn't have to be there.
I wouldn't be on Facebook.
I'm not gonna say I would never use the internet, but I would use it sparingly.
And part of the way that I know that is that when I go on vacation or something, or I have off for a few days, where I don't have to pay attention at all, I generally don't use the internet at all.
I don't use social media, and I don't miss it.
I have no compulsion to use it.
You know, if I could take off for two weeks, which I rarely am able to, but if I do, I really have no desire to pick it up and go on social media.
When I'm in the thick of it, you know, on a regular day, I do feel the compulsion.
But if I can put it down for a minute and just separate myself from it, then that compulsion goes away very quickly.
So there is an addiction there, but it's a very weird kind of addiction, in that it's really intense when you're in the midst of it, but it's also really easy to break.
I think it's probably true for anyone.
Here's my suggestion for you, Jeremy.
What I would suggest is, try this.
Just trial basis.
Don't go on social media for a week.
Just a week.
And see how you feel.
I'm betting, I'd put a lot of money on this, that after a week, you have no desire to get on it.
Because you'll discover that You're happier without it.
It wasn't making your life any better.
You'll find other things to do with your time.
And you'll probably have very little desire to pick it up and go on it again.
So just give it a shot.
That's what I would say.
And I think we will wrap it up there.
But thanks everybody for watching.
And thanks for listening.
Godspeed.
If you enjoyed this episode, don't forget to subscribe, and if you want to help spread the word, please give us a five-star review and tell your friends to subscribe as well.
We're available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, wherever you listen to podcasts.
Also, be sure to check out the other Daily Wire podcasts, including The Ben Shapiro Show, The Michael Knowles Show, and The Andrew Klavan Show.
Thanks for listening.
The Matt Wall Show is produced by Sean Hampton, Executive Producer Jeremy Boring, Senior Producer Jonathan Hay, Supervising Producer Mathis Glover, Supervising Producer Robert Sterling, Technical Producer Austin Stevens, Editor Donovan Fowler, Audio Mixer Robin Fenderson.
The Matt Wall Show is a Daily Wire production, copyright Daily Wire 2020.
If you prefer facts over feelings, aren't offended by the brutal truth, and you can still laugh at the insanity filling our national news cycle, well, tune in to The Ben Shapiro Show, where you'll get a whole lot of that and much more.
