Ep. 470 - Don't Sneer At The Lockdown Protestors If You Still Have A Job
Today on the Matt Walsh Show, the people protesting the lockdowns across the country have been called “selfish.” The interesting thing is that most of the people making that accusation still have jobs and incomes. Also, Five Headlines, including Trump’s immigration moratorium, and apparently fake fliers for an anti-lockdown protest meant to discredit the anti-lockdown movement. Finally in our Daily Cancellation, I have to once against cancel someone near and dear to me.
Check out The Cold War: What We Saw, a new podcast written and presented by Bill Whittle at https://bit.ly/2z2j1NB. In Part 1 we peel back the layers of mystery cloaking the Terror state run by the Kremlin, and watch as America takes its first small steps onto the stage of world leadership.
If you like The Matt Walsh Show, become a member TODAY with promo code: WALSH and enjoy the exclusive benefits for 10% off at https://www.dailywire.com/Walsh
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Today on the Matt Wall Show, the people who are protesting the lockdowns across the country have been called selfish.
The interesting thing is that most of the people making that accusation have themselves jobs and an income, so isn't it rather easy when you have a job and an income to call people selfish for wanting their job and income back?
Also five headlines including Trump's immigration moratorium, which was just announced.
And apparently, fake flyers for an anti-lockdown protest, a fake anti-lockdown protest, meant
to discredit the anti-lockdown movement have been making their way online.
So we're going to talk about that.
And finally, in our daily cancellation, I have to once again, unfortunately, cancel
someone who is very near and dear to me.
So we'll get to that coming up.
But first, as I said, thousands of people across the country have taken to the streets
to protest the draconian lockdown measures that have destroyed the economy and millions
of lives along with it.
This development should not be a surprise to anyone.
Anyone with two brain cells saw this coming.
Now, many in the media seem to be perplexed about this development.
They just can't understand why people would be protesting, because they themselves are doing quite well.
They're still pulling an income, they can still do their cable news hits from their home studios, and so they figure, what's the big deal?
They can't imagine why anybody would be so upset about being asked to stay home and watch Netflix and play video games as, in fact, Patton Oswalt, the famous comedian Said in a tweet where he was complaining and making fun of the protesters and saying, all you have to do is stay home and play video games and watch Netflix.
But those who lack the privilege of media personalities or famous comedians may find that Netflix and video games, if they can afford those things at this point, are paltry comfort when they return home from waiting in line at a food bank for six and a half hours.
Now, agree or disagree with the methods of the protesters, the fact is that any reasonable and decent person should at least understand why they are protesting.
You should at least be able to sympathize with what has motivated them to take this step.
In the past month, 22 million people have lost their jobs.
And that's just the tip of the iceberg, plus another several million who didn't qualify for unemployment or haven't applied or couldn't apply because the websites are crashing from all the traffic to them.
Now, contrary to how some, including Dr. Fauci, have characterized it, these numbers, 22 million unemployed, this represents more than a mere inconvenience.
This represents Americans who have lost everything.
And not because of some natural disaster or some act of God, But because the government has forbid them from going to work.
Now, you might say that the reason why they've lost their job is because of the coronavirus.
No, that's not the reason.
That's not the reason.
The reason is, the direct immediate reason, is that the government said you can't go to work and shut down their business.
There was a woman at a protest in Maryland.
I think I showed this picture yesterday, but she held a cardboard sign Saying she wanted to save her business and I need to work to live.
That's what the sign says.
And that's why she's at the protest.
Now, Democrat politicians will call that woman selfish.
And talking heads on MSNBC, as one talking head did, said that the protesters are part of a death cult.
And so I guess they would say of that woman, she's in a death cult.
But it seems to me that she's a woman trying to salvage the business that she's poured her sweat and blood and tears into.
And so that's what she wants to do.
And she wants to survive.
And those seem like perfectly reasonable goals, if you ask me.
You can disagree with her approach if you want, though honestly I don't see any problem with her approach.
It's a very American approach to go and protest and make your voice heard.
But to sneer at her and other protesters, as so many in the media have done, is morally repugnant.
And meanwhile, these people are trying to pretend that they have the moral high ground.
That they are the selfless ones who are so concerned about sick people.
They're the selfless ones.
The selfish people are the ones who are protesting the lockdown.
But the truth is the opposite of this.
Because almost all the people, at least in media, who are making this criticism, they still have jobs and an income.
So what they're saying is to the protesters, I want you to be unemployed.
I want you to be forced to go to a food bank so you can feed your kids so that I can feel safe and so that my family can feel safe.
Now, you can argue that all you want, but don't pretend that you're being selfless.
That is a selfish Position where you want other people to suffer and sacrifice for you.
So I would like to propose an unofficial rule for any further discussion of these protests and lockdowns, the lockdowns that prompted them.
Before you give your opinion, you should first have to reveal whether you still have an income yourself.
Before you go on to say how you feel about the protests, how you feel about the lockdowns, you should begin by saying, I still have an income, or I don't have an income, but that should be the first thing out of your mouth.
Because the rest of us would like to know if you are earning an income while you smear your fellow Americans for wanting to earn an income.
It is, as I said, rather striking that the loudest voices in favor of the shutdown are primarily people who have lost nothing because of it.
It's bad enough for those who've lost nothing to wag their fingers at those who've lost everything, but to call them selfish?
That just takes hypocrisy to a whole new level.
Now, since I am proposing this rule myself, I should disclose the fact that I myself am a media personality.
I'm still earning an income.
In fact, the lockdown has been a relatively light burden on my family.
I have lost money from it.
Not an insignificant amount of it, but I'm still making money.
I still have an income.
We already homeschooled our kids, and so there was no real adjustment there.
We live out in the country, we got plenty of space for our kids to go out and play.
I can even still do the main recreational thing I like to do, which is go fish.
I can still do that.
At least in my state, I'm still allowed to.
At least where I currently live, I'm allowed to do that.
Or at least they haven't stopped me from doing it.
And, you know, I personally tend to be a bit of a hermit anyway.
So isolation from the general public, for me, is no great horror.
So that's the position I'm in.
I have an income, and I'm working from home.
And we've had to adjust, but it hasn't been a huge, I wouldn't call it a huge sacrifice for us.
Now, if the economy continues to crater and we wind up in a full-on depression, then I certainly will not be immune from the Consequences of that.
Very few of us will be immune from those consequences.
I will not be immune.
My family won't be immune.
So we could, down the road, we could be in line to make enormous sacrifices as well.
But as of right now, I'm doing all right.
Here's my point.
I realize that not everybody is in my shoes.
Not everybody can work from home.
I don't know why, for so many others in the media, why is this such a difficult thing to understand?
I'm not some sort of great humanitarian for having this attitude.
It's logic is all it is.
I understand that I can work from home.
Not everybody can.
Not everyone can so easily isolate themselves from society.
Some people have real jobs that require them to go out and do things.
And we still need that in society.
It's a good thing.
We could never be a society where everybody can work from.
There are people who have to go out and physically do things out in the real world.
And many of them are not allowed to do that now.
So what has been a light burden for me has been a crushing weight for so many others.
Who am I to call people selfish for wanting income and stability when I already have those things?
So if I'm going to be outraged at anyone, My outrage should be directed not at them, but at the government that has done this to them.
Speaking of the government, the moral outrage here is compounded by the fact that people in government, just like people in the media, are still living comfortable lives, living in relative luxury.
While regular Americans lose everything.
Now, I think that Congress, they should have to forfeit their pay.
They shouldn't be making a paycheck throughout all of this.
But of course, that would require them to pass some sort of rule or something, or at least to volunteer to lose their pay, and they're not going to do that.
Because all of this stuff they talk about, we have to make sacrifices, we're all in this together.
Oh, shut up.
You're not making any sacrifices.
You're making even fewer sacrifices than I am, because you're also in government.
So I, along with everybody else, I've lost liberty and freedom, you have gained power.
So you keep your income, while many people lose theirs, while many people lose their liberties, you gain power.
So it's not just that you haven't sacrificed in government, you have gained from it.
Now, this dichotomy was captured, I think, in a dramatic fashion in an ad that the Trump campaign released last night.
This is truly one of the most devastating political ads I've ever seen in my life.
So, just buckle up for this.
Watch.
We turn now to that $350 billion fund to help small businesses and its workers get through the shutdown.
It will be up to Congress to restock it.
But Democrats blocking that move this morning.
They asked for a quarter of a trillion dollars in 48 hours.
I said, well, I don't think so.
They objected and I congratulate the Senate Democrats.
Speaker Pelosi, what are you going to share with us from your home?
Chocolate candy.
Thousands have been forced to wait for hours at food banks all across the country.
Chocolate and then we have some other chocolate here.
We just gotta restock the ice cream.
You don't want to eat up everything all at one time.
I can't do it much longer.
I'm trying so hard.
We're, shall we say, enjoying.
Having to admit that, yeah, we're starving and... I like it better than anything else.
Taping this segment, there are 22 million people out of work.
This specific program is about stopping job losses today.
Wow.
First of all, politically, that is brutal.
Brutal.
Right now it's survival mode.
You don't know where that next something else is gonna come from.
I don't know what I would have done if ice cream were not invented.
I just wonder.
Wow.
First of all, politically, that is brutal.
Brutal, and deservedly so.
It captures an important truth, that all of the sacrifices that are being made
are being made by regular citizens.
.
And that is, it's a pretty profound illustration there.
When you see, and you see this contrast between people who are waiting in lines at food banks that stretch literally miles, okay?
We're talking about lines at food banks that are miles long.
And while that is happening, Nancy Pelosi has her $24,000 fridge stocked with ice cream.
The people behind these lockdown policies and those who support the policies do not appreciate the toll that these policies are taking on regular citizens, and I think that is a very relevant fact.
Here's another great example.
As the price of oil was tanking yesterday, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez couldn't help herself.
She has since deleted this, but this is what she tweeted.
You can see it right here.
You absolutely love to see it, she says.
You love to see it.
Many Americans are going to lose their jobs.
Many Americans already have.
Now because of this, many more Americans are going to lose their jobs.
This is going to have a devastating effect, especially in places like Texas and Louisiana.
Americans are going to lose their livelihoods over it.
And AOC loves to see it.
She loves to see Americans losing their jobs.
Because it's no skin off her nose.
She's still got her job.
Everything's fine for her.
She's living her life.
Living her truth.
And meanwhile, she sees this as advantageous for her ideological agenda, which is green energy.
And this is the attitude that the people in government have.
So maybe you begin to see why there are these protests.
One other point I want to make about lockdowns and ending the lockdowns and everything, and we'll talk about that in just a second.
But first, a word from our friends over at ZipRecruiter.
You know, ZipRecruiter, you want to talk about helping employers and helping in the workforce.
ZipRecruiter has been doing that for a long time.
And that's why, rather than the typical advertisement, they've got a special message that they want to pass along to you and to everybody in the middle of this crisis.
So here's a message from our sponsor, ZipRecruiter.
Right now, we cannot be overwhelmed.
We have to work to keep our loved ones safe and protect our communities.
We have to work to stay strong, to stay connected, to stay focused.
We have to work to inspire, to innovate, to build new solutions.
But for all this to work, we have to work together.
At ZipRecruiter, we connect employers and people every day, but today is different.
We are partnering with first responders, government officials, the medical community, the innovators in manufacturing, transportation, and food distribution industries to make sure we are finding the right people for the right job right now.
Let's work together.
Ziprecruiter.com slash work together.
All right.
One other point I wanted to make about these lockdowns and specifically ending the lockdowns, because an objection I keep hearing is that, well, we let people go out Maybe there are, there may be people, there are lots of people, certainly, who want to go back to work so they can feed their families.
And as the argument goes, okay, that's all well and good, and maybe you want to take on that risk, but now you're forcing other people to take that risk because you're going to spread it to them.
And so isn't that, so that's not fair.
Right, and this is the response to the argument that people should be allowed to take on a risk if they want to, so they can work and feed their families.
There are all kinds of risks that we take in life.
And generally, we let adults decide if that's a risk that they think is worth taking.
But the response is, aren't you forcing other people to take the risk too because you can spread it?
And that's why I want to say, That while I, just to clarify here, and I think I can speak for most people who support ending the lockdowns.
I haven't heard anyone take the opposite view on this.
So this is my view.
We end the lockdowns allowing people to leave their homes again and, most importantly, go to work.
So that they can support their families.
That's the position.
That's what we're advocating.
Allowing people to leave the home.
Here's the point.
We're not saying that people should be forced to leave their home.
I certainly don't think that.
I don't think you should be mandated to leave your home.
I just think you should be allowed to in the United States of America.
And especially when you can't afford food to feed your kids.
So, I think that that really addresses that concern, doesn't it?
Of someone going to work, taking the risk, but then spreading it.
If you don't want to leave your house, don't leave your house.
If you want to stay locked in your home for another six months or year, you're free to do that.
I mean, if you can find a way.
Right?
If you're making it through the lockdown okay right now, you're working from home or whatever, and you want to keep doing that, keep doing it.
So what's the problem here?
People who want to leave their homes and participate in society can.
And if you don't want to, and I don't even mean this in a combative way, I really, this is very sincere.
If you're still worried about it, you're still afraid, maybe for good reason.
Maybe you have pre-existing conditions.
Maybe you're in one of the vulnerable categories.
Well, in that case, I wouldn't blame you at all.
I think it's a very good idea to stay, even if the lockdowns are lifted.
Maybe you stay for as long as you can, depending on your situation, depending on what your pre-existing condition is, right?
Depending on where you live, too.
So there are a lot of factors that work into this.
But if you're in that category, then maybe you stay home.
You continue to self-isolate.
And I also think, as I've said before, that people who are in those vulnerable groups, we should keep helping them.
And the government should help them.
And it'd be a lot easier to do, rather than giving checks to everybody, even people who don't need it, if we can target, if we can be a lot more targeted in our approach, helping people who actually have to stay home because of pre-existing conditions.
Okay, so I think that that kind of addresses that issue.
That those people can continue to self-isolate.
As I've said many times, you know, nursing homes should remain locked down, of course, for the foreseeable future.
Because we know how devastating this has been in nursing homes.
And then anybody else.
Maybe you don't have a pre-existing condition.
Maybe you're younger and healthy, but you just are afraid of it.
You don't want to go out of your house.
Well, I'm not saying you should be forced to.
You could stay home too.
The people who feel like they need to or want to to get back out and resume their lives should be allowed to do that.
All right, let's move on to news headlines.
Number one.
President Trump sent out a tweet yesterday with an announcement in light of the attack.
This is his tweet.
It says, in light of the attack from the invisible enemy, as well as the need to protect the jobs of our great American citizens, I will be signing an executive order to temporarily suspend immigration into the United States.
This apparently will be a moratorium on immigration through the southern border.
Obviously, it makes sense to do this.
My only problem is that he didn't do it two months ago.
But, or maybe even two years ago, frankly.
But the general idea is clearly, clearly good.
Now, of course, as you might expect, some on the left are calling it bigoted, yada yada, etc.
and so forth.
But that is just a very stupid, unserious position to take here, and it can be ignored, and should be ignored.
Especially coming from people who, up to this point, haven't met a government action in response to the virus that they didn't like.
Shutting down churches, arresting people for You know, going to drive-in services, closing up playgrounds and parks and beaches.
Oh yeah, love all that.
But no, stopping people from coming in from foreign countries in the middle of a pandemic?
No, that's too far.
We can't do that.
No, that's one government action that definitely, unassailably makes sense.
Now, we're going to move on to number two, but before we do that, A word from our friends over at Benham Brothers.
You know, when you start having your employees working remote, you have to manage your workforce and also your workflow really well.
And in that case, systems are very crucial.
The Benham brothers are great at managing work teams that are all over the country.
This is what they do.
These guys have over a dozen businesses, including a real estate empire that spans over 35 states.
Now that name might ring a bell, the Benham brothers, because they were slated for,
you might remember this story, they were slated for a reality TV show on HGTV,
and they were canceled because of their commitment to conservative values.
So they're really great guys, and they were willing.
You think about how great it must be, especially in this business, to have that show on HGTV.
They're willing to sacrifice that for their convictions, which I think is just spectacular.
Over the last six months, these guys have been working on a new course called Expert Ownership,
How to Own a Business Without It Owning You.
And in it, they teach entrepreneurs and small business owners the exact system
that they themselves have used to build their businesses over time.
So if you're sitting at home trying to run your business right now,
expert ownership was made for you.
The Benham Brothers slashed the cost of the course to help small business owners and entrepreneurs
who are trying to navigate all that's happening right now.
So head over to benhambrothers.com slash Walsh to see a preview of the course
That's B-E-N-H-A-M Brothers.com slash Walsh.
Okay, number two, as we've covered here several times, cities around the country, including New York, have been releasing prisoners back into the population in order to protect them.
That would be the prisoners, not the population.
And after weeks of this insane suicidal policy, New York and other cities have developed a problem wherein the released criminals are going right back to being criminals and starting to commit crimes again because that's what they do.
It's their whole thing, you might say.
Well, Mayor Bill de Blasio of New York spoke about this, about the released prisoners committing crimes again during a briefing this week, and this is what he said.
I think it's unconscionable, just on a human level, that folks were shown mercy, and this is what some of them have done.
Unconscionable, he says.
Now, unconscionable means that something is shocking.
Shockingly bad.
So, Mayor Bill de Blasio, who, to emphasize, was elected mayor of New York City, our largest city.
He thinks it's shocking that criminals would commit crimes after being given a get-out-of-jail-free card.
He's shocked by this.
Didn't see it coming.
Didn't see it.
No, no way.
You're telling me, wait, wait, wait.
Those criminals we released are committing crimes?
What?
That's just unconscionable.
Now, for most leftists who are claiming to be shocked by something like this, I would say that that's bogus and obviously they're not really shocked.
They knew that was going to happen.
But de Blasio is such a dumb goober that I might actually buy it.
I think he might actually be that stupid that this surprises him.
Number three, reading now from the Daily Wire says, in a press release issued Monday, the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health announced that the early results of its highly anticipated joint study with the University of Southern California on COVID-19 infections in the county suggests that infections from the new coronavirus are far more widespread and the fatality rate much lower in LA County than previously thought.
And then it goes into the numbers.
You can read the report on the Daily Wire.
But the point is, a lot more people have it than has previously been reported, which obviously is good news.
It's good news because that means that, number one, the fatality rate, if this holds true across the country, the fatality rate is much lower than what they're reporting.
And it also means that there are probably many states where the crisis has already passed, because so many people have already had it, and they've already seen the worst of it.
Number four.
This is something you need to watch out for.
Maybe you've seen this picture that I'll show you now floating around social media.
I've seen it many times.
And the first time I saw it, immediately, I thought, something doesn't look right here.
This is a photo of a flyer from an anti-lockdown protest in New York.
And the flyer says, End the lockdown rally.
No mask needed.
Bring your children.
Non-essential workers.
If you're sick, still come.
It's your right.
Sunday, April 19th, Conference House Lawn.
Keep America Great.
MAGA.
Hashtag end the shutdown NYC.
Now, the left has been making hay with this because it proves, right, it proves that the anti-lockdown people are a bunch of suicidal MAGA cult maniacs actually encouraging sick people to come, telling people not to wear masks, and even throwing in, you know, bring your children But, as I said, I saw this and immediately my BS detector went off.
Now sure, it's possible that some actual maniac was crazy enough to put this flyer up and try to plan a rally inviting sick people to come.
That's possible.
But it is not very likely.
Because despite how they're portrayed by the media, the anti-lockdown folks are not a bunch of comic book villains.
This is not Joker putting these events on.
So, the fact that this flyer feeds right into the caricature of the protesters that the media presents should tell you something.
It should raise a red flag.
And it tells you that this is probably fake.
So, I looked into it myself.
And, first of all, this rally was supposed to be on Sunday.
Nobody showed up, apparently.
According to reports.
Nobody came.
Not one person.
Now, if this was a rally actually being organized by some group or some person, they at least would be at the rally.
I've been to plenty of political rallies and protests in my day that were sparsely attended, but the one thing you can always count on is the people who organized it will be there at least.
Oftentimes looking very embarrassed that nobody else came, but they're going to be there.
So if nobody came, what does that tell you?
It tells you that nobody organized it.
It wasn't a real rally.
Then also the hashtag on the flyer.
Hashtag, what was it?
End the shutdown NYC or whatever it was.
I checked that hashtag and nobody had tweeted the hashtag.
There were two tweets with that hashtag and they were both making fun of the flyer.
Now if you're organizing an event and you come up with a hashtag for it, the whole point of the hashtag is that you're going to tweet on that hashtag to try to promote the event.
That's the whole point.
But there are no tweets.
So, are we supposed to believe that somebody was organizing this event, they came up with a hashtag, they went around posting flyers around town, they never once posted on Twitter, hey, end the shutdown NYC, hashtag whatever.
No, that doesn't make any sense.
Also, no group claimed credit for this or there's no name attached, no website attached to it.
So, factoring all that together, what does it mean?
It means that this is fake.
Like this is like 99.9% fake.
I'll allow for a 0.1% chance that it's real, but 99.9% this is fake.
And that tells you that the other side of this debate, they are resorting to some devious tactics, including fake flyers for fake rallies to try to discredit those who want to end the shutdown.
And that, you know, that should really Um, make you wary.
And when you start seeing media reports about rallies and things, you just keep this in mind.
If you see, if you, if you've seen footage of a rally and you see somebody with a really inappropriate or weird or crazy looking sign or something, you have to think, is that person actually part of that rally or is that someone who's there to discredit?
Um, so.
That should tell you that.
Number five, speaking of things that smell funny, two doctors were on a coronavirus podcast this week, and they were talking about the dangers that farts pose during this pandemic.
Now, one doctor, Dr. Swan is his name, he said that it might be possible for the virus to be spread through your southerly winds.
Which is why it's recommended that, and this is very important, the health recommendations here are that if you're going to fart, make sure you wear pants.
Which, you know, it's a little bit of a burden there, but again, we all have to make sacrifices.
Generally, if you're out in public, you want to be wearing pants anyway, but especially during these times, I would say.
Now, this is what the doctor said, quote, I think that we should, what we should do in terms of social distancing and being safe is that you don't fart close to other people and that you don't fart with your bottom bare.
So this is, we're talking about fart social distancing, social fart distancing.
And anyway, this is one measure that I can certainly get behind.
Or rather, I guess I'd rather be out in front of it.
But anyway, this is all to say we need to quarantine Eric Swalwell ASAP.
Before it's too late.
Moving on to your daily cancellation.
Today, I'm once again unfortunately going to have to cancel.
I hate to do it, I really do, but I'm going to have to cancel my wife again.
I think this is the second or third time I've canceled her on the show.
And I'll tell you why.
And you're going to agree with my decision once you hear what she did.
So yesterday, I had the brilliant idea to give both of my sons a haircut.
I was going to give them a buzz cut.
Okay?
Three years old and six years old are my sons.
And they both look, at this point, because they haven't had a haircut like the rest of us, and so they look like they're wearing mops on their heads, or like some sort of woodland creature crawled on top of their heads and died.
And so I said, you know, this is not good.
It's not good for their self-esteem.
It's not good for me because I have to look at it.
It's not good for hygiene, you know, and the coronavirus can hide up in the hair.
You know, I've read that too.
So I said to my wife, I'll cut their hair.
Now, I happen to be a celebrated stylist.
So I figured this idea would go over well with my wife, but she recoiled for some reason.
Actually, she refused to Allow my oldest son to go anywhere near me when I had the clippers because Luke, my oldest, has blonde curly hair, which my wife is very protective of.
In fact, he didn't get any kind of haircut, even a professional haircut, I think until he was like four years old.
And so by the time he was four, he had like these long, golden, he looked like a hippie with a perm.
He had this ridiculous looking hair.
And finally he got a haircut.
So she said, I can't cut Luke's hair.
But my youngest son, Jeremiah, was offered up as a sacrifice, much like Abraham offering Isaac.
My wife offered the three-year-old up to the slaughter.
But she doubted me the whole time.
She critiqued, harassed me.
And it is for this doubt, this lack of faith, this lack of loyalty, that she is being canceled.
And ultimately she was put to shame because my son's hair turned out beautifully.
Honestly, the kids never looked so good.
I was masterful.
I discovered within myself not only a natural ability as a hairstylist, but frankly, a passion for it.
I think I might quit my job and become a hairstylist full-time.
I just discovered this is something I'm very good at.
Here, take a look.
Here's a picture.
I blurred out his face because I don't want his face on camera.
I just want you to see the work that I did.
This is the haircut.
That's pretty good, you have to admit.
Notice the fading of the sides, the way I blended it all together.
You know, they spend 10 years teaching this in hairstylist school.
10 years.
I mastered it in 5 minutes.
And you can see he has kind of the edgy sort of styling that I did up top there.
Kind of a messy, spiky, but still classy look.
Right?
So it looks like he's ready for a business meeting, but he's also ready to go out and play on the playground.
And that's kind of what I was going for.
So, I just thought I did a fantastic job.
And now my next goal is to give my daughter a haircut.
I don't know if that's going to go over well or not, but I, but the point is I have a, I have, apparently I have a real passion for fashion and a skill.
And so that's why my wife is canceled.
Uh, and you know what else is canceled?
Bad hair.
All right.
In this house, bad hair is canceled.
Okay.
Now we go to emails and I've got a why I'm wrong email here now.
Um, I feel like it's getting repetitive here with these coronavirus emails telling me why I'm a monster who wants to kill the elderly, but it's the same point repeated over and over again.
This is from Justin, says, Hi Matt, I've been very disappointed with your coronavirus takes recently.
It's hard for me not to see it as highly selfish.
Yes, you're young and healthy, but not everybody is if you're going out in public.
And you have the virus, you could be directly killing multiple people.
Would you press a button to kill three people just so you can get your normal life back?
That's what it's like.
This is actually the second or third time I've specifically seen this press a button thing.
Someone tweeted that to me yesterday.
That going out in public during the coronavirus, or going back to your normal life, going to your job, is like pressing a button and killing people.
I don't know if this is the latest.
This is the latest argument, it's like pressing a button.
No, it's not like that at all.
So there's a few problems here that we have to go through.
First of all, even if I was sick and I went out in public, it would not be exactly the same as pressing a button and directly killing.
It's not the same.
When you're sick, now if you're sick and you intentionally try to infect other people, And then they die from the illness, then I would say that's effectively the same as shooting them.
Sure, I agree with you there.
But if you're sick and you go out and you unintentionally infect somebody else, it's morally not the same as shooting them in the head.
It's just not.
You're not directly responsible.
You're not directly and intentionally killing someone.
And there's a big difference there.
So just to be clear, there's a big difference between intentionally killing someone by shooting them or pressing a button, or accidentally getting them sick.
Am I saying that if you're sick with the coronavirus, you should go out in public?
Of course not!
That would be reckless, stupid.
Yes, it would be selfish.
It would be all of those things.
And if you know you are sick with a potentially deadly virus and you go out in public and you get somebody else sick, then yes, I do think you're partially responsible for killing them.
But it's just, it's ethically not the same as directly shooting somebody in the head.
Or pressing a button or whatever it is.
Pressing a button and I guess, what, blowing them up or I don't know how this button thing is supposed to work.
So that's the first thing.
But I am not advocating that if you know you're sick that you go out in public.
It's not what I'm saying.
That's not the discussion here.
In fact, part of my, not just me, but part of the proposal of opening up society is that if you're sick and you have symptoms, of course you stay home.
We quarantine people who are sick or who we know have been exposed to the virus.
And that's actually what a quarantine is supposed to be.
So what I'm saying is we should have actual quarantine policies.
Quarantine and isolation.
If you're sick, you're isolated.
If we know you've been exposed to someone who's sick, like somebody in your house is sick, okay?
So we know you've been exposed to it.
And especially in a prolonged way, where the chance of transmission is pretty high, then we quarantine you.
So I'm totally in favor of actual quarantines and isolation policies.
What I'm not in favor of Is a blanket policy imposed by the government locking everybody in their homes, even people who, as far as we know, are healthy.
People who we have no reason or no evidence to think that they are sick or that they've been exposed.
And then, in the process, cratering the economy and causing millions of people to lose their jobs and causing them to have to go to food banks and everything else.
That's what I'm against.
That's my issue.
And as far as the risk of infecting somebody else, listen, I go back to what I said before, that anyone who does not want to take a risk, and if we do this right and we're smart about it, it's not a very significant risk.
Now, I realize that people, as far as we know, pre-symptomatic people can still spread the virus.
We don't know how effectively they can spread it, probably not very effectively.
But we can go a long way to stopping the spread by keeping people who have symptoms at home.
And so if we do that, we still practice social distancing.
I'm in favor of wearing masks, you know, especially in certain environments.
I don't think you should have to wear a mask when you're walking down the street or going for a jog or something in the park.
But if you're in a crowded environment, I think it makes sense to wear a mask, of course.
And so if we do that, we keep the elderly people at home, people who are especially vulnerable, we keep them at home.
And if you yourself don't want to go out, you don't want to take that risk, you don't have to.
You're welcome to stay home.
And that means that everybody who's out and about in society, it's because they've decided that it's worth it to them.
It's worth it to take that minimal risk.
Maybe it's worth it because they just want to go about their lives.
Maybe it's worth it because they feel like they have to work to live, which I totally understand.
And there we go.
So I think that this idea that it could be spread to someone who has no interest in being out in society and taking the minimal risk, well, I don't see that because they can still stay home.
So what exactly is the issue here?
I don't see it.
Well, thanks for the email.
And we'll wrap it up there.
Thanks, everybody, for watching.
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.
Tell your friends to subscribe as well.
We're available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, wherever you listen to podcasts.
We're there.
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.
Our supervising producers are Mathis Glover and Robert Sterling.
Our technical producer is Austin Stevens, edited by Danny D'Amico, and our audio is mixed by Robin Fenderson.
The Matt Wall Show is a Daily Wire production, copyright Daily Wire 2020.
Even left-wing mayors are beginning to admit the experts got it wrong.
Way more people have the virus than they thought.
Way fewer people are dying from it.
And the lockdowns likely aren't doing very much to stop it at all.
