Today on the Matt Walsh Show, as the jury in the Chauvin trial gives the violent mob what it demanded, another police shooting has led to more protests and claims of systemic racism in policing. The problem is that the “victim” in this case was shot while trying to stab someone. We’ll have more on that case and the Chauvin trial today. Also, speaking of the Chauvin case, Nancy Pelosi officially canonizes George Floyd as our culture’s new Christ figure. And in our Daily Cancellation, we’ll deal with complaints that a children’s cartoon about dogs fails to portray racial diversity. How can you have racial diversity among cartoon dogs?
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Today on the Matt Wall Show, as the jury in the Chauvin trial gives the violent mob exactly what it demanded, another police shooting has led to more protests and claims of systemic racism in policing.
The problem is that the victim, in this case, quote-unquote victim, was shot while trying to stab someone.
So we'll have more on that case and the Chauvin trial today.
Also, speaking of the Chauvin case, Nancy Pelosi officially canonizes George Floyd as our culture's new Christ figure.
I mean, literally, that's what she did.
In our daily cancellation, we'll deal With complaints that a children's cartoon about dogs fails to portray racial diversity.
How can you have racial diversity among cartoon dogs?
Well, we'll talk tackle that and much more today on the Matt Wall Show.
So I had planned, of course, to begin today talking about the verdict in the Chauvin trial,
a verdict that was reached by the jury hours after the president of the United States went
on TV and publicly called for a guilty verdict.
Also shortly after the mayor of the city demanded a conviction and only a day after one of the
most prominent members of Congress flew from DC.
to Minneapolis to inflame the already violent mob.
It was a verdict reached by a jury in the same city that had been devastated by riots last year because of this case and where even worse riots would have happened had they returned anything but the verdict they did return.
A verdict reached in a trial that could have been moved to a different city and could have involved the sequestering of the jury for the whole trial, but it wasn't and didn't.
Even aside from the facts of the case, facts which very clearly amount to reasonable doubt on all charges, in my opinion, rather than a conviction on all charges, which is what the jury decided.
But even aside from those facts, the public pressure, the location, the refusal by the judge to take any steps whatsoever to address any of these issues, all of that is enough to call this a fundamentally unfair and unjust trial, and one in which the verdict cannot be trusted.
I mean, moving the trial's location and sequestering the jury, these are tools that a judge has in his toolbox.
If this trial didn't call for those things, then what trial in history ever has?
This is why this is a decision which should be appealed and retried, but it may never get that far because almost everyone in this country, especially in positions of leadership, including in the court system, is too afraid of the mob to do the right thing.
There should have been a mistrial declared at various points along the way, but certainly when Maxine Waters showed up and did what she did, that should have been a mistrial.
But courage is in short supply in this country.
Though we've never needed it more, there's never been so little of it.
But as I said, this is the topic that I was going to open the show with.
We'll talk more about that later.
That was until a new case, a new protest, a new BLM martyr was appointed, right as the guilty verdict in the Chauvin case was read.
BLM protesters were descending on Columbus, Ohio in response to a police shooting that had happened just hours earlier.
Now, as we've seen over and over again, the narrative takes shape, solidifies, metastasizes like a cancerous tumor rapidly.
I mean, within minutes, within seconds now.
And this time, as almost always, the narrative was that the victim, 16-year-old Micaiah Bryant, was innocent, unarmed, helpless, not a threat to anyone, and had been gunned down randomly by police.
Police showed up and just shot her dead.
That's basically what we were told.
Activists and media journalists, but I repeat myself, took the words of the supposed witnesses and the supposed victim's family and ran with it as gospel truth, as they always do.
Before any other facts, here's the point we're at now, before any other facts about this case had circulated, already this video clip of Micaiah Bryant's mother, now she was out in front of cameras right away, right away, within minutes, within hours at least, And before we knew anything else, this was the clip making the rounds, and this is what established the narrative.
Here's what Ma'Khia Bryant's mother said.
Let's listen.
Ma'Khia was named after a male prophet in the Bible.
She was a very loving, peaceful little girl.
She was 16 years old.
She was an honor roll student.
And Ma'Khia had a motherly nature about her.
She promoted peace.
And that's something that I want to always be remembered.
Loving, motherly, and honorable student, she promoted peace.
That's what her mother says.
Her mother, we should note, did not have legal custody of her daughter.
Micaiah was in foster care.
Even more important to note, the loving and peaceful Micaiah was actually shot by cops while in the process of trying to murder somebody with a knife.
The same day as the shooting, only hours after the shooting happened actually, Columbus Police held a press conference, and usually it takes a couple of days, but now we're at a point now where they put the body cam footage out right away.
Even that, it's not quick enough.
If you can't get it out within seconds, it's not going to be fast enough to get out in front of the narrative.
So this is a few hours later, still not fast enough, but they showed the body cam footage and explained the context of the shooting.
And let's watch that now.
71 Legion Lane.
The information was that a caller said females were there trying to stab them and put their hands on them.
Dispatchers tried to obtain information about weapons, but were unable to gather that information.
Officers were dispatched at 436 and arrived at 444.
We will play the first video in real time.
[BLANK_AUDIO]
What's going on?
What's going on?
Hey, hey, hey, hey, get down, get down, get down, get down.
[BLANK_AUDIO]
There's the body cam footage.
So the cops were called to the scene because someone was trying to stab somebody else.
That's all they know.
Police officer arrives, sees a woman wielding a large knife.
Appears to be a butcher's knife or steak knife that you get from your kitchen.
The point is, this is no pocket knife.
This is a large knife.
The suspect attacks one other woman and pushes her to the ground.
And then she goes after someone else, the girl in pink in the body cam footage.
Micaiah pins the girl in pink against the car, raises the knife, and is in the process of trying to stab her when the officer, given no other choice from his perspective, opens fire.
Micaiah was not unarmed.
She had a knife.
She was not peaceful, at least in that video.
She was trying to stab someone.
These details matter.
At least they matter to those of us who are honest and rational, though our club is small and losing members by the day.
The full facts of the case, as they've now been revealed, facts which absolutely, without any shadow of a doubt, vindicate the police officer and reveal him to be not just justified, but heroic, acting to save someone's life.
But of course, that doesn't matter.
None of it matters.
Still the cop is accused, not just of murder, but of racist murder.
This in spite of the fact that he was firing, not even to defend himself, but to defend the life of another black girl.
He shot a black girl to stop her from killing another black girl, and that makes him a homicidal racist?
There's no reasoning with this thinking.
Because there's no thinking involved.
The left needs, this is what the left needs to know.
They need to know only two things, two data points.
Did the police kill someone, and was that person black?
If so, it was racism every time without exception.
Now let's really consider the position this officer was in.
He's called to the scene.
He finds a black girl trying to gut another black girl with a butcher's knife.
If he shoots, he's racist.
If he doesn't shoot, and the other black girl gets stabbed and killed right in front of him, He'll be accused of not acting to save the life of that black child.
So if he saves the black girl's life, then he's guilty of not valuing the assailant's life.
If he doesn't save her life, he's guilty of not valuing the victim's life.
And because they're both black, then no matter what he does, he's not valuing the life of one or the other of the black people involved.
No matter what he does, he loses.
No matter what he does.
He's already condemned simply for arriving to the scene.
The moment he is there wearing that badge, he's done.
There's nothing he can do.
No option he can avail himself of that would not lead to accusations of racism.
Of course, you're always going to get the Monday morning quarterback, why didn't he use a taser?
When someone is in the process They've got the knife like this and they're in the process of trying to stab.
A taser is by no means guaranteed to stop that from happening.
You could shoot them with a taser and they're still going to get that stab in.
They could get multiple blows in.
Certainly at least one.
A knife that size, a blade that size, just one stab placed in the right place could very easily kill somebody.
So if he had done that, if he had just pulled the taser out, tried to use the taser, and it wasn't enough, and the girl was stabbed to death, then what would the activists be saying?
You know what they'd be saying?
They'd be saying, oh, yeah, well, now you use a taser because it's not important enough to you to use lethal force to save this black child's life.
That's what they would say.
And we all know it.
So there's no option.
Except for one, perhaps.
Here's the other option, if you're a cop.
Don't take the call.
You know, there was some static over the radio, you didn't hear it.
Oops, these things happen.
Go grab a coffee instead.
Stay out of it.
Let whatever's gonna happen, happen.
The other members of the community there, you see them in the video, There appear to be some adults there as well.
They don't seem too concerned about these kids' lives anyway.
They're just standing around watching, like a knife fight between teenagers is a spectator sport.
So let the violence happen.
Stay far away from it.
If parents don't want to raise their children, if communities don't want to care for themselves, then let them reap what they sow.
What we know for sure is that if the cops had done that, if Mackay had simply been allowed to stab the other girl to death, and no cop was in the vicinity, then we'd never hear a word about it.
BLM wouldn't care.
You wouldn't have people in the media weeping and wailing, oh no, another black life taken, I'm so distraught.
They wouldn't be saying any of that at all.
They wouldn't say a damn word about it.
There'd be no protest, no outrage, no mourning.
Because there'd be no political or ideological benefit to any of that.
The left needs the cops involved for that.
So the real way for the police to avoid the lose-lose situation is to avoid the situation completely.
And yet, you know, they still respond to the call.
They still show up to the scene.
It turns out lots of cops really do care about protecting and serving.
Even protecting and serving communities that wouldn't spit on them if they were on fire.
In fact, they probably lit the fire.
Now, cops aren't superhuman.
They aren't superheroes.
They aren't perfect.
They aren't saints.
Nobody is.
But I can't imagine why any of them would still be on the job at this point if they didn't at least care about helping and protecting people.
Why else would you be there now?
What other motivation could you possibly have?
Sadly for them, they're doing that job in a culture that doesn't care about justice and truth, doesn't care about the rule of law, doesn't care about human life, except when it can be used.
As I talk about all the time, human life in this culture, all human life, black or white, is a commodity.
It's something to be used.
If you can't use it, then you just throw it away like it doesn't exist.
We do that in the womb.
In the womb, if a life is taken in the womb, we call it medical waste.
Throw it in a medical waste dumpster out back of the abortion clinic.
So life only has value when it can be used.
And when it comes to black lives, In the city, from the media's perspective and our culture's perspective, they have value after the life has already been taken, if it was taken in a circumstance that's politically advantageous to the cultural powers that be.
That's the culture we live in.
A culture governed not by mob rule.
Okay, let's get that straight.
This is not mob rule.
This is a culture governed by the rule of leftist elites who use the mob to affect their ends.
And that has made many things very difficult.
To merely live as a normal and decent person, maintaining your decency and sanity amid the torrent, is at times a Herculean task for everybody.
But to enforce the law in this culture, in this environment, with your life and the lives of others on the line?
That is now almost impossible.
Now let's get to our five headlines.
All right, now we can get into some more about the Derek Chauvin verdict.
First, Vice President Biden yesterday, Vice President Biden, after weighing in on the case and calling for a guilty verdict while the jury was still deliberating.
And remember, the judge in the case admonished Maxine Waters and
asked all political officials to stay out of it.
Hours later, the mayor of Minneapolis gets up, says he wants a guilty verdict, and
the President of the United States goes in front of cameras and says,
he strongly implies that there should be a guilty verdict.
But after the verdict was read, he then addressed the nation about the results of this
local murder trial.
Of course, President Kamala Harris spoke first, and then Vice President Biden got up and shared his thoughts about how all of this relates back to systemic racism.
Let's listen.
It was a murder in the full light of day, and it ripped the blinders off for the whole world to see.
The systemic racism the Vice President just referred to.
The systemic racism is a stain on our nation's soul.
The knee on the neck of justice for black Americans.
Profound fear and trauma.
The pain, the exhaustion that black and brown Americans experience every single day.
Systemic racism.
No, I am still to this point waiting For some, I've heard over and over and over again that this case, it's just, it's assumed, it's like it's self-evident that of course this case is all about race and racism.
Even some so-called conservatives on social media after the verdict were celebrating it as a victory for racial justice.
And, you know, that qualifier is important.
Because the Chauvin verdict has nothing to do with justice.
It doesn't have anything to do with justice as we have traditionally understood it.
It's not justice in the way that courts are supposed to be enacting justice.
But it is racial justice.
And it's racial justice because, for the simple fact that Derek Chauvin's white, And he's accused of killing black men, whether he did or not.
And as we were told by the media many times during the trial and before it, that this is not just about Derek Chauvin.
The entire country is on trial.
All of white America is on trial.
Derek Chauvin is the sacrificial goat, as I've been saying this whole time.
He's a sacrificial goat.
Much like, you know, religious ceremonial practices that date back thousands of years.
He is a sacrificial offering.
And the guilt of white America is placed on his shoulders.
And so, you know, when you bring the sacrificial goat to the altar, it has to be burned.
In sacrifice.
And it was, in this case.
And that's why, you know, I was saying, I haven't heard anyone even try to actually explain what racism, how racism plays into any of this.
Pretending for a second, for the sake of argument, that Chauvin actually is guilty on all accounts.
And that we can say that beyond a reasonable doubt, which we can't.
But pretending we can, okay.
Race?
What?
So you're saying if, if, what?
You go back and you watch the body cam footage and then you, and then you go to the footage taken by the, Uh, the, the bystanders.
What part of that do you think would be different if, if George Floyd had a lighter skin tone?
If you had a, what was George Floyd?
Six foot five or six, 240 pounds.
So you've had a six foot six, 240 pound, uh, convicted felon high on four times a lethal dose of fentanyl trying to pass counterfeit bills.
What would the police do differently?
Resisting arrest, saying he can't breathe before he's on the ground, asking to be put on the ground.
He does ask that.
They get him into the police car.
He crawls back out.
All of that's exactly the same, but he's got lighter skin tone.
What part of it plays out differently?
Well, of course, there's no answering that question.
And it's easier too to blame everything, you know, when you take racism, the concept of racism, and you've expanded it into the, to the point of meaninglessness and also whiteness and white supremacy, all of these words can mean anything now.
Um, so there's, there's president Biden on, on the chiming in for, for some reason we need an address.
from the vice president and the president on this case.
As I brought up in the, we did a backstage yesterday and as I brought up there, think back to the Kermit Gosnell case.
He was an abortionist in Philadelphia.
Most prolific serial killer in American history.
Hundreds of born children that he killed.
He also killed some of his female patients that came to him.
And he was able to do this in a major American city for decades.
And the reason he was able to do that is because the government at every level chose to look the other way.
So this was a case that implicated the government.
There were hundreds of lives taken, hundreds of people deeply affected by it, thousands deeply affected by it.
So that was a case of national significance for all those reasons.
But the media totally ignored it.
Obama, in office at the time, ignored it.
And the reason we were given is that it was a local crime story.
That was a local crime story.
Somehow.
And the reality is the opposite.
That was not a local crime story.
That was a crime that involves the government.
It actually does involve the system.
There were actual systemic failures that led to this and allowed it to happen.
But the Chauvin case, no matter what else you think about it, it's a local issue.
An isolated incident.
Alright, some more reaction to the Chauvin verdict.
First, here's someone on MSNBC explaining why, even though they got everything they want, they're still very, very unhappy.
Shockingly.
Let's listen.
I actually always thought that he would be found guilty because it's sort of a cultural makeup call.
But I'm not happy.
I'm not pleased.
I don't have any sense of satisfaction.
I don't think this is a system working.
I don't think this is a good thing.
What this says to me is that in order to get a nominal degree of justice in this country, That a black man has to be murdered on air, viewed by the entire world, there have to be a year's worth of protests, and a phalanx of other white police officers to tell one white officer that he was wrong in order to get one scintilla of justice.
Notice, okay, he's not happy.
Of course, the left, we know that.
They're never happy.
The revolution continues.
And they also assume, he says, yeah, I knew there'd be a guilty verdict.
They assume they're going to get what they want, and they do most of the time, but you're never going to be satisfied.
That's why I think, I've always thought the label progressivism, it fits.
Now you might not like, when you think of what the left is doing, I don't really consider it progress, but it's progress in the way that cancer progresses, in that sort of way.
It just keeps moving, and infecting, and growing.
And left-wing progressivism is the same way.
It never gets to a point where it's satisfied and says, all right, I've had enough.
Just keep moving to the next thing.
Keep moving on.
So he's not happy, obviously, but notice how he admits, basically admits, that this verdict was partly the product of the pressure put on the jury.
He says it right there.
He says that, well, we needed to have a year of protests and all this stuff in order to get that quote-unquote justice.
He's admitting, he's admitting that the jury, at least partially from his perspective, came to this conclusion because that's the pressure that was put on them.
AOC had, I think we have this clip, she had a similar take.
Let's play that.
It's not justice.
And I'll explain to you why it's not justice.
It's not justice because justice is George Floyd going home tonight to be with his family.
Justice is Adam Toledo getting tucked in by his mom tonight.
Justice is When you're pulled over, they're not being a gun.
That's part of that interaction, because you have a headlight out.
What is that supposed to refer to?
A gun's not part of that interaction?
Well, if you're talking about Daunte Wright, the reason a gun's part of the interaction is because you committed armed robbery against a woman, and there was a warrant for your arrest, and they tried to arrest you and you resisted.
That's how the gun got involved there.
This is not, I will agree though, aside from that last part, the rest of it, I sort of agree.
This is not justice.
This verdict is not just.
Because it's the result of pressure.
This is really, it's the death of the rule of law.
Where the left knows that it can get someone convicted of murder.
If it wants.
And we could sit here all day playing the reaction from the left and the media to the Chauvin trial, and most of it is exactly what you would expect.
This is also what you would expect, but it's also perhaps the most demented reaction.
This is from Nancy Pelosi.
What she's saying here is not unique, and not the first time she's said something like this.
But here she is fully embracing the religious cult-like nature of all of this and of the whole quote-unquote anti-racism movement.
Here she is appointing George Floyd, a Christ-like messianic figure who dies for the sins of all mankind, or at least of white mankind.
Here she is.
Thank you, George Floyd, for sacrificing your life for justice, for being there to call out to your mom, How heartbreaking was that?
Call out for your mom.
I can't breathe.
But because of you, and because of thousands, millions of people around the world who came out for justice, your name will always be synonymous with justice.
Good Lord.
You know what?
I actually had not listened to that full clip until right now.
Because I could barely stomach it.
All I heard was, thank you, George Floyd, for sacrificing your life.
Sacrificing your life for all of us.
It's not an exaggeration.
This is what Christians say about Jesus Christ.
They've appointed George Floyd, their Christ, their Messiah, in this religious cult.
Which has the hallmarks in every sense of a religion.
As we've talked about, there's always the concept of original sin.
Only we know in the Christian faith, original sin is shared by everyone.
In this case, it is a racial original sin.
White people have it.
We pass it down, I guess, in our bloodline, this guilt.
But what she says there, "Your name will always be synonymous with justice."
I, you know, every time I hear something like that, I can't help but think to,
and I don't even know her name or what she looks like.
And that's the point.
But imagine being the woman who George Floyd robbed.
Didn't just rob, but it forced his way into her house, put a gun to her and robbed her.
Another one of the guys in his crew pistol whipped her.
So you've been robbed and pistol-whipped in your own home by George Floyd and his crew.
That happened a few years ago.
And now you have to hear Nancy Pelosi saying that his name is synonymous with justice.
Imagine if the Christ figure that your culture has selected is the guy who forced his way into your home and robbed you.
But nobody cares about her.
She is literally nameless and faceless as far as the public goes.
One other clip to play.
This is Maxine Waters.
And I think there's a lesson we could learn here.
Maybe even a little bit of inspiration we can find here.
Maxine Waters, we know, is guilty of tampering with the jury, intimidating the jury.
Republicans tried to censure her for it, but that was voted down by every Democrat in Congress came to her defense.
And then she went on MSNBC and continued to refuse to apologize and made herself into the victim.
But let's listen to what she said.
I'm just pleased that I still feel strong enough and able enough to go out with the young people and say, Auntie Maxine is here and I support you and I want you to be activists.
I'm so sorry that it causes pain oftentimes with my colleagues.
Many times they're in these districts where they're frightened, where they have a lot of racism, where they still haven't moved to the point where they can have a decent conversation.
About these issues and sometimes it's very difficult for them, but they stood up with me today.
They put me up for censure because of my visit to Minneapolis and my colleagues stood with me and they voted to table the motion that was put up to censor me because the Republicans love to use me as a target.
They raise money on my back.
That's that Maxine Waters, that black woman.
I mean, all I did was fly from D.C.
with someone we can't control.
And so you've got to make sure that I have enough money to keep her from getting reelected.
And I keep getting reelected and these poor people, many of them retirees, they keep giving them their money.
They don't seem to understand.
They're not gonna get me out of office.
I'm here until I decide to retire.
I mean, all I did was fly from DC to Minneapolis and tamper with a jury and intimidate them
get a verdict that I want in a local murder trial.
Clearly, if anyone would object to that, the only reason could possibly be racism.
By the way, did she actually call herself Auntie Maxine?
Did I hear that right?
Is that how she referred to herself?
If you want an argument for term limits, there it is right there.
That clip right there is everything you need to know.
She considers herself to be the auntie to her constituents.
Refusing to leave.
How old is she now?
Like 98?
She's saying, I'm never leaving.
I'm never leaving.
I'll be here forever.
Because I know my constituents are stupid enough to keep voting me in.
I've never done anything for them.
At all.
But the one lesson we could take, the one maybe bit of inspiration that we can all take from Auntie Maxine is Refusing to apologize.
This is the left's game.
They're just never, ever going to apologize.
For anything.
I'm not going to apologize.
Anyone who's attacking me, they're wrong.
I'm the victim here, really.
And we could take, you know, the self-victimization thing, I can't stomach that when anyone does it, so we could take that part of it out.
But the part where you refuse to apologize, that has to be the move.
That's what the left does.
It works.
There's nothing to be gained by apologizing.
Especially when your attackers are totally disingenuous.
Now, in this case, the critics of Maxine Waters are not disingenuous.
Like, I'm one of the critics, and I actually am concerned about tampering with and trying to influence a jury.
But she refuses to apologize anyway, and we should all take notes from there.
We should take that cue.
All right, actually, one last clip to play before we move on to reading the comments.
This is Greta Thunberg.
I don't know why.
I don't know the context.
I can't imagine any context that would make this anything less than absurd.
But she's instructing other countries on how they should handle the vaccine distribution.
Here she is.
Just with the climate crisis, those who are the most vulnerable need to be prioritized, and global problems require global solutions.
It is completely unethical that high-income countries are now vaccinating young and healthy people if that happens at the expense of people in risk groups and on the front lines in low- and middle-income countries.
And this is a moral test.
We talked today about showing solidarity and yet vaccine nationalism, it's what's running the vaccine distribution.
What do we care what she has to say?
Who asked her opinion on vaccine distribution?
But going back to religious cult.
The left is a religious cult and many religions throughout history have child prophets.
Child prophets play a big role in a lot of religions and that's what she is for the left.
She's a child prophet and she doesn't have to have any expertise at all.
Now usually the move is like she can pontificate about anything and we're supposed to listen.
And that's been the case since she was like 14 when she first stepped on the stage.
Instructing, telling the whole world, countries, other governments, what sort of policies they're supposed to enact.
And for that, we're supposed to listen.
Nobody's allowed to ask her, like, what is your—you even have a high school diploma?
Why should we listen to you?
What's your expertise?
Yet, of course, if you get up there as just a normal, sane adult and say something like, You know, only men have penises.
If you say that, you're gonna hear, what are you, since when did you become a doctor?
I don't see your medical degree.
That's the way that goes.
All right, let's move to reading the YouTube comments.
This is from Banks Parento, says, hi Matt, I just wanted you to know how young some of your listeners are.
I'm 12, and I listen to the show every day.
Well, I appreciate that, and Here's what I'll say for this show.
There are a lot worse things that a 12-year-old could be watching on YouTube.
I don't know if that's the greatest selling point, but that's what I'm going with.
Sebastian says, your show was late today, Matt.
Usually I'm able to watch it during my study hall period, but you released it during my science class.
For that, you are, of course, cancelled.
Well, I hate to say it, but you know what?
You're probably going to hear better science on this show than you'll hear in your science class, depending on where you go to school.
Another comment says, the reason no one is talking about the alien stuff is there really isn't anything to talk about other than pointing it out.
You're right about there really only being two options, but in both, the only logical response seems to be sit around and wait for a third explanation or wait to be conquered and try not to think about it until then.
Well, yeah, if there are aliens out there that are visiting the planet, there's not a lot we can do about that.
If there's another country that has this otherworldly technology that is so mind-blowing that even our government officials think that it might be from another planet, in both those cases, there's probably not a lot we can do about it.
All I'm saying is, that's the case for everything we talk about.
There's not anything that we can individually do about it.
Any big societal issue.
Yeah, we talk about everything, we talk about all these things.
I would think that the reason we would talk about the alien issue is that it is important, I don't know, I would consider it important, and it's interesting.
It's much more interesting and fascinating than 95% of the stuff we're talking about all the time.
But, you know, we ignore it.
Let's see, another comment says, Matt could easily pass off as Chauvin's defense attorney.
Check it out.
I've seen a lot of comments like this, that I look like Chauvin's defense attorney.
Why?
Because we both have beards?
All bearded guys look the same?
That kind of bigotry is not allowed on this show.
You are banned from the show.
Obviously.
And finally, it says, Matt, the cosmos is huge.
There's a statistical certainty that there's intelligent life on another planet.
It's also statistical certainty that such a planet is so far away from us that we'll never know about them, and we'll never be able to reach them, and vice versa.
Yeah, that used to be my position, and that's still a very credible position.
There's a good argument for that.
The distances are so vast.
The closest solar, our neighboring solar system, like the one that's right next door to us, in cosmic terms, is, I don't know, 25 trillion miles away.
Four or five light years, 25 trillion miles.
With current technology, it would take us centuries and centuries to get there.
And that's the closest one.
And imagine, it takes you centuries to get there, and you get there, and there's nothing there.
Well, it'd be another thousand years to the next one.
So I used to think that that, I used to agree with that, but then also you're thinking of things in human terms.
And some of these vehicles, these crafts that we've seen videos of, and the Pentagon has confirmed that these are flying objects, and they're doing things that to us seem impossible.
And so when we talk about how long it takes to travel across space, we are Saying that based on technology as we understand it.
There might be technology out there that can do things we can't understand.
We know there are because we see them.
But our government has seen that stuff flying around in the sky and told us about it.
And then we all just yawn and move on.
Now a quick word from Helix Sleep.
You know, when you don't get a good night's sleep, everyone knows it.
It's obvious to you, it's obvious to everyone.
You're wearing it on your face, you got the bags under the eyes, everything.
It looks hideous.
Don't go out in public looking like that.
That's why you need a Helix Sleep mattress.
Helix Sleep has a quiz that takes just two minutes to complete and matches your body type and sleep preferences to make the perfect mattress for you.
If you like a mattress that's really soft or firm, if you sleep on your side or your back, wherever you sleep, with Helix there's a specific mattress for each and everybody's unique taste.
You don't need to take their word for it.
You can go to Helix, you know, check out their reviews.
Helix was awarded the number one best overall mattress of 2019 and 2020 by GQ and Wired Magazine.
And you can take my word for it, too, because we had one Helix Sleep mattress and we just got a second one.
And that's true.
That's how much we enjoy these.
We have one.
My daughter has one.
The boys, they don't have one yet.
They don't need it.
They could sleep on a cardboard box and they'd be fine.
Just go to HelixSleep.com slash Walsh, take their two-minute sleep quiz, and they'll match you to a customized mattress that will give you the best sleep of your life.
Right now, Helix is offering up to $200 off and free pillows with all mattress orders.
That's HelixSleep.com slash Walsh.
Again, HelixSleep.com slash Walsh.
HelixSleep.com slash Walsh for up to $200 off your mattress order.
Well, it's almost time for another new episode of Candice.
This week's special guest is Dana White, and always a lot of interesting things to say.
You don't want to miss that.
The show streams on Fridays at 9 p.m.
Eastern, 8 p.m.
Central, only on dailywire.com.
If you're not a member yet, use code Candice and get 25% off.
And don't forget also, of course, the Candice podcast, which is available on Apple, Spotify, or wherever you listen to your podcasts.
Now let's get to our daily cancellation.
Today for our daily cancellation, we're going to move away from issues surrounding race and policing to talk about issues surrounding race and cartoon shows.
No matter what, as we've seen, race is involved in every issue.
It's involved even when it's not involved.
Though sometimes when it is involved, it's not involved.
Like anytime a white person is the victim of interracial violence.
So, anyway, I hope that clears things up.
Now, the headline on Yahoo News, which I promise is not satire, reads as follows.
Kids cartoon Bluey criticized for not having disabled, queer, poor, gender diverse, or dogs of color.
Now apparently, as we'll discover when we keep reading, Bluey is an Australian children's show, which is why I've never heard of it.
But even not being familiar with the program, it seems immediately clear that the show does have dogs of color.
I mean, it has a blue dog, doesn't it?
In fact, all dogs are some kind of color.
Every dog is a dog of color.
Just like every person is a person of color.
All people are some kind of color, aren't they?
This is why the phrase people of color is nonsensical and silly when applied only to certain groups to the exclusion of others.
Like, last I checked, Caucasian people have a color.
I can't imagine what a colorless person would look like.
They'd have to be translucent like some kind of hideous deep sea fish or something.
But certainly again, all dogs have a color.
All dogs go to heaven and all dogs have a color.
If that first part is not true at all in my opinion, despite what the cartoon shows say.
What can dog of color even mean then?
Does it mean that the show should have dogs which resemble racial minorities?
But wouldn't that be considered racist if it did?
None of this makes any sense.
In fairness, though, we haven't read the article yet.
Maybe it will make a persuasive case.
You know, far be it for me to make assumptions based merely on the psychotic headline.
So here's the article.
It says, quote, The animated show for preschool children follows Bluey, an anthropomorphic six-year-old blue heeler puppy, and her family as they go about life in Brisbane and learn important life lessons.
In an opinion piece on the ABC Everyday website, journalist Beverly Wang shared her love of the hit cartoon, but also questioned why the show isn't more representative.
Wang asked why the show, which is set in the capital of Queensland, does not reflect the wide diversity of the Australian city.
Quote, where are the disabled, queer, poor, gender diverse, dogs of color, and single parent dog families in Bluey's Brews Brisbane?
She said, if they're in the background, let them come forward.
Wang acknowledged the creators of Bluey may not view their show through a political lens, imagine that, but she argued it's important for children's programming to be more representative.
She said the tender, nuanced, and joyful show has already demonstrated depth and range in its ability to touch on important issues.
Quote, as a parent of color, I am always conscious of the presence or absence of diverse representation in kids' pop culture.
What it means for children and conversations we have around that, Wang said.
I sincerely believe you don't have to be other to think about this too.
Okay, well let me say, as a translucent parent, a parent without color, a colorless parent, I am not conscious at all of the racial makeup of the cartoon shows my kids watch.
All of my kids have enjoyed Peppa Pig, for example.
I have never wondered about the race of Peppa and her family.
They do seem to be British, but I never speculated about their racial background.
That's because they're pigs.
And also fictional.
That's also why I've never wondered about the sexual orientation or gender identity of these fictional cartoon British pigs.
I mean, it's possible that Daddy Pig, my favorite character in the show, is in his private life a pansexual, gender-fluid foot fetishist.
I mean, it's possible.
The issue has simply never been addressed in any episode of Peppa Pig that I've ever watched.
And I prefer, in fact, for it not to be addressed.
I prefer if Daddy Pig's sexual proclivities, and even his racial background, remain unexplored.
Then again, I'm approaching this from the perspective of a sane person.
And that's why I often have so much trouble relating to the concerns of the left.
Now, let's read a little more from the article as it talks about the mild blowback that the author, Wang, received for her psychotically insane opinions.
It says, quote, Guardian Australia's political reporter, Amy Ramachis, said the amount of hate being directed towards Wang was the reason, quote, why this country can never have a serious conversation.
She wrote on Twitter, the amount of hate being directed at a journalist for a very gentle piece, pointing out Bluey is great, but maybe doesn't represent everyone and is something to think about, is why this country can never have a serious conversation.
She continued, quote, you might not see yourself or your family represented all the time, but if you're white, able-bodied and working slash middle class, you're not short of options.
Okay.
Two quick points here.
First, I agree that we can't have serious conversations, but it's precisely because this kind of conversation, racial representation in a cartoon show about fictional dogs, drowns out the serious conversation.
This isn't the serious conversation we need to have, it's the unserious conversation that we're having instead.
Second, part of the whole point of a children's show is for children to use their imagination.
They see themselves in these stories and in these characters through their imaginative faculties.
You don't need to spoon-feed it to them.
The idea of representation actually limits representation in a certain way.
Okay, so if you say to a black child, hey look, this dog is the representative for black people.
That's your dog.
You can see yourself in that dog.
When you say that, you've limited the child.
Never mind the, as noted, rather dicey proposition of how exactly you represent a human race in a dog.
The even bigger issue is that you've limited the children in the audience.
You're saying to the black children, here's your character, and to the Asian children, here's yours, and so on and so on.
And the white kids, you don't need one.
But what children really want to do, and what they're very good at doing, if you let them, is to relate to, and see themselves in, any and all characters.
That's also how they learn empathy.
They don't see the world through the lens of racial identity unless you force them to.
And the great tragedy right now is that we are forcing them to.
Instead of letting them be individuals, we're forcing them to see themselves as nothing but representatives of their racial category.
It's perverse.
It's dehumanizing.
It causes racism.
It causes a lack of empathy.
It doesn't solve those problems, it causes it.
And that, after all, is the whole point.
And it's why Beverly Wang, and anyone else complaining about representation in cartoon shows for children, is cancelled.
And Daddy Pig is cancelled too, if he really is a pansexual foot fetishist.
Can't have any of that in my cartoon shows.
And we'll leave it there.
Thanks for watching.
Thanks for listening.
Have a great day.
Godspeed.
Don't forget to subscribe.
And if you want to help spread the word, please give us a five-star review.
Also, 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 Knowles Show, 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 director is Austin Stevens.
Production manager Pavel Vodovsky.
The show is edited by Sasha Tolmachev.
Our audio is mixed by Mike Koromina.
Hair and makeup is done by Nika Geneva.
And our production coordinator is McKenna Waters.
The Matt Wall Show is a Daily Wire production.
Copyright Daily Wire 2021.
The George Floyd jurors saved themselves.
The president and Joe Biden celebrate the verdict.
