As the March For Life takes over D.C. today, we'll talk about the pro-life movement's simple and compelling message. Also, a voter confronts Elizabeth Warren about her morally abominable student loan forgiveness plan. It's awesome. And is it true that millennials will never be able to buy a home? Finally, I answer your emails.
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
Check out "Verdict with Ted Cruz" on Youtube and Apple Podcasts!
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/verdict-with-ted-cruz/id1495601614
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Welcome especially to any marchers who might be listening as the March for Life happens in D.C.
today.
I've told you before, the thing that I love about the March for Life the most is that the march participants are, you know, they don't stand to gain anything from this.
Their motivations are not selfish because their demands are not self-serving.
Every single person, hundreds of thousands of people, they're right now in D.C.
Marching in place of somebody else.
Now the Women's March, by contrast, which happened last week, and so many others of its types, Have been mostly about people saying, you know, do such and such for me.
Give me something.
Help me.
Me, me, me, me.
But the March for Life is different.
The March for Life says, do this for them.
Give them a chance.
Give them their rights.
Them, them, them, them.
Turning the focus away from the individual and to Those people, those human beings who are being victimized.
And those human beings, the them in this case, of course, are unborn children.
Whereas the people at the so-called Women's March say, forget about them, let them die.
People at the March for Life say, remember them, let them live.
Those are the two contrasting, competing points of view on this issue.
And it's a very stark dividing line in our culture.
Because the question is asked, and must be answered, should these children be given a chance or not?
And however you answer that question will decide what side of the line you belong on.
Should they be given a chance or not?
Should they be given a chance to live or not?
Now our culture, of course, has answered no for the past nearly 50 years.
The feminist movement, liberalism, the media, Democrat Party, academia, all of these powerful forces have joined together in shouting no.
Give them no chance.
Give them nothing.
Take everything from them.
Take their dignity.
Take their rights.
Take their lives.
And when they're dead, don't stop taking.
Take some more.
Take their limbs, their livers, their brains, their hearts.
Carve them up.
Make use of their parts.
Take it all.
Because they're nothing to us.
They are insects.
In fact, they are lower than insects because we would sooner acknowledge the life of an insect than we would the life of a human child in the womb.
They are dirt to us.
Let them die.
And then pick apart their carcasses and throw the rest in the dumpster.
That has been the answer from our culture.
People at the March for Life and the pro-life movement, instead of saying no, give them no chance, the answer is different.
It's a yes.
It is a rather, you know, the message and the answer from the pro-life movement is rather elegant in its simplicity, and forceful and compelling because of that simplicity.
Every child should be given a chance to live.
Yes.
We affirm the life of every human being at every stage of development, in the womb and outside of it, at the beginning of life and at the end of it.
Yes, a child is entitled to live the life that they have been given.
Yes, a child is, according to our country's own founding documents, endowed by God with an inherent human dignity that no one on earth, not even his own parents, can deny him.
A child's existence may indeed require sacrifice on our part.
It may feel burdensome at times to care for people who cannot care for themselves, but that does not give us the right to dispose of these people, like old scrap metal.
Our children have the right to live, and so it is our responsibility to care for them.
To give them our time, our energy, our money, our love.
And a civilized society should recognize that obligation and enforce it by law, just as we do With children outside of the womb.
We say to parents, you have an obligation.
You have a responsibility to those children.
You can't neglect them.
You can't just toss them to the side.
You can't just leave them in the house and go do your thing.
You have a responsibility to them.
Doesn't matter if it's hard.
Doesn't matter if it requires sacrifice.
You have to do it because they are your children.
You are the parent.
If I bring a child into this world, it's my fundamental duty to tend to that child, to make whatever sacrifices that entails, and if I cannot or will not, then it's my obligation to find somebody who will.
But one thing that I cannot do is just kill the child.
That's it.
That's what the Pro-Life Movement says, and everybody at the March for Life, what they say is, well, you know, that's our message to parents of born children, so why would it not be our message?
To the parents of unborn children.
A very simple thing.
You don't get to kill people because their existence interferes with your own.
That is one of the most basic and fundamental moral principles known to man.
Or at least it used to be.
Um, and that's the message.
As I said, very simple.
Now, as we continue with the show, let's check in with Duke Cannon.
I like Duke Cannon's approach because...
Their point is, listen, it's hard to improve yourself.
Self-improvement is very hard.
So set modest goals.
Don't go all crazy trying to transform yourself in one fell swoop.
Most resolutions don't last anyway.
Mostly because dramatic self-improvement is hard.
That's why Duke Cannon Supply Company wants you to consider lowering your expectations That's an easy thing to do.
We can all accommodate that.
Lower your expectations this year with the Moderate Self-Improvement Box.
I have one myself.
Right now, it's a one-step program to achieving a slightly better version of yourself.
This box is packed with over $80 of premium American-made grooming goods designed to help you Look and smell just a little bit better in 2020.
Moderate self-improvement.
Usually $84.
Now it's $50 for a limited time.
Some of the stuff in there includes the Trench Warfare Dry Ice Body Power Powder, I should say.
Body Power as well, perhaps.
Trench Warfare Antiperspirant and Deodorant.
The News Anchor 2-in-1 Hair Wash.
Working Man's Face Wash.
And then my favorite, They've got the big-ass brick of soap and also the big-ass brick of soap junior for the slightly
For the slightly smaller size.
This one-time offer, it's not a subscription box.
It's just $50 with free shipping to the lower 48 states.
All products are tested for quality and endurance by Active Duty Military and 5% of net profits are donated to causes benefiting veterans and Active Duty Military.
Visit dukecanon.com and use the promo code WALSH for 15% off your entire order.
That's dukecanon.com promo code WALSH.
Alright, I love this.
I want someone to give this man a medal.
This man deserves a medal.
Here's a voter confronting Elizabeth Warren about her student loan forgiveness plan, and I love everything that he has to say.
Listen to this.
I just want to ask one question.
My daughter's getting out of school.
I saved all my money.
She doesn't have any school money.
Am I going to get my money back?
So you're going to pay for people who didn't save any money, and those of us who did the right thing get screwed?
Of course we did.
My buddy had fun, bought a car, went on vacations.
I saved my money.
He made more than I did.
But I worked a double shift, worked extra.
My daughter works you just 10.
So you're laughing.
Yeah, that's exactly what you're doing.
We did the right thing and we get screwed.
I appreciate it.
So it might have been a little hard to hear over the din of the crowd noise.
What he was saying is that he paid for his daughter's college, he worked a double shift, he made a lot of sacrifices, and he wants to know if he's gonna get his money back under her plan.
And her answer was, I loved her answer, her answer was not just no, her answer was of course not.
Of course not!
No, no, no.
This isn't about you.
We're not trying to help you out.
No.
Now, as we've been talking about on this show, there is no response to his point.
She has no response because there really isn't one to give.
There is no morally coherent rebuttal to his argument.
He's saying, I'm financially hurting now because of the sacrifices that I made to pay for my daughter's college.
I'm out that money.
I've had to do a lot of things.
I've had to change my whole lifestyle around.
I've had to work double shifts and everything to afford, you know, sending her to college.
Am I going to be made whole?
Will I get restitution?
The only thing that a proponent of loan forgiveness can say, and this is what proponents have been saying about this guy, From what I've seen online, the only answer is, hey, tough luck, deal with it.
No, you don't get any money.
You don't get, you know, hey, that's your problem.
Quit your whining, you selfish jerk, basically.
Here's the problem, though.
If you can say that to him, if you are a person who wants loan forgiveness, and your message to this guy is, hey, tough luck, shut up.
You don't get your money back.
Go cry about it, you whiner.
If that's your answer to him, why can't that be my answer to you?
You see?
If that's what you're saying, why can't I throw that right back in your face?
Why is it tough luck for him and not for you?
Why is tough luck such a terrible and evil thing for me to say to you?
But you could say it to him.
Personally, look, I mean, just from my perspective, as someone who basically doesn't have a dog in this particular fight because I don't have student loans and I also didn't pay any back, although I have been paying my wife's loans back, so I do have a dog in the fight as a matter of fact, but still, from my perspective, I think that guy is a much more sympathetic figure than you are.
If you're somebody who has loans and you're clamoring for loan forgiveness, because for the simple fact that he actually paid back his, uh, you know, he, he fulfilled his, his financial obligations.
This whole, his, this whole idea was of forgiveness.
Wasn't his idea.
He wasn't the one clamoring for it.
All he's saying is, Hey, if we're doing this, then what about me?
I just find that to be a much more sympathetic position to be in.
As opposed to somebody who signed on the dotted line, accepted the loans, went to college, got the education, and then immediately started crying they don't want to pay it back.
That to me is just not very sympathetic.
So, if you have this harsh, dismissive answer to this guy, then I think you've opened yourself up to the same sort of answer.
And of course we have the additional problem, as we discussed, A few shows ago of people with other forms of debt.
Why not forgive theirs?
So you create all these problems, all these unanswerable questions when you start picking arbitrary winners and losers and forgiving some people that are financial obligations, but not others.
So what's the solution?
Well, how about this?
This is my solution.
And this is what I would say to that guy.
We forgive nobody's debt, not mine, not yours, not anybody's.
Every adult is expected to settle their debts, live with the choices they made.
And in the future to stop the bleeding, as I've advocated many times, we start encouraging better choices.
And some of those choices are going to be like, don't go to college.
Maybe there are a lot of people in college.
You don't need to be there.
A lot of people with a college education who don't need it.
And that's just insult to injury, right?
When you're paying back a loan and you've got all this debt and you're not even using the education.
And I can understand how frustrating that would be.
So the real solution is... So we talked about this yesterday in regards to something else.
And somebody was saying, what's the solution?
Well, most of the time in life with these sorts of things, the only solution is people have to make better choices.
That really is the only feasible solution.
So with college and student loans and everything, the only real solution is just that people stop being reckless and foolish.
It is reckless and foolish to take on enormous debt to go to college when you don't even know what you want to do with your life and you don't know if you're going to use the education.
Now, if you do know what you want to do, and you have a certain plan, and you know you need the education in order to achieve your goals, then that's not reckless.
That's a risk, but it's a calculated, smart risk.
You want to be an engineer, you want to be a doctor, you know you need the education, you take it on, there's a definite risk there, but it's calculated, it's smart.
To take on a six-figure debt, and go to college when you don't even know, when you have no idea what you want to do with your life, That's stupid.
That's a stupid, reckless thing to do.
What's the solution?
People need to stop doing stupid and reckless things.
That's it.
It's the same thing for if we're talking about mortgage or people with car loans.
And if you find that you can't afford your house, you probably should have bought a house you can afford.
What else can we say?
That's the solution.
All right, speaking of homes, let's...
Let's check in with our friends over at Ring.
You know, there's nothing worse than feeling unsafe in your own home.
If there's anywhere in the world where you ought to feel safe, it's in your home.
You have a right to that, a right to feel safe, and be safe in your home, and your family does too.
And that's why I use Ring, and that's why you should use Ring too.
Ring's mission is to make neighborhoods safer.
You might already know about their smart video doorbells and cameras that protect millions of people everywhere.
Ring helps you stay connected to your home anywhere in the world.
So, if there's a package delivery or if there's a surprise visitor, you'll get an alert and you'll be able to see and speak to them no matter where you are.
You'll do it all on your phone.
That's thanks to the HD video and two-way audio features on Ring devices.
Personally, it gives me peace of mind knowing that I can see my house wherever I am in the world and I travel a lot, so I can always check in on my house, see what's going on.
I know that my house is, in a sense, within reach.
All I gotta do is reach for my phone, and I can see what's happening.
As a subscriber, you have a special offer on a Ring welcome kit available right now at Ring.com slash Walsh.
The kit includes a video doorbell and Chime Pro, which is just what you need to start building a ring of security around your house today.
Go to Ring.com slash Walsh.
That's Ring.com slash Walsh.
Okay, I wanted to talk about this.
There's a piece on Medium right now that's kind of gone viral, and it's gotten a lot of attention.
The title of the article, Millennials Love Zillow Because They'll Never Own a Home.
You gotta love these millennial, woe-is-me type articles.
There's a lot of them on the internet these days, and here's one of them.
There's a few points I want to make about this.
First, I'll read a little bit of this article from Angela Lashbrook.
On Medium says, The apartment I found on Zillow has cornflower blue walls and original details with crown molding still intact, a rarity among today's bleached and flavorless condo renovations.
It has picture windows and a functional fireplace, and it's only a couple blocks from Prospect Park.
It isn't perfect.
The kitchen is mismatched and hideous, and the second of two bedrooms is minuscule, little more than a walk-in closet with a window.
But it's big enough for a small child, and the place is charming, well cared for, and modestly sized without being a grim shoebox.
It would be perfect for my husband and me and our dog, and even a kid if we decide to have one.
I can envision our bed frame and the little armchair in the bedroom next to the window, and my favorite of the framed art we own in the dining room.
I imagine how I would renovate the kitchen, replacing the metallic backsplash with sunny yellow tile.
But...
The apartment costs $850,000, not including homeowner association fees, home insurance, and property taxes.
The total monthly cost, according to Zillow, would be $4,546.
A 20% down payment would be $170,000.
A 20% down payment would be $170,000.
A lower down payment, while possible, would carry with it mortgage insurance and likely
higher interest.
Despite the apartment's humble size and middle-class appearance, owning it is an impossibility.
A daydream, nothing more.
Millennials are less likely to buy a home than previous generations were between the ages of 25 and 39.
And it isn't because we don't want to.
Research shows that we do.
But as homeownership becomes less of a reality and more of an illusion, many of us resort to merely imagining ourselves in our own homes via the internet.
Websites like Zillow, StreetEasy, and Realtor.com or real estate dedicated Instagram accounts allow many of us to danger about the security and stability that we could have if we could buy a home.
Meanwhile, we're stuck renting, so on and so on and so forth.
It goes on for a while.
Okay.
You get the point.
Millennials can't, the poor Millennials can't buy homes.
They really want to.
And this woman has a home she'd really love to buy and she can't.
Because, turns out, a little bit of a logistical problem, it's $850,000.
Okay.
So, there's a... And this article has resonated with a lot of millennials.
That's how I saw it being shared online.
And there's a lot here that frustrates me.
And I approach this as a millennial.
And a homeowner.
I am a millennial homeowner.
So let me... We do exist.
It is not an illusion.
My house that I'm in right now is not an illusion.
It is a real house.
So first of all, it's not true that millennials can't buy homes.
Or that most of us never will.
Owning a house is very much a feasible possibility.
It's just that See, you might not be able to own the exact house you want, in the exact area you want, for the exact price you want.
So yes, those houses you're looking at on Zillow, the house shopping you do when you don't have to worry about silly things like budget, the houses that you find in that scenario, those houses you may never own.
It shouldn't be surprising that if you go on Zillow, With no budget, and you start looking at the houses, you're gonna see a lot of really nice houses that you'd love to own, but you can't.
It's not surprising that this individual was able to find a house she really loves for $850,000.
I think pretty much anyone can find a house they love for $850,000.
But it's $850,000, and most people can't afford that.
But that doesn't mean that you can't afford any house.
$850,000 but it's $850,000 and most people can't afford that
But that doesn't mean that you can't afford any house you see that's my point
So we've got What was her name again?
We've got Angela here.
Would love to own a home.
She talks about, for the rest of the article, how much she'd love to own a house in general and how much it sucks to be renting.
Okay.
I'm sure you can find, Angela, a house on Zillow that you could afford.
It's just that it's not gonna be that.
It won't be your dream home.
It won't be a home that you can You know, poetically described for three paragraphs about all of the lovely features.
It might not be that kind of home, but you could still find a home.
See, this is what you find a lot in my generation.
And to me, it's pretty confounding.
You hear millennials say all the time, oh, I can't do that.
When really, they can do it, it's just that they don't want to make the sacrifices associated with it.
So, when they say, I can't do that, what they mean is, I can't do that while maintaining the level of comfort and luxury that I prefer.
That's what they mean.
Or they mean, I can't do that in exactly the ideal kind of way that I would like to do it.
When someone says, I can't move out of my parents' house.
Well, you can.
Any adult can, if you're able-bodied and everything, especially if you're employed.
You can do it, but you might not want to live in the sort of apartment you'd have to live in if you did move out.
And you might not want to work as much as you'd have to work if you did move out.
And so, that's why you're not moving out.
And that's your choice.
But just don't say you can't.
You can.
You're choosing not to.
And there's a difference.
I'm not making any judgments about the fact that you choose not to.
Well, if you're an adult living at your parents' house, eventually you really should move out.
But when it comes to buying a home, that's up to you.
I have no opinion about whether or not any other person buys a home.
But if you're sitting here and you're gainfully employed, and especially if you're married and your spouse is gainfully employed, you can almost certainly afford a house.
As long as your credit is okay.
If it's in shambles, then you're, you know, that might preclude you for a while.
But if you've got decent credit and you've got it and you're gainfully employed, you can buy a house.
It's just that it might not be the kind of house you want.
And if you're going on a website like Zillow, that's the problem with a website like Zillow is because you can, you know, back in the old days, I assume before they had the internet and people went to buy homes, Yeah, there might have been catalogs and pamphlets you could look through, but you didn't have access to that much.
So if you were looking for a home in 1992, you probably weren't looking at homes in the $850,000 range because they weren't just a click away, right?
Um, but now you can.
And so people look at these houses and, uh, and then they can, you know, they can, they can look at the $850,000 range and, and, and then they can start comparing those houses to the houses in the, let's say the $250,000 range, which is what they can afford.
And the comparison makes those homes in the $250,000 range look terrible.
And so they don't want to do it.
And then they, they walk away dejected saying, Oh, I can't buy a home.
Again, you can.
It's just not, you can't buy that home or a home in that range.
Which doesn't mean that you can't, you know, one thing that you might do.
One thing we did in the house that I'm currently living in is we bought a house, um, a cheaper house that needed some work.
And then we did the work and we renovated it.
And now it's, you know, to me, it's, I'm not gonna call it my dream home or I don't, I don't, I'm not sure I even have a dream home, but the home we live in now is exactly the kind of home I wanted.
But when we, when we were shopping for, for houses, I couldn't find exactly the kind of home and we couldn't find exactly the kind of home we wanted that was moving ready.
And so we found a cheaper home that had the potential to be the home we wanted, and we put the work in.
So, you know, there are things you can do.
But you have to be willing to make those sacrifices and kind of adjust a little bit.
And I do recommend homeownership for a few reasons.
First of all, of course, you're getting equity in something.
You're not just throwing your money away.
I think sometimes about what I spent on apartments from the age of 20 to 28 when I was living in apartments.
And it gives me heartburn to think about how much money I spend just throwing down a hole.
Even when I was single and I lived in a dumpy little place, it was only $500 a month that I rented, but it looked like a $500 a month apartment, and I specifically moved to an area that had those cheap places, not the nicest area.
But even that, lived there for five years, $500 a month, wasn't making a lot of money during that time, and that works out to what?
30 grand?
I'm terrible at math, so was that for five years?
I think so.
That was a lot of money, and I have nothing to show for it.
It's just, it's gone, right?
Whereas with a house, you put the money into it, and you can always get it out.
We sold the first house that we bought, you know, five years ago or so.
We lived in it for three years.
We moved.
Hadn't even come close to paying it down.
But we sold it, and we got back all the money we put into it, plus extra.
And you can do that with a house, and that's nice.
But here's the other thing.
That's good about home ownership, I think.
And buying a home.
And that process.
I think it's a learning process, and it's a growth process.
And I think there are a lot of people in my generation that could benefit from the process of buying a home.
Because buying a home is all about managing expectations.
You learn a lot about the world and about life and how unfair life is and how nothing is exactly,
things that are too good to be true really are and you're not gonna find the ideal situation
There's a difference between the reality you conjure in your head, in your dreams, in your fantasies, and reality itself in three dimensions.
And you learn stuff like that when you're buying a home, and it's an important lesson to learn.
And you learn things like, if you are looking on Zillow and you see a home that is your dream house and everything looks amazing and it's affordable, what you learn is, Pretty much 100% chance when you go to look at the house, there are going to be massive problems with it.
There's a reason why it seems too good to be true.
We went through that with our first house that we bought.
We saw a house, when we were shopping for the home, we found a house that was very affordable, under our budget, on a nice chunk of land, it seemed like.
Big house, like way bigger than we needed.
And we thought, this is incredible.
How is this house so cheap?
And then we went to look at it, and it was, the house was half built.
Somebody had been building the house and then given up and tried to sell it.
And you didn't see that part.
You didn't see the unfinished, the whole unfinished part of the house in the Zillow pictures.
And so, you know, it's a common thing that you go through when you're buying houses.
And it's clear to me that there are a lot of millennials that could use lessons like that.
Where ultimately, yeah, you hear people say, I don't want to settle.
I don't want to have to settle in life.
Well, you know, then you're not going to ever live a life because life is about settling.
I have news for you.
You're going to have to settle.
When you buy a house, you're going to be settling.
You're not going to find exactly what you wanted.
You're going to settle.
There are going to be things, when you go into the house buying process, there are things that you want, that you consider to be non-negotiable.
Okay, I want this out of the house, out of the property, so on.
What you're going to find is that you have to negotiate on some of those.
And you're going to start paring down what your non-negotiable things are.
You start with a list of like 10 things that are non-negotiable that you absolutely want in a house, in a neighborhood, in a community, and you discover you're not going to find those 10 things unless you strike it rich and win the lottery.
So then eventually it whittles down and you're left with maybe like two things that are non-negotiable.
It's an important process and one that I think people should go through.
All right, before we get to emails, a word from policy genius.
You know, life is unpredictable, guys.
I mean, speaking of making plans and life decisions and everything, you never know what's going to happen.
We all have plans for the future, for the next day, the day after, and so on and so on.
But you have to be ready for the unexpected, and that has to be a part of your plan.
That's why life insurance exists, to account for the unpredictability of life, and that's where PolicyGenius can help.
PolicyGenius makes finding the right life insurance a breeze.
In minutes, you can compare quotes from top insurers to find your best price.
You could save $1,500 or more a year by using PolicyGenius to compare life insurance policies.
Once you apply, the PolicyGenius team will handle all the paperwork, all the red tape, and PolicyGenius doesn't just make life insurance easy, they also can help you find the right home Insurance, speaking of buying homes, auto insurance, disability insurance.
It really is a moral obligation, I think, to be prepared in this way, to have life insurance, to have something, you know, for your family should the unexpected happen.
So, be prepared for the unexpected.
Get life insurance.
It takes just a few minutes to find your best price and apply at policygenius.com.
Policy genius will always get the future wrong, so you better get life insurance right.
All right, let's go to Emails, mattwalshow at gmail.com, mattwalshow at gmail.com.
This is from Matthew, says, big fan of the podcast.
I've been listening to it for a while now.
I have a question for you that would, for what would happen under your regime with this situation.
My soon to be wife wanted to invite her friend and husband over for dinner.
That was my first time meeting them and wanted to make a good impression.
I love cooking, and I asked my fiancé, do they like meatloaf?
Once they answered the question with yes, I started preparing the dish.
I used deer meat from the deer I harvested a month ago.
I time it perfectly to be done by the time they arrive.
Once they arrive and we meet, my fiancé and I get all the food ready to serve, and I even get some bourbon out for myself and the husband to enjoy.
None for the women, huh?
You sexist.
As we start eating, my fiancé and her friend's husband tell me how good the meatloaf is.
My fiancé's friend looks at me and asks if I have mustard.
Looking at her confusingly, I hand her some mustard out of the fridge.
She covers the loaf with mustard, even though I had a special barbecue sauce I made already on the dish.
I was disgusted and still might go see a therapist.
Under your regime, how would you handle this mustard disaster?
First of all, mustard on meatloaf is Deranged.
And this is why, under my regime, you're not going to be allowed to just put any condiment you want on a dish.
We gotta get control of this.
This has gone way overboard.
There have to be some limits.
There have to be some limits on freedom.
And when I'm in charge, there will be lots of limits on freedom, as you know.
This is one.
People cannot be trusted with their own condiments.
And so when I'm in charge, there will be a list of all the approved condiments.
First of all, all the approved dishes that you may eat.
It'll be a generous list, you know, probably at least 10 items on it.
And then here are the condiments that go with that dish.
You don't have to use the condiments.
I'm not saying that, but I am saying you cannot use a condiment that's not approved for that specific dish.
In this case, it's even more outrageous because you made a homemade venison meatloaf and homemade barbecue sauce and this person requests a condiment that was not even provided at the table and then smothers it all over your beautiful dish.
That is an outrageous insult.
Just so you know.
I mean, etiquette here, people.
The same things happen to me, so you can see I'm taking this personally.
Um, if somebody prepared, now it's one, look, if you get pizza or something, if you're doing takeout pizza and you put whatever condiment you want on it, but, uh, and you can request a condiment.
If you're at somebody's house and you're ordering takeout and there's a condiment you want for the dish and they haven't brought it out to the table.
I think in that case, it's okay to say, Oh, do you have XYZ?
But if it's a homemade dish and, and this is someone who cares about their cooking and puts time into it.
As our friend Matthew did.
First of all, eat what's on your plate and use the condiments that are at the table.
To ask for a condiment that was not provided is an insult.
Number one, you're ruining the dish.
Number two, what you're saying is, this is inedible to me.
I cannot eat this unless you give me this assistance with this other condiment.
And it's insulting.
Just so you know why I get so emotional about this.
I will never forget the time when I made chili for a guest at my house.
And they put syrup on it.
Syrup.
On the chili.
That I had made.
That I had slaved over.
That I spent 12 hours making.
In the slow cooker.
All of the flavors and spices were exactly correct.
It was the right balance of everything.
Doesn't need anything.
You want to put some cheese on it?
Fine.
Sour cream?
Okay.
Syrup?
You might as well just get up and spit in my face.
Spit directly in my face.
You might as well.
It's the same thing.
All right.
This is from Aaron, says, Dear Matt, you argued on the show that it is morally wrong to have a massive house because, in that situation, the morally right thing to do would be to give the money to someone who needs it.
While I agree that it is morally right to give the money to the poor, I believe that you presented a false dichotomy between morally right and wrong.
I believe there is a third option, morally permissible.
For example, in your case with the house, I know someone who gives upwards of 30% of his income to charity and yet also has an 11-bedroom house.
The distinction I want to make is that, at a certain point, it can be morally permissible to spend money on yourself, even if it would be morally right to give it to the poor.
Thanks for all you do, love the show, but as a freedom-loving American, I will be forced to lead the rebellion against your dictatorship.
Sorry in advance.
I'm not sure I agree with you here.
You're drawing a distinction between morally permissible and morally right.
You're saying that there could be something that is morally permissible, but is not morally right?
See, I don't think I agree with that.
I think if something is morally right, if something is not morally right, it is morally wrong.
Another way, maybe another term that we could be using, would be morally licit versus morally illicit.
And in that case, something that is morally licit is both morally permissible and morally right.
But to draw a distinction between right and permissible, I just don't know if I agree with that.
There are things that are morally neutral, or are effectively morally neutral.
So, the color of the shirt.
I'm wearing a blue shirt.
That was a morally neutral decision.
There's not a lot of moral content to the decision of what color shirt to wear.
But it wouldn't be accurate to say that me wearing a blue shirt is not morally right, But it is morally permissible.
No, it was a morally right decision.
It's just that the moral implications of my shirt color are so minor as to essentially be non-existent, right?
So what I'm saying is that if somebody is doing a morally permissible thing with their money, it must also be morally right in that it can't be morally permissible and morally not right.
Um, am I saying that your friend is morally wrong for buying an 11 bedroom house?
No, I'm not.
I don't, I can't make that decision.
I'm not, I don't know his situation.
I mean, there are certainly, I'm not saying that there's a, you know, a certain number of bedrooms that it's okay to have.
And if you go over that number, it's morally wrong or that there's a certain correct size for the house.
I'm not saying that.
Um, there are certainly scenarios where a person could own a bigger house and there's no moral problem at all.
Uh, I mean, one example would be you find a good deal on a, on a, you know, on a really old house.
I mean, a lot of, a lot of the older houses tended to be bigger and, uh, and you know, and, and okay, fine.
It's a beautiful old house and I don't think there's nothing overindulgent about that or obscene about it.
Um, however, there can be situations where, Buying an obscenely big house, you know, could be morally wrong.
It's just, it's... I don't think that you can set up exact parameters and say, if you go over this... I think it's a case-by-case basis.
And it also has a lot to do with the intentions and what's in the heart of the individual.
But my point yesterday was simply that, obviously, there is a point.
We could talk about where that point is, but there is a point where a person could be living
in a way that is greedy, materialistic, and overindulgent.
And if somebody is living that way, that's morally wrong.
If they're not, then there's no moral issue and that's it.
All right, I have another email, a slightly more contentious email on this topic to read.
But before we do, you know, if you're a listener to this show, you know, and we just talked about it, to start the show, the March for Life, the pro-life issue, you know how important it is?
Not just to me, but to the country, to our culture.
60 million children who have been killed in the womb, and that's what people are marching for in DC today, is to speak up for those for those children.
But the people who are the proponents of killing babies, people on the side of killing babies, it maybe is not so surprising that they can tend to be vicious and underhanded and deceptive in their tactics.
And if you come out against them, they're going to respond.
They're not just going to respond rhetorically with arguments.
They're going to try to destroy you.
Because whatever it takes to protect the abortion industry, that's what they're going to do.
And we've faced that ourselves at The Daily Wire.
We've had our advertisers, our sponsors targeted.
We've faced attempts at censorship and so on because of our pro-life message.
But we're not the only ones.
The group Live Action is one of the biggest voices in the pro-life movement.
They continue to do some of the most important work in the pro-life movement, and they have been banned from advertising on Twitter.
They've been banned from Pinterest altogether.
They've seen their advertising efforts on many different platforms restricted or interfered with.
That is why our dailywire.com members are so important.
Your membership helps keep our cameras on and our microphones turned up, even when the left pressures our sponsors.
That's why from now until January 31st, a portion of any dailywire.com membership will be donated to live action if you use the promo code LIVEACTION to support awareness and education around the world on this issue.
So join dailywire.com and make your pro-life voice heard.
Okay, this is from Pamela, says, Dear Matt, you completely misunderstood Brian's email to you.
First of all, when you're talking about slave labor, you are implying that it is here in the United States, which it is not.
That was his point.
Also, the exception does not make the rule.
Are some wealthy people greedy?
Probably.
As are some leeches on society.
Does that make all poor people greedy?
No, it does not.
All your statement does is reinforce the liberal lie that all wealthy people are bad.
And what is immoral about owning more than one house?
You are enforcing the don't waste food there are people starving in China rhetoric.
On that note, you also said that life is not fair and that some black people live in poor areas and that we wouldn't know what it's like because of our privilege.
I am white, and for a period of my childhood, I ate from trash cans.
We were so poor.
We keep the racist lie alive with nonsense comments like yours.
You are clearly trying to play both sides of the issue.
Don't.
Pick a side.
It doesn't make you appear superior or open-minded.
On the contrary, it makes your opinion appear weak.
I realize you have your own style, and I try hard to see past that as I do enjoy The Daily Wire, but you stepped so far over the line yesterday, and today again, I'm not sure how much longer I can keep listening.
And for the record, only people with no self-control eat and drink at unhealthy levels on cruises.
Plenty of us work out and limit our alcohol and food intake.
Thanks, Pamela.
And thank you for the note at the end there.
Your self-control is an inspiration to us all.
Speaking of misunderstanding the point, good lord, your email, Pamela, and I say this with no offense intended, but just one long list of non-sequiturs and straw men.
It is shocking to me that you could have actually listened to the things I've been saying for the last two days, and that's what you come away with.
First of all, I never said or implied that companies who use slave labor are doing it in the U.S.
In fact, I specifically said that slave labor is especially an issue for companies that outsource overseas.
I specifically said that.
Though, I never said that all of them use slave labor.
I said some of them have.
Some.
Why is the word some so difficult to comprehend?
Why?
It's not just you, Pamela.
Why is it hard for people to understand that the statement such-and-such sometimes happens is not the same as such-and-such always happens?
There are things that sometimes happen.
In fact, most things that happen only happen sometimes.
So the word sometimes is a really important word to understand.
It is not the same as always, Pamela.
Second.
For the tenth time.
I never said all wealthy people are greedy, or that all wealthy people are bad.
And I specifically repudiated that notion.
In depth, at length, I repudiated it.
I said some are greedy.
Some.
S-O-M-E.
Please look it up.
Some.
You know, this is an issue that exists in the world.
Greed is an issue.
It's a real issue.
That's my point.
Now, if you want to disagree with that, then you have to understand what you're disagreeing with.
You are not disagreeing with my point that all wealthy people are greedy, because that was not my point.
That's not the point I made.
If you're disagreeing with my point, then you are disagreeing that some wealthy people are greedy, which means what you're claiming is that no wealthy people are greedy.
If you're disagreeing with me, that has to be your claim.
I also never said it's immoral to own more than one house.
Never said that.
Never implied it.
I also never brought race into it.
Okay?
You brought race into it.
I didn't.
I mentioned, for example, a kid living in the inner city with no father, surrounded by crime, etc.
I also mentioned a kid growing up in a trailer park with a meth-addicted mother.
These were two hypothetical examples that are not just hypothetical because we know that they exist in the real world, but these were two sort of standard examples of the kinds of people who might grow up in a situation that, because of the situation they were born into, it will all but preclude them from some opportunities.
Now, typically, the former example of someone in an inner city, that's going to be a black child, typically the latter will be white.
So, I covered both bases.
I didn't turn it into a racial issue.
You did.
I didn't say that all white people are privileged.
You interpreted it that way.
For some unknown reason.
And then you say, pick a side.
What the hell are you talking about?
Pick a side.
What side?
Pick a side.
What are the sides on the complex moral issues of human greed, privilege, and poverty?
That's what we're talking about here.
And your response is, pick a side.
Pick a side.
What an enormously silly thing to say, Pamela.
Pick a side.
See, your problem is that, and I'm going to be real with you, and frankly, I don't care if you listen or not.
Maybe you haven't picked up on that by now.
I really don't care.
If me simply saying that greed is bad offends you to this degree, if you are so allergic to nuance that you can't even comprehend the word sometimes, Pamela, then I'm not sure I can provide for you the kind of content you want.
And I don't think I want to provide that sort of content.
So you have to make your decision.
Your problem, and this is why it frustrates me so much, that I just, I am so tired of this.
I'm so sick of it.
You have bought into these simplistic talking points that you see on cable news, and you see in Facebook memes, and you've bought into them to such an extent that you literally hear those talking points even when they're not being said you hear them.
It's the only thing you're capable of hearing, apparently, are the talking points.
You just accused me of saying a whole bunch of things I never said.
You can go back and look at it.
It's all on tape.
I said one thing, and in your head, you imagine this whole other conversation that never took place.
Why?
Because you've been told that the correct opinions with regard to this issue are ABC, okay?
So on this issue, which is a very broad, very nuanced, complex, big topic, again, greed, poverty, privilege, you know, these sorts of things.
But you've boiled that whole topic, you've boiled it down to a few basic talking points.
And in your head you think, if we're talking about this, you have to say ABC.
And any opinion that is not ABC is wrong.
And is thus, I guess, liberal.
And so every non-ABC opinion is the opposite.
It is an XYZ liberal opinion.
So even if I'm saying something else, you know, maybe I'm not giving you the ABC talking points, maybe I'm saying LMNOP or something, you hear it as XYZ.
Because you've been told that there are only a few approved opinions on this issue, and every non-approved opinion is a bad, evil, liberal opinion.
And so, When I was treading into this water to talk about it, you were expecting to hear the standard, very, very basic, shallow, normal, right-wing, conservative thing, right?
That's all you were expecting to hear.
That's all you wanted to hear.
You heard something else, and instead of actually listening to what I was saying, Your mind went, I don't know, red flag, liberal, liberal, liberal, and then you started inventing this whole thing that I must be saying.
Rather than listening.
Rather than listening to what I'm saying, in your head, you're just filling in the blanks.
Oh, he's actually saying this.
He's a liberal.
That's what the memification of public discourse has done.
That's what cable news has done.
I find it endlessly depressing and frustrating.
And I ask that you simply try to think these things through on your own, with your own brain, rather than relying on the script you've been assigned.
If what I'm saying offends you, I don't care.
I'm just so sick of this.
You know, we try to have an interesting, intelligent conversation.
To have somebody busting in with, Liberal!
Liberal!
Pick a side!
Jeez, come on.
What a boring way to live, too.
I mean, Is that really how you see everything?
I don't know.
Okay, but thanks for the email.
Let's go finally to... Do we have time?
Probably not.
This is a longer one.
All my emails are longer ones.
So we will unfortunately have to leave it on that note.
All right, by the way, I don't know if you've been following this impeachment trial, but it's only been a few days and it's already pretty clear, unsurprisingly, that the left and the media are going to try to manipulate this and control the way that people perceive what's happening.
If you want to know the real truth, if you want a more unvarnished Take on what's happening and get a behind-the-scenes look into all of the goings-ons with the impeachment.
Check out the newly released podcast, Verdict, with Ted Cruz.
Senator Ted Cruz and The Daily Wire's own Michael Knowles take you behind the scenes of the Capitol and give you exclusive conservative insight on the most important political stories of the day.
People ask me all the time, you know, what's going on with impeachment?
What's the real story?
Because it can be hard to follow, especially when you can't trust the sources that are telling you about it.
Well, this show solves that problem.
Join Senator Ted Cruz as he breaks down the most important political stories of the day on his new podcast, Verdict.
The Nancy Pelosi House, I think they're interested in just nonstop investigations and attack of the president.
Conservatives believe in power to the people.
The socialists believe in power to the government.
What they're selling doesn't work.
Subscribe today and leave a five-star review for Verdict with Ted Cruz, co-hosted by me, Michael Knowles, on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and everywhere else you get your podcasts.
Be sure to check it out on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or whatever your favorite streaming service is.
Again, that's Verdict.
With Ted Cruz.
Thanks, everybody, for listening.
Pamela included, even if this is your last time.
But thanks for being with us on this journey, at least for up until this point.
And have a great weekend, everybody.
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, Michael Knoll 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.
