All Episodes
June 25, 2020 - The Matt Walsh Show
48:15
Ep. 512 - We Need Law And Order, Not "Police Reform"

Today on the Matt Walsh Show, Republicans are trying to appease the Left with “police reform” measures, but I have an idea for different reforms that should be our priority before we talk about reforming the police. Also Five Headlines including the Michigan prosecutor who still has not arrested and charged the man who brutally assaulted a Macy’s employee on camera. And we’ll also discuss a video of a white protester trying to explain racism to black police officers. It doesn’t go well for her. 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

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Today on the Matt Wall Show, Republicans are trying to appease the left, as usual, this time with police reform measures.
But I have an idea for different reforms that we could make our priority, and should make our priority, before we talk about reforming the police.
Also, five headlines, including the Michigan prosecutor who still has not arrested or charged the man who brutally assaulted a Macy's employee on camera.
Still hasn't done it is according to him is considering not charging him at all We'll play that clip for you, and we'll also discuss a video of a white protester trying to explain Racism lecturing about racism to a group of black police officers It doesn't go very well for her as you might imagine all of that coming up So, Republicans in the Senate have come up with a police reform bill.
The bill has been blocked by Democrats.
Not only blocked by Democrats, but Nancy Pelosi, infamously, said that the bill is murder.
It is murder.
Republicans are trying to get away with murder with this bill.
They're trying to get away specifically with the murder of George Floyd with their police reform bill.
That's what she said.
How is this bill murdering George Floyd, who is, of course, already dead and who died in a Democrat-run city?
I mean, how could you possibly blame the murder of George Floyd on Senate Republicans when he died in a Democrat-run city at the hands of one single police officer?
Who knows?
But she's not apologizing for the comment.
When you were speaking yesterday, you said that Republicans are, quote, trying to get away with murder, actually, the murder of George Floyd.
Senate Republicans are demanding an apology for that statement.
Will you apologize?
Absolutely, positively not.
The fact is, people say, I think you, frankly, and the press have given them far too much credit for a bill that does nothing.
They're saying, well, you have your bill, they have theirs.
Yeah, our bill does something, theirs does nothing.
Is Tim Scott working in good faith, I guess?
I'm sorry?
Well, we would hope that you- Has Tim stopped working in good faith?
Is this a good starting point?
I'm talking about Mitch McConnell.
Now what does this murderous bill actually do, or what is it intended to do anyway?
Reading now from an NPR report, which for the most part appears to be relatively fair, surprisingly, it says the legislation will increase federal reporting requirements for use of force no-knock warrants.
It also increases penalties for false police reports.
It seeks to encourage chokehold bans through this added transparency and by withholding funding for units without bans on chokeholds except when deadly force is authorized.
The effort also looks to up use of police body cameras with grant programs and in turn penalties for failing to use the cameras.
It creates a database of police disciplinary records for law enforcement departments to use in their hiring practices.
It makes lynching a federal crime, which is linked to an effort that passed in the House but has recently stalled in the Senate.
It directs the Justice Department to develop and provide training on de-escalation tactics and implement duty to intervene policies.
That's what Democrats are blocking.
And we'll talk about all the specifics here.
Making lynching a federal crime, what's the point of that?
When is the last time we actually have a verified case of somebody being lynched in this country?
On the extremely, extremely, extremely rare occasion that it does happen, if it does happen, why would that form of murder be a federal crime?
So if you lynch somebody, it's a federal crime, but if you just shoot them in the head, it's not.
Why would we be doing that?
Well, this is about, of course, there's no reason for it.
It's absurd.
The whole thing's absurd.
But this is Republicans just trying to appease the left and give them what they want, even if it doesn't make any sense.
But Democrats are blocking it. Republicans are shocked and scandalized that the bill is being blocked.
Here's Senator Tim Scott reacting.
In Detroit, Atlanta,
Minneapolis, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, all these cities could have banned chokeholds
themselves.
They could have increased the police reporting themselves.
They could have more data information themselves.
They could have de-escalation training themselves.
They could have duty to intervene themselves.
Minneapolis as well.
All these communities have been run by Democrats for decades.
Decades!
What is the ROI for the poorest people in this nation?
And I don't blame them!
I blame an elite political class with billions of dollars to do whatever they want to do and look at the results for the poorest, most vulnerable people in our nation.
I'm willing to compete for their vote.
Are you?
But Democrats are even more shocked and scandalized.
So it's a competition.
Who can be the most shocked and scandalized?
Democrats are even more, which Kamala Harris says that she's shocked and scandalized because the bill is hollow and political.
And she, of course, knows something about being hollow and political.
Watch.
We're here because Mitch McConnell has put up a bill Challenging us to either comply with his political game that is about obstructing the United States Senate's ability to actually do something or to play a game with him, which is only about covering his political concerns and not about the real concerns that the American people have about the realities of two systems of justice in America.
And we're not going to play that game.
And we're not going to be played.
The truth, as we know it, is that people by the thousands are marching in the streets of America.
Of every race, every age and gender, in every geographic location in all the 50 states.
Unified.
Demanding we act.
And back and forth we go.
But you know something?
is actually done.
And we have it in our power to actually do something.
And back and forth we go.
But you know something?
I'm happy that this bill was blocked by Democrats.
I really am.
And I want to tell you why, and I'll do that in just a second.
But first, today's show is brought to you by Rad Power Bikes.
Listen, this is a great way if you want to get out and about and finally start emerging from your home again if you've been locked down for so long, electric bikes are a great way to do it.
Convenient, fun.
Whether you want a new way to commute or just get around town, get around the city, out in nature, whatever it is, even if you have your kids in tow, okay, you've got to try Rad Power Bikes.
It's a cross between a traditional bike and a moped, but it doesn't require a special driver's license.
You don't have to worry about all that red tape.
You can go up to 20 miles per hour without pedaling, and you can get out and about without getting sweaty, which is, for those of us who are in the sweaty, for those of us who tend to get especially sweaty, who are in the sweaty community, Yes, we do have our own community.
This is also great as well.
They're great for commuting, getting out on the trail, hauling groceries.
You can transport your kids on the back.
Whatever you need it for.
And also, by the way, dedicated U.S.-based customer support.
Seven days a week to answer any questions or concerns.
So they're there for you.
They're going to answer your questions.
Makes a perfect gift for someone who loves being active and outdoors.
Rad Powerbikes offers flexible financing for as low as 0% APR.
Right now as a limited time offer.
Get a free accessory with the purchase of a bike.
That's right.
Get a free gift of up to $100 in value and free shipping to the lower 48 states.
To get this special offer, text the word BIKE to 64000.
That's BIKE to 64000.
Text BIKE, B-I-K-E to 64000.
All right.
Dems are blocking the bill.
I'm happy they did.
Here's why.
Two reasons.
One, I'm an optimist.
At heart.
Cheerful optimist.
Which you know this about me.
Okay, I see everything through rosy tinted glasses.
And so, I hope that finally, finally, finally, Republicans will learn that you will never ever win by trying to suck up to and appease the left.
No matter what you do.
No matter what.
It won't be enough.
There is no reason to ever do anything Because you think that it will make them feel good, or you're trying not to upset them.
There's no reason to ever do anything for those reasons.
It'll never be enough.
Republicans could pass a bill abolishing the police, abolishing the national anthem, mandating the removal of the Statue of Liberty, which will be replaced by a 300-foot statue of, I don't know, RuPaul.
Deporting all white people to Mars, whatever.
And they'd still be told that it's not only not enough, but it's so insufficient that it only proves that Republicans are literal Nazis who sacrifice goats to idols of Hitler that are constructed out of the bones of puppies.
That's the way it always goes, okay?
So maybe Republicans will learn that.
Probably not, but that's my hope anyway.
Second reason that I'm glad it's blocked.
It's a bad bill.
It is just a bad bill.
I know it's a bad bill because they're trying to pass it for the reason just stated.
To appease the left.
When was any Republican talking about police reform before, say, two months ago?
Before George Floyd, I don't remember any, there weren't very many Republicans putting this forward as the number one item on their agenda, were there?
Who in the Republican Party was calling for that?
Almost no one.
They discovered this passion for police reform because of the public outcry over one particular case.
A case that we have no reason to think has anything to do with bad policy or bad policing strategies.
People are so emotional that we can't stop and be reasonable about this and realize that this had nothing to do with a bad policy.
This was the behavior of one cop who, it seems, may have had a personal issue with George Floyd, because it seems like they knew each other.
Though actually, we still don't know a whole lot about.
Still to this point, there's been a lot of reaction, to put it mildly, to George Floyd and his death.
We still don't know almost anything about what happened.
Do you realize that?
We don't know the context.
We don't know what led up to it.
We don't know.
To this point, we have not seen body cam footage, though it exists.
We have not seen dash cam footage, though it exists.
Why is that?
That's a whole different question.
But the point is that this bill is a reaction to a high-profile news event, And bills passed as a reaction to high-profile news events, bills that seek to make new laws and regulations based on the public reaction to something in the news, are almost always bad.
They are almost always passed for, well, Kamala Harris said it, hollow and political reasons.
I actually agree with her criticism.
The only difference is that she forgot to mention that she is also hollow and political, and her own police reform efforts are the same.
So she was half right, anyway.
Do the police need to be reformed?
Well, again, if you didn't think so two months ago, then you shouldn't think so now.
Nothing has happened in the last two months that should have changed your mind about however you felt about police reform.
Do I think that police should be?
Well, sure.
Any institution, especially a government institution, can stand to be reformed, refined.
That's a constant process that should always continue.
There are always problems to be addressed, adaptations that need to be made, keeping up with the times and all that kind of stuff.
So, yes.
But not like this.
Not under these circumstances, not for this reason, not passed down from the top, from the federal government, in a panic, in reaction to voters who are emotional and upset for reasons that many of those voters can't even articulate.
These are quote-unquote reforms that need to be much more localized and targeted and enacted with the input of actual law enforcement officials, not empty suits in DC.
But here's the real point for me.
Before we talk about police reform, before we get to that, I think there are other, much more pressing reforms that need to be made.
And these are the reforms that Republicans, if they had any guts at all, if they were worth anything, if they weren't utterly worthless, useless, spineless jellyfish floating around, barely able to stand on their own two feet because they're comprised of such weak, gelatinous material, they would be calling for reforms that restore law and order in the streets.
And bring the criminals and terrorists to justice.
That's what we need right now.
That's what we need first and urgently.
And don't tell me that, well, this will help restore law and order because this is what the anarchists want and it will make them happy and they'll go away.
No.
No, they're anarchists.
They're insurrectionists.
They're nihilists.
Okay, they're people that are destroying for the sake of it.
There's nothing you can do.
They're not going to say, oh, you know what?
Republicans passed police reform.
Guys, let's stop toppling the statue for a minute.
Let's look over this bill.
We'll talk about it.
And maybe it's good.
Maybe we just go home.
That's not going to happen.
That's not ever going to happen.
Never.
There is nothing in a police reform bill that will do one single damned thing to stop the spread of lawlessness and anarchy across the country.
So one example of a reform measure that could be put in place, if you remember this video, watch it again.
Now that dirtbag Who pushed the 92-year-old woman onto the ground, she hit her head against a fire hydrant, had been arrested anywhere from 60 to 100 times already, including sex crimes.
Why not a reform that gets monstrosities like that off of the street for good, forever?
Why not some reforms targeted at preventing terrorists from tearing down priceless monuments?
Or reforms enacting stiffer penalties for people who participate in riots?
I could list dozens of more reforms that could be enacted, that could be made in the direction of restoring order to our communities and freeing us from the grip of anarchists and insurrectionists and all around scumbags who are trying to destroy society.
And if Republicans had any sense or any guts or any spine, that's what they would be doing.
Instead, we get police reform.
Instead, we get them following the agenda of the left.
As always, the left looks at what's happening and they say, this is a sign we need police reform.
And the stupid, useless Republicans say, you know what?
You're right.
That's what we need.
Completely useless.
Thank you.
And the argument for as long as I've been alive, you know, for as long as I've been alive, I've known that, sorry about that, for as long as I've been alive, I've known that the Republicans are useless.
But I've always been told that, well, they're better than the Democrats.
So you just gotta vote for them.
They're better.
Okay?
It's the best we can do.
Sorry, just suck it up, buttercup.
It's the best we can do.
Is it?
I mean, are they even better than the Democrats?
How are they better?
The lines are blurring so much.
In what way?
Democrats are doing nothing to restore law and order.
Republicans are doing nothing.
They're both doing nothing.
They're both focusing on police reform.
We're really gonna get to a point, I think we're probably there already, where there just is really no substantive difference between these two groups of people.
And I think arguably we've been there and have been there for a long time.
All right, let's go to news headlines.
Number one, over the last several days I've been telling you about this apparently racially motivated hate crime at a Macy's in Michigan.
Watch it again.
Oh!
Don't touch me.
Quit touching me.
You know, it's hurt.
It's hurt.
Stop moving.
It's hurt.
I'm sorry.
The important update on this story is that there is no update.
Nothing has happened in this case.
It's been 10 days.
Nothing has happened.
No charges.
The man seen pummeling a Macy's store manager in broad daylight in the middle of the store on video has not been arrested, has not been charged with anything.
He brutally assaulted someone on camera.
You know, we see it.
The guy's on the ground begging for mercy, getting pummeled.
Hasn't been arrested for it.
The prosecutor, David Leighton, here's his Twitter, by the way, he hasn't filed charges.
He still has not.
And he's actually considering not filing charges at all.
That's what he said.
Here he is right now.
Well, listen to this.
I would say to the president and anybody else who has an interest in this that I will make a fair and just decision as to charging or not charging after I have all the information.
The warrant request only came in today.
The police reports only came in today.
And after we reviewed them, we determined that they're not complete yet.
We want more information.
So I would say to Mr. President, give us the time that we need.
And we certainly would appreciate it if you would send more resources in to help us because Genesee County is not the wealthiest, wealthy county.
And our police departments work very, very hard.
Our prosecutor's office works very, very hard.
But it takes time to get these right.
We want to get it right.
So, haste makes waste, and we're going to make sure that we do everything so it's fair and just for all people concerned.
Charging or not charging.
He's deciding about charging or not charging.
He is actually, as of now, according to him, leaving open the possibility of not charging a man with a crime for pummeling another man while that man is on the ground begging him to stop.
He's saying, potentially, in his eyes, that's not a crime.
What would make that not a crime?
What information?
He said, we're still investigating.
What information could you possibly discover in your investigation that would make this not a crime?
What could you possibly find out?
That's what I want to know.
What could have happened before this that would make what you saw on video okay?
In the eyes of the law.
The assailant's brother, by the way, who filmed it and posted it, doesn't even claim that it was self-defense.
Okay, he doesn't even... So, the people responsible for it, they're not even pretending that this was legally justified.
Which, of course, it's not self-defense.
A Macy's store manager, I very much doubt, would get into a fist fight with random customers who are coming in the door.
But that isn't even being claimed anyway.
The claim from the assailants, their defense is that the manager said the N-word, which he didn't.
That's clearly a lie, but even if he did, how would that change a single damn thing in respect to criminal charges?
You don't have the legal authority to assault someone because they said a word you don't like.
So how would that make a difference?
He also says that, I don't know, I don't think it's in the clip, but he says that, They're looking at different footage, and they're looking at security camera footage, but unfortunately it doesn't have audio.
What do you need audio for?
Who cares what's being said?
And the prosecutor says he needs more resources, that Trump should send him.
What resources do you need?
You have a video of it, and you have a public confession from the assailants that they gave to the media, admitting that they assaulted him.
And saying that the only reason they did it is that he said a word, a bad word.
And then you have Macy's, who already investigated it, and could very easily tell you that he didn't say the bad word, but again, for the millionth time, whether he did or not is immaterial to the criminal aspect of this case.
Number two, so this is weird.
A few days ago, Kelly Weil of the Daily Beast, not Daily Wire, Daily Beast published this piece under the Chaos Debunked heading, and the piece is titled, Local Businesses Love the quote, Domestic Terror Zone in Seattle, actually.
And her point was that, in fact, all the businesses in the so-called autonomous zone in Seattle actually love being in a lawless hellscape rife with unregulated and unpunished crime and chaos.
They love it.
That was her whole, she wrote a lengthy piece about it.
They really are, they can't get enough of it.
You know, they wake up every morning, tears of joy in their eyes.
Those tears you see, those are of joy.
Because they look out their shop windows and see a half-naked man, high on heroin, spray-painting a park bench, while protesters smash the neighbor's window, and a mentally disturbed woman performs karate with an orange peel over her face, which is a thing that actually happened.
And they think to themselves, I am so glad to be here.
That's what Kelly Wiles says, anyway.
But here's the weird part.
A report today from Preston Phillips, local news anchor, In Seattle, says that a dozen business owners in the chop zone are suing.
They're filing a class action lawsuit against the city of Seattle for abandoning them and leaving them to wallow in the chaos and filth.
That's a strange way to show you love something, isn't it?
To file a class action lawsuit to get it to stop?
Hmm.
Number three, a Black Lives Matter activist was on with Martha McCallum on Fox News last night.
A number of crazy things were said, as you can imagine, but here's just one example.
I just want to put up this quote from Martin Luther King, and I've heard you talk about Martin Luther King versus Malcolm X, and you said that he was an anomaly, Martin Luther King.
He said, Do you agree with that?
Satisfied until that day when nobody will shout white power when nobody will shout black power
But everybody will talk about God's power and human power.
Do you agree with that? I Love the Lord and my Lord and Savior
Jesus Christ is the most famous black radical revolutionary in history
And he was treated just like Dr. King.
He was arrested on occasion and he was also crucified or assassinated.
This is what happens to black activists.
We are killed by the government.
Well, and if you need context, if you read your Bible, it'll say that Jesus had feet like burnt brass and hair like wool.
I don't know if you know this, but our hair seems to be more like wool and we seem to be likened to that color than anyone else.
And, you know, it's just a hypocrisy and white supremacy in America and in the world that would show us portraits of a pasty white Jesus.
Jesus was not white.
We all know this.
OK, no.
No, that no.
That's a no on that one.
Jesus was a Middle Eastern Jew.
That's what he was.
There's no debate over that.
He was a Middle Eastern Jew.
He wasn't white.
He wasn't black.
He wasn't white European.
And he wasn't black African.
He was a Middle Eastern Jew.
Probably looked very similar to what Middle Eastern Jews look like today.
If that matters, which it doesn't.
As to the Bible quote, the Bible verse quoted there, that's not a Bible verse.
That's just, that's not actually in the Bible.
The Gospels never once describe any of Christ's physical features.
They don't say a single word about what he looks like.
And there might be a reason for that.
You know?
Maybe there's a reason for that.
I say that his physical appearance didn't matter.
Well, I think the writers of the Gospels agreed.
That's why they don't describe him.
Revelation does provide a description, you might say, but it's highly metaphorical, and it's describing a glorified Christ returning on Judgment Day.
The actual verse says, the hair on his head was white like wool, as white as snow.
That's the verse that he mentioned.
But he didn't quite quote it that way, did he?
Now I don't think that means Jesus is white, as in Caucasian.
But it does show that the wool comment is about color.
The color of the hair, that's what it's about.
Color of the hair, specifically, is what it's referring to.
And so all of that is nonsense.
And of course, you know, this, and I've addressed it before so I'm not going to go into detail, but this constant, constant effort.
By activists and leftists, to make Jesus into himself sort of a political activist who was killed by the government because they were afraid of his political message is just completely off base.
There is no support for it whatsoever.
No support in the Bible.
Now, there is support among New Age scholars who have for decades been trying to turn Jesus into that, but all you have to do is pick up the Gospels and read them.
He was not a political activist.
At all.
He barely discussed anything remotely political, and when he did, you know, he said, give to Caesar what is Caesar's.
But that was not Jesus's message.
It was not one about politics.
And the Roman government couldn't care less about Jesus.
They weren't worried about, you know, an itinerant preacher, an itinerant Jewish preacher going around talking about, from their perspective, from their perspective he's just another Jewish preacher, there's a lot of them, going around talking about Jewish, you know, theology.
They didn't care about that.
It made no difference to them.
They killed Jesus.
Pilate ordered the execution to appease the mob.
He didn't care.
He tried to exonerate Jesus.
Said, I find no fault in him.
I don't see a problem with him.
Killed him because the mob demanded it.
So again, if there's any lesson we can apply to the current, it's that this is why you don't go along with mob rule.
Number four, Bubba Wallace has slightly changed his tune from that embarrassing CNN performance after the news story was exposed as false, as you may remember.
And he went on CNN in what was really a therapy session more than an interview and was defiant and basically doubling down on On the whole story in a lot of ways, although he admitted that it wasn't a hate crime, but he was doubling down saying it was a noose and trying to still make himself a victim.
Anyway, yesterday he published a statement.
Well, I don't know if he published it so much as his PR people finally got to him and they published this, but this is what he says now.
It's been an emotional few days.
First off, I want to say how relieved I am that the investigation revealed that this wasn't what we feared it was.
I want to thank my team, NASCAR and the FBI for acting swiftly and treating this as a real threat.
I think we'll gladly take a little embarrassment over what the alternatives could have been.
Make no mistake.
Though some will try, this should not detract from the show of unity we had on Monday and the progress we've made as a sport to be a more welcoming environment for all.
Okay, that's slightly less objectionable than his, than his, than the spectacle on, on Monday, Tuesday night.
But what's missing from this?
An apology?
There's no apology.
How about just, I'm sorry about that.
There's no accountability.
And he says, oh, it's not what we feared it was.
Oh, you just feared that it was that.
Because that's not what you said, Bubba.
What you said was that this is a hate crime, a despicable act of hate.
That's what you said.
You didn't say, I fear that it might be a hate crime.
You stated for a fact that it is.
Not only with no skepticism, but insulting anyone who was skeptical about it.
So, and then as far as it shouldn't detract from the show of unity, well, I'm sorry, it does detract from the show of unity.
Because that was a show of unity based on a lie.
And if we want unity in America, we're not going to find it based on lies.
Number five, here's a great video of a white protester trying to explain racism to black cops.
A black person pointing to privilege and power as white?
Yes, sir.
A white person?
We're done.
My black wife is calling me.
I'm going to have a conversation.
That doesn't mean that your life is conserved just because you have one black friend or a black wife.
You can still be racist.
It has nothing to do with your acquaintances.
Wow, it must have been so intimidating if all the police moved that way.
That's impressive.
Just with a little drive.
It's not intimidating.
It's just like...
You're trying to have a conversation, and you have a one-track mind.
There's no point in having that conversation at all.
Amazing.
Everyone moved that way.
You have to be able to be open to both sides of the story.
Amazing, sir.
Everyone moved over.
Impressive.
They couldn't even handle it.
They couldn't handle it, sir.
I wasn't talking to you, sir.
I was talking to Wesley.
Oh, because I can't be racist, right?
No, sir.
I was talking to him.
Systemically, racism can only be white.
Systemically, sir.
Individually, it can be a different color, but systemically, it can only be white.
It's not an agenda, sir.
It's not an agenda.
It's the past.
I hope you're not the future, sir.
Good, I hope you're an anti-racist then.
How can I be?
I'm white.
I'm inherently a racist.
You just called him a liar, saying he don't have a black wife and black family.
You just called him a liar?
I wanted to see his picture.
I wanted to see his picture to believe him.
How dare you ask about this man's family?
How dare you make a personal call?
You don't know nothing about him.
Amazing.
And great stuff from that officer at the end there.
From all the officers, actually.
But you notice how this woman... It really is a cult.
These people are in a cult.
Full-on cult.
She's just repeating doctrine.
She's like an automaton.
A robot.
Can't engage.
She can't.
It's like she can't even hear what's being said to her.
She's saying what she's trained to say.
You can almost see the spirals in her eyes, like a hypnotized cartoon character, right?
Systemically.
You're systemically racist.
Systemically.
Systemically.
What the hell are you babbling about?
This is what people on the left, they think that just saying the word systemically wins the argument.
All they have to do is say, oh really?
Systemically.
Boom, mic drop.
Got you on that, didn't I?
Nothing you can say in response to that.
Systemically.
She's just shouting the word systemically at him.
Systemically!
It's systemic!
You have no idea what you're saying.
You have no clue what you're saying.
But you're saying it because it's what you've been trained to say.
By the way, the officer with the black wife, And he starts by saying, okay, I'm gonna go call my black wife now, obviously as a dig at the woman calling him a racist.
And she says, it doesn't prove you're not a racist.
Yes, actually it does.
It really does.
I think having a black wife, very good evidence that you're not racist.
Extremely good.
I'd say it's almost 100% confirmation that you're not racist.
Yes.
Do you know why?
Despite what we are told by these barely coherent activists who are shouting the word systemically, racism is not some mysterious, undefinable, ambiguous thing.
It's not.
I'll tell you what racism is.
Racism is this.
If you think that people of another race are inferior, Because of their race.
You're racist.
If you don't, you're not.
That's it.
The end.
That's what racism is.
If you have any opinion outside of people of this race are inferior because of their race, you're not racist.
You might still be wrong.
There are plenty of other objectionable opinions a person can have in the realm of race or in any other realm.
It's not racist though.
That's what racism is.
But the left doesn't want us to think that or know that because it's a pretty clever trick.
They know that if they turn racism into this impossible to understand, highly sort of academic and scholarly concept, then they become the gatekeepers.
And they get to decide, and then you're no longer able to deny that you're racist because then they can say, you only think you're not racist, but you actually are because you don't know what racism is.
And that's why you constantly have leftists, many times white leftists, trying to lecture you about what racism is.
They love doing that.
I'll tell you what racism is.
Yeah, you don't know what racism is.
You only think you're not racist.
Think about that statement.
Think about what a stupid statement.
You only think you're not racist.
Guess what?
If you think you're not racist, you're not.
Because racism is all about what you think.
The hell is that?
It's like, you know, if I think that, you know, that I don't like vanilla ice cream, Then I don't like it.
It's simple as that.
It's about what I think.
It comes down to what you think.
All of these issues are about what you think, how you feel.
That's what it is.
So if you think you're not bigoted in a certain area, then you're not.
If you think you're not racist towards a certain group of people, you're not.
And you know something else?
You are the only person who can speak to it.
You're the only person who can decide whether or not you're racist.
Nobody else can because no one else can see inside your head.
I mean, you could certainly lie about it.
But in terms of who is the one single absolute authority on your racism or lack thereof?
You.
Whether you speak honestly on the subject or not is a different subject.
But you're the only authority.
Not some other person.
Not some leftist in a surgical mask holding a sign at a BLM rally.
Shouting at you.
They're not an authority.
They don't know a single damn thing about what you think or what's in your head.
Alright, now we're gonna move on to, um...
To our daily cancellation.
Before we do, if you're not already a Daily Wire member, you should consider getting a reader's pass to dailywire.com.
It's a great value for only three bucks a month, and if you sign up, you get that first month for only 99 cents.
You also get access to our mobile app, articles ad free, access to exclusive editorials, like
the latest one that I wrote about the Bubba Wallace situation, specifically focusing on
the fact that the FBI sent 15 federal agents to investigate a rope in a garage while there's
anarchy and insurrection in the streets.
So I talked about that, analyzed that.
You can check that out.
If you haven't gotten a reader's pass already, go to dailywire.com and sign up for just a
buck.
Okay, now for our daily cancellation.
The actress Jenny Slate has apologized for her flawed decision to voice a non-white character on the Netflix show Big Mouth.
Slate announced that she's stepping aside from the role.
She acknowledged that her initial decision to voice the animated character was a symptom of her, quote, white privilege.
And she explained that she originally thought it was okay because her character, Missy, has a white Jewish mother.
But, and she is white and Jewish, so she thought, okay, I can, but she now understands that she could only take on that role because of, quote, unjust allowances made within a system of societal white supremacy.
And she makes a salient point, of course, because it's well known that the ultimate goal of any Nazi or Klan member is to be a voice actor for a mixed race cartoon character.
This is the goal, right, of white supremacy.
I don't mean to laugh, it's very serious.
Slate promised to do her part to fight the white supremacist scourge by, quote, engaging in meaningful anti-racist action, and she expressed deep remorse for anyone that she may have, quote, hurt by doing voiceovers on our cartoon show.
If you were somehow hurt, in some way, by the fact that Jenny Slate was doing a voiceover on a Netflix cartoon show, she's sorry for that.
She really is.
As a person who was hurt by it, I'm glad that she, it means a lot to me.
I was waking up every morning distraught over Jenny Slate's character on the show Big Mouth on Netflix.
It was ruining my life.
It was the only thing I could think about.
Finally, I have some closure.
On the same day, actress Kristen Bell stepped aside from her role, voicing a non-white character named Molly on the animated show Central Park, which I don't even know existed until now.
She apologized for her, quote, lack of awareness of her, quote, pervasive privilege.
She admitted that, quote, casting a mixed-race character with a white actress undermines the specificity of the mixed-race and black American experience.
Now, it's not clear how a cartoon character's voice could undermine anyone's experience, or even what it means to undermine an experience, but whatever it means, and however it happens, the point is that Kristen Bell is very sorry, and she wants you to know that she's not one of the bad, inherently racist white people.
She's one of the good, inherently racist white people.
In the Twitter thread where she posted this statement, The very humble Kristen Bell responded to a person thanking her for the statement and for her decision to step aside.
And she responded by saying, you know, quote, I don't deserve a thank you.
And she said that she, quote, deserves to acknowledge my part in the problem and then rectify it.
And this was an impressive answer, I thought, because it goes to show that in no way whatsoever did Kristen Bell come to this racial enlightenment at this particular moment in time and dramatically announce that enlightenment to the entire world in a public forum because she wanted applause and approval.
In no way, in no way was that what this was about.
Certainly not.
No, no, no, no, no.
Don't be cynical about this, okay?
Now, I personally find these decisions by Bell and Slate to be inspiring, and so inspiring that the last thing I'm going to do is cancel them.
You thought I was about to cancel them, didn't you?
That's because you're a bigot, and that's your own inherent privilege and pride and white supremacy talking, okay?
In fact, I'd like to build statues in their honor so that protesters can promptly tear them down, and the women themselves, I'm sure, will join in tearing them down because that's how relentlessly progressive they are.
Instead of cancelling them, I would like to suggest other characters that should be cancelled along similar lines.
So I want to kind of build off of the steps that they've taken, and suggest some other characters as well.
So, obviously Darth Vader has to go.
He's a white man in a black suit, voiced by a black man.
I'm not sure how that's racist, but I'm sure that it must be, somehow.
Bart Simpson is a boy voiced by an adult woman.
Now, for years, I accepted this problematic dichotomy because I assumed that The Simpsons was headed in a direction for a story arc where the young Bart would discover his inner female identity and come out as transgender and begin hormone therapy.
But, you know, after 30 years on the air, this moment still has not arrived, and I'm beginning to despair that The Simpsons will not ever make the expected transition into a nuanced, introspective drama about the experiences of transgender adolescents in modern America.
And because of that, I think we have to get rid of that character, too.
Other characters that should be cancelled, abolished, outlawed, imprisoned, executed, or at least recast, are perhaps maybe a little bit less obvious, but I think still Still crucial to defeating white supremacy.
So let's go through a few of these.
E.T.
From the movie E.T.
Only a few lines of dialogue in the movie, which is a problem in and of itself, but those lines are handled by a white voice actress named Patricia Welsh.
It boggles my mind that in the entire cosmos, populated by a hundred billion galaxies, With a hundred billion stars in each of them, and trillions of planets, Steven Spielberg could not find even one actual extraterrestrial to take on this role?
You mean to tell me in the entire universe he couldn't find one?
A white actor cannot empathize with the lived reality of aliens, certainly not enough to capture the fullness and depth of their experiences on screen.
It really is as simple as that.
We have to remember something, okay?
Acting is not about pretending to be something you're not.
That's not what it is.
Acting, in an ideal society, would consist of people being themselves and doing and saying all the same sort of stuff they would do and say on a normal day.
So, in a truly progressive culture, films would have no characters, no script, no plot, no actors, no directors, Instead, the audience would just watch people, all of them non-white, of course.
Going about their day, running errands, sitting on the couch, checking the mailbox, preparing dinner, etc.
And that's what it would be.
That's all the film would be.
Every film would be like this.
All of them would be titled Experiences.
And all of them would win every Oscar every year.
The fact that this scenario I just concocted in my head is not a reality just proves that white supremacy is real and literal Nazis are running the country.
Another bigoted film that must be eradicated or changed immediately would be a disturbing fascist manifesto from 1987 called The Brave Little Toaster.
Now, the film tells the story of appliances, led by the titular toaster, who embark on a quest to find their owner.
Now, there are a number of obvious problems here, not the least of which being the deeply insensitive reference to owners, which brings to mind the legacy of slavery.
But more to the point, none of the characters Not Toaster, not Lampy, not Blanky, not Radio, not Kirby the Vacuum, are voiced by actual household appliances.
And it is difficult enough for Toasters to find work in Hollywood already as it is.
If they're not even allowed to play Toasters, how are they supposed to get a foothold in the industry?
That's my question.
Similar problems can be found in the film Babe, where the protagonist Pig is not portrayed by an authentic pig.
Boss Baby, a film in which Alec Baldwin ruthlessly appropriates the lived experiences and identity of actual toddlers.
Though of course he does act like a toddler much of the time, but he's not a real one.
A Nightmare Before Christmas, a movie about undead humans that exclusively casts alive humans.
The 90s Nickelodeon cartoon Hey Arnold, which features a person with a normal shaped head voicing a character with a grotesquely deformed head.
A casting decision that still rankles the grotesquely deformed head community to this day.
GDH for short.
Many other examples could be provided.
The point Is that a great many films and television shows, arguably all of them, have for decades featured actors playing characters that are in some way different from their real selves.
This has to end, and it has to end today.
Kristen Bell and Jenny Slate have helped take the first step.
We have to have the courage to go all the way.
And until that happens, all movies and all shows and everyone who watches them are cancelled.
And we'll leave it there.
A lot to think about and meditate on, which is what I will go do right now.
Thanks for watching, and 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.
Hey everyone, it's Andrew Klavan, host of The Andrew Klavan Show.
A Black Lives Matter leader threatens to burn down our system if he doesn't get what he wants, and a girl from Venezuela tells the truth about what system will be put in its place.
You've been warned.
Export Selection